Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Does having a foreskin make an orgasm four time more likely?

47 replies

mumtolily · 15/08/2007 14:59

DH's doctor wants him to have a circumcision but he's not keen and one of the main reasons is he's read that women are four more time likely to orgasm if the bloke has a foreskin!

Anyone test driven both?

OP posts:

GooseyLoosey · 17/08/2007 14:42

Have to say the w*k*g without is an acquired art and can hurt bloke more if you don't get it right. However, they look much nicer in my view and have not really noticed any difference in terms of what I get out of it!

flightattendant · 17/08/2007 14:43

I read some research that said the partners of circed men may have a higher chance of developing cervical cancer
I believe this is to do with the foreskin kind of 'sweeping out' or catching the bacteria which might be introduced by a penis, including those (virus?) that cause HPV and that in turn can raise the likelihood of cancer? I can't remember now it was so long ago, but I think the gist was that the foreskin has a purpose and actually does us gals a favour

I could be totally wrong

Meeely2 · 17/08/2007 14:47

surely when erect the foreskin is pulled back so can't really sweep?

themoon66 · 17/08/2007 14:49

Lol at mental image of 'beats as it sweeps as it cleans'

flightattendant · 17/08/2007 14:56

Oh, God knows, I have no idea how it works! Just trying to recall where I read it. Sorry to cause alarming mental images

flightattendant · 17/08/2007 14:58

Ah, Just googled it and all the hits seemed to be saying the opposite...

I got that a bit wrong, then...sorry.

Sazisi · 17/08/2007 15:40

pmsl flightattendant that's how rumours start

expatinscotland · 17/08/2007 15:45

I like 'em intact. Better that way.

greenday · 17/08/2007 15:52

How thoughtful of your husband to resist for your pleasure's sake! My DH would probably only think about the pain and hassle!

I personally prefer one without foreskin. Find it more attractive, thereby I suppose would increase my satisfaction.

DaDaDa · 17/08/2007 17:12

I think the 'women are four times more likely to orgasm' argument is likely a bit of a smokescreen. He'll be scared it'll hurt (it will) and that he'll lose sensitivity (he will).

Seriously, if it's just a bit tight he needs to ask the GP about frenuloplasty.

All this talk about cleanliness though. Some men have heard of soap and water y'know.

bookwormtailmum · 17/08/2007 17:58

My dp washes his every night 'just in case'. Sometimes he's lucky .

hls · 17/08/2007 19:49

Men you have had the op are supposed to be able to keep going longer as they are not so sensitive- the skin gets used to sensations as it is not protected by the foreskin.

I have experienced both and aesthetically, prefer the cut version. Man handling (!) by either of us is not a problem either.

Also re the argument over orgasm- many books (if you believe them) say that all orgasms are from the clitoris and that if no hands are used, it's because the penis is actually doing something else apart from penetrating- sorry if that's too graphic- and who cares- aslong as they make you happy somehow.

littledetails · 17/08/2007 22:46

Im so jealous of you all Ive never had an orgasm from sex or foreplay, only from my rabbit - and god bless the rabbit!! And just to let you know my ex hubby had a circumcision in his 30's and it didnt make any differnce at all...actually thats a lie as it was more difficult to give a hand job as there wasnt any skin, but you get used to it after a while.

swalesie · 17/08/2007 23:39

Oh yes god bless the bunny!!!

But had the pleasure of both and i can honestley say i cant tell a difference either way. Dont meen to be too graphic, but once its in there, can anybody really feal a difference? i certantly (sp) couldnt!

littledetails · 17/08/2007 23:46

I agree I cant feel the difference either when its in.

mamama · 18/08/2007 00:02

Does feel different, but not better or worse, just different. I don't think the orgasm thing is true

3andnomore · 18/08/2007 00:05

Hm...the lac of the male forskin means that their cold be friction, which could cause pain..however, without the foreskin the penis is less senstive, which can be positive or negative...positive, as it takes them longer to ahve an orgasm and it will take more rigorous sex, and well, engative the same points really...just depnds on how you see it!

What are the reasons of the GP recommending circumcision?

3andnomore · 18/08/2007 00:10

just raad flight attendents post, adn you know...I never had any probs down below...until dh...had rto have a loop cone biopsy due to pre cancerous cells...hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

expatinscotland · 18/08/2007 00:38

Nowt to do with it, 3. Plenty of women in the US who need loop diathermy and have been with nothing but circumcised men.

3andnomore · 18/08/2007 02:02

very possibly just that coincidence...lol

flightattendant · 18/08/2007 08:09

3andnomore, I hope you read all my posts...apologised in a later one because I think I got it wrong

It seems there is more out there about how people were worried that not being circed was more likely to contribute to cervical cancer. I can't think where I got the opposite idea from, genuine mistake, should have checked on google before I chucked that into the pot!

Sorry again for any confusion or muddle I created.

3andnomore · 18/08/2007 15:26

don't worry FA

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread