Smegma. Oh Yuck


Smegma.  Such an ugly word.  One of the comments on my Infant Male Circumcision survey lead me to investigate smegma.  As a circumcised men, I've never experienced smegma.  But I hear about it often as a reason why infant male circumcision is a good thing.  So I thought I'd check it out.

I was also lead to another site on men's health, and this one has an extensive discussion of the smegma question, obviously by guys who know what they are talking about.  Some intact men have had a problem with smegma.  Some haven't.

Most of the comments are very down to earth and sensible, such as this one:

"use a showerhead for cleaning that area... my glans is very sensitive too, and i rarely touch it at all coz its very uncomfortable. the showerhead works fine in this case coz it washes it all off... its a clean method."

And its always nice to Hear from a Woman on this issue:

"My hubby used to have this problem when we were younger. Cleanliness is the only fix other than getting cut. (that was not an option for us since I like him as is, so does he) Clean it every time you pee.. as you get older it will get better."

Of Course Circumcision Promoters  Also Have Their Say:

"Smegma is a mixture of shed cells, sebum and bacteria. In some men it is produced in excess, it appears as not age related.
     "Smegma is not obviously produced by men who are circumcised as in these men the inner surface of foreskin is removed.
     "Is smegma useful? I do not think so. For what I know several types of bacteria grow on smegma and it can cause an infection in a woman. For instance fungal ( candida) infections in women often do not get cured by medications and are more persistent unless their male partner is treated.
     "Women health doctors who are correctly trained, always ask a patient about health of the partner and whether is he (sic) circumcised or not.
     "Smegma is not an adequate a lubricant. Your reader who stated that his smegma is a lubricant, is confused. Mucus glands in the opening of a urethra during an erection produce lubricant in most of men, and this is helping with friction during an intercourse. Smegma is not doing anything helpful.
     "What is the role of smegma? Believe me, no role. People believe that if nature is producing something it must be good. It is incorrect. In fact smegma can be harmful, and non-circumcised men can develop a certain penile cancer which is a result of long life irritation by smegma. This cancer occurs in older men. Smegma can be an irritant, because a mixture of shed skin cells, secretions and urine form a perfect environment to grow all sorts of bacteria that produce, amongst other, ammonia. When men do not follow a correct washing routine, they frankly smell. Smegma smells when a man gets excited. Smell is not detectable by the parson who is producing it. But a woman partner can detect it easily. Smell of smegma is not sexually attractive and is a deterrent. Women are not comfortable to tell a partner that he smells, therefore he often does not understand why a woman does not want to touch him.
    "In older age ( after menopause) women are prone to an urinary tract infections. Women who are after menopause and co-habitate with men who have a lot of smegma are more prone to recurrent urinary tract infections.
Also, the cells that produce smegma and are placed on the inner surface of the foreskin are prone to attract viruses such as HIV and Hepatitis B virus. Studies have confirmed this and are well known to the medical profession. Circumcised men are twice less likely become infected with HIV and Hep B during a casual sex.
     "Although non Jewish and non Islamic a doctor, on the basis of my knowledge and experience I am for circumcision of baby boys. This can be done humanly, with no pain and hardly any risk of complications. In young babies circumcision heals within 5 days. Having foreskin is a problem for life.
     "And a true anecdote says that the best lovers in history were circumcised. Removal of foreskin makes penis less sensitive and premature ejaculation is less likely . Also circumcised men can be much more patient and enjoy sex with a female partner instead going ahead as they always do.
     "Female circumcision should be prosecuted, is unnecessary and very harmful."

######End quote from Circumcision Advocate########

This argument sounds very authoritative, which doesn't mean it is correct. It was refuted by this entry:

"Smegma is a actually very useful. Smegma has anti viral and anti bacterial qualities and without smegma sex would be almost impossible without continuous application of lubricant. The only 'problem' with Smegma is if a yeast or other infection is present it is very easy to just think you have excess smegma. If you are worried at all by smegma build up that seems unusual it is probably smegma & other things."

And, slightly more rudely, by this one:

"Definitely pulling facts out of his behind. Anecdotal evidence about I read this (sic) and she said that is not fact. More to the point, the penile cancer you mention was one study, and the incidence rate of that, although higher for non-circumcised men were higher, was an order of magnitude smaller than other cancers in general. Sounds to me like you're some closet case who was circumcised, feels angry about it and spreading this litany to get back at your misfortune in some weird way."

The prospect of encountering smegma is a very strong emotional argument in favor of circumcision. I'm as disgusted as anybody else by the penis in the picture above.  But I think the whole smegma argument is not relevant to the discussion about whether infant boys should be circumcised.  Obviously, intact men can deal with smegma.  Obviously those who want to relate to intact penises can learn to deal with smegma.  For me here's the question:

Is it okay to cut off a part of another person's body without their permission?

Return To DarwinHarmless.com to Leave a Comment