Is it a prerequisite that the male’s foreskin be intact or restored?
I define ‘success’ as both a happy husband and a happy wife.
My wife and I have been practicing Karezza for 6 ½ years. I have thoroughly enjoyed it and benefited from it. The effects of semen retention for me are real and substantial. Protracted intercourse is a wonderful thing.
But, my wife has not enjoyed Karezza. She finds protracted intercourse irritating and some motions by me painful. She also has a bit of a mental block about Karezza, that it is not natural.
I always thought my wife’s comments about our Karezza intercourse – that it could be irritating and a bit painful – were colored by her mindset about Karezza. I learned some time ago to not ignore her comments about pain, but to honor them and stop things immediately.
This weekend, I read ‘Sex as Nature Intended It’ (SANII). It is a remarkable book. It is, in my mind, akin, in its own lane, to ‘Cupid’s Poisoned Arrow.’ It was written in 2004 by a woman who had come of age in the ‘50s and ‘60s, and who had had intercourse with both intact and circumcised males. She married a kind, caring, but circumcised man. 12 years into their marriage, she told her husband of her experience with, and preference for, intercourse with intact males. Happenstance, her husband, weeks later, saw a report of a surgeon in Texas who was having wonderful results with surgical reconstruction of the foreskin. The husband got the procedure from that surgeon. After healing, the couple resumed intercourse, and the wife was thrilled that it was as satisfying with her restored husband as it had been with her prior, intact lovers.
Within years of her husband’s surgery, the wife constructed a questionnaire that she advertised in select publications, in which she searched for women who had had intercourse with both intact and circumcised males. She mailed out questionnaires to nearly 300 respondents, of whom just under half returned completed documents. The results – published in a British medical journal -- were shocking, and anticipated the results that we saw in the paper that sood linked to a few days ago. Women who had had intercourse with both intact and circumcised males far preferred intercourse with whole men. The comments from the women mirrored what I had been hearing from my wife over our Karezza years, but had pooh-poohed, in my mind. I was sad for my wife.
My wife has never had intercourse with an intact male. And, she does not read sex-related materials. So, she knew nothing about women’s comparative views on intercourse with intact versus circumcised males.
I am 40% the way to restoring my foreskin via tension-for-mitosis methods, that may take as little as two years, from start to finish. I am seeing benefits already. But, from what I read in SANII, I have lots of room for improvement ahead of me. I was motivated and disciplined about restoration before. I am zealous, now.
The book is remarkable in several regards:
-- The description of the biology and function of the male penis was astounding. E.g., I had never heard of the male clitoris, which was purportedly discovered by a female researcher at Harvard in the ‘70s-‘80s. Good news: it is wholly intact in circumcised males. The description of the differences in movements and thrusts between intact (short and enjoyable) and circumcised (long and irritating) males was eye-opening.
-- The thorough and detailed recounting of the results of the author’s ground-breaking survey of women who had experiences with both intact and circumcised males was most enlightening. The women spoke to the differences in movements, presence, consideration, premature ejaculation (50% higher for circumcised), request for oral and anal (higher in circumcised), etc. Intercourse with circumcised males resulted in lowering levels of vaginal secretions as intercourse proceeded. Conversely, intercourse with intact males resulted in increasing levels of vaginal secretions as intercourse proceeded.
-- The author’s personal experience, comparing her experience with intact, circumcised, and her now-restored husband, were invaluable. I have not seen such elsewhere. Her husband recounts his pre- and post-reconstruction intercourse experience, as does one other fellow who restored via tension methods (surgical methods are not used nowadays, it appears).
I think this book makes an air-tight case for circumcised males who are in relationships, or who want to establish one, to undergo restoration. Two days ago, I recommended restoration to my adult son.
My wife has been ambivalent about Karezza. Maybe what she really is ambivalent about is intercourse with my circumcised penis.
The surveyed women in the book thought their intact lovers had superior technique and were more considerate folks. The author once thought that, too. But, over the decades, she arrived at a different answer. She now asks, ‘Is it the man, or is it, in fact, the penis?’ Does the more caring, loving, enjoyable intercourse with an intact man favorably color the woman’s perceptions of him? When presented with that view, many of the surveyed women agreed that it probably did.
Recommendation – for any and all circumcised heterosexual males, I most highly recommend reading ‘Sex as Nature Intended It.’ I also recommend reviewing the photos and videos on the accompanying website (it could be triggering for those who are sensitive to porn). It will be educational, sobering, and most worthwhile. At least, for me it was.
For folks who are in successful Karezza relationships (both male and female are happy), are the males intact or circumcised?
For folks who are in successful Karezza relationships with circumcised males, were there any particular ‘teething pains’ that you had to work through before both of you were happy with Karezza?