Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 47, Issue 5, pp 1319–1320 | Cite as

Antecedents of Emotional Distress and Sexual Dissatisfaction in Circumcised Men: Previous Findings and Future Directions—Comment on Bossio and Pukall (2017)

  • Tim Hammond
  • Mark D. Reiss
Letter to the Editor

Bossio and Pukall (2017) make an important contribution by identifying the subpopulation of men distressed by having been circumcised nontherapeutically as infants or children. This group, heretofore largely overlooked, has been recognized for decades by grassroots citizens concerned about risks, harms, and disadvantages of culturally motivated genital cutting.

We agree that “Future research is required to…explore the antecedents of distress in this subpopulation.” Although earlier explorations of such antecedents were reported, those surveys relied on self-selecting samples and should be regarded as preliminary (Hammond, 1999; Hammond & Carmack, 2017). Even so, serious and even debilitating distress over having been circumcised in infancy has now been described in several reports (Earp & Darby, 2017).

Based on available data, such distress can be caused by physical damage, including excessive skin removal causing tight, painful erections; meatal stenosis; prominent or irregular...


  1. Bossio, J. A., & Pukall, C. F. (2017). Attitudes toward one’s circumcision status is more important than actual circumcision status for men’s body image and sexual functioning. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Scholar
  2. Earp, B. D., & Darby, R. (2017). Circumcision, sexual experience, and harm. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 37(2), Online symposium.
  3. Earp, B. D., Sardi, L., & Jellison, W. (2018). False beliefs predict increased circumcision satisfaction in a sample of U.S. American men. Culture, Health and Sexuality. Scholar
  4. Fleiss, P. M., Hodges, F. M., & VanHowe, R. S. (1998). Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 74, 364–367.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Foregen. (2017). Promoting genital integrity through regenerative medicine. Retrieved from:
  6. Goldman, R. (1997). Circumcision: The hidden trauma. Boston, MA: Vanguard.Google Scholar
  7. Hammond, T. (1999). A preliminary poll of men circumcised in infancy or childhood. British Journal of Urology International, 83(S1), 85–92. Scholar
  8. Hammond, T., & Carmack, A. (2017). Long-term adverse outcomes from neonatal circumcision reported in a survey of 1,008 men: An overview of health and human rights implications. International Journal of Human Rights, 21(2), 189–218. Scholar
  9. I Am Not Thankful. (2017). Retrieved from:
  10. Men Do Complain. (2017). Retrieved from:
  11. National Organization of Restoring Men. (2017). Retrieved from:
  12. Personal Accounts of Circumcision Resentment. (2017). Retrieved from:
  13. U.N. International NGO Council on Violence Against Children. (2012). Violating children’s rights: Harmful traditional practices based on tradition, culture, religion or superstition. Retrieved from:
  14. Watson, L. R. (2014). Unspeakable mutilations: Circumcised men speak out. Ashburton, New Zealand: Author.Google Scholar
  15. Watson, L., & Golden, T. (2017). Male circumcision grief: Effective and ineffective therapeutic approaches. New Male Studies: An International Journal, 6(2), 109–125.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Global Survey of Circumcision HarmPalm SpringsUSA
  2. 2.Doctors Opposing Circumcision/D.O.C.San FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.Celebrants of Brit ShalomSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations