Author(s)

Stefan A. Bailis¹, Stephen Moreton², John N. Krieger³, Brian J. Morris⁴

¹Cornerstone Therapy & Recovery Center, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
²CircFacts, Warrington, UK.
³Department of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, USA.
⁴School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Tye and Sardi recently reviewed the evidence purporting to implicate male circumcision, especially when performed early in infancy, in psychological problems in men. Here we provide a critical evaluation to determine the veracity of their evidence and claims. Missing from their review were critiques pointing out fundamental flaws in key studies. We argue that psychological stress in some men may be caused by anti-circumcision propaganda telling them that they are victims of “genital mutilation”, a term adopted from dissimilar female practices in particular ethnic groups. Sexual dissatisfaction results. We critically discuss claims about foreskin “gliding”, the eccentric foreskin-related sexual practice of “docking”, and the use of lubricant in masturbation. We further find that a study claiming to show numerous differences in socio-affective processing in men circumcised as neonates stem from statistically flawed and one-sided data that has been misinterpreted, and in fact shows the opposite of the hypothesis that psychological problems in some men can be attributed to the pain of their circumcision as newborns. Importantly, since the brain regions responsible for empathy, namely subcortical gray matter and white matter in frontal and parietal regions, were similar in neonatally circumcised and uncircumcised men, the null hypothesis remains null. In conclusion, we find no compelling evidence to support newborn circumcision pain being responsible for psychological problems in neonatally circumcised men. Men who come to believe that they are victims of their infant circumcision are in actual fact likely victims of false claims perpetrated by activist community groups with trenchant opposition to circumcision.

Sexual Function, Psychology, Male Sexual Health, Anti-Circumcision

Bailis, S. , Moreton, S. , Krieger, J. and Morris, B. (2022) Tye & Sardi’s Psychological, Psychosocial, and Psychosexual Aspects of Penile Circumcision*. Advances in Sexual Medicine, 12, 65-83. doi: 10.4236/asm.2022.123006.