Um well I might be treading on a bit of controversial/off-topic water here, but I think this is where cultural differences are coming into play a little bit. I absorbed a lot of sex & culture stats as part of biweekly mini-seminars I had to attend in college as a student-to-student peer counselor, usually a specific topic hosted by someone from the Student Health Center or similar organization. I think something to take into account (I notice that you are from Sweden) is that while this is quickly changing, a majority of American men are still circumcised. And to get into the controversial part (it's something cut men are not happy to acknowledge, and I don't blame them) studies do show that this reduces sensitivity by a significant degree-- but there are a lot of conflicts amongst the studies and there is no "widely accepted" conclusion, in part because for a very long time in the U.S. the medical community pretty much took a "nope, it's better, period, end of discussion" attitude about the topic. But some studies do report (amongst men who were circumcised later in life) roundabouts a 30% drop in sensitivity, as well as some types of motion/stimulation to which cut men reported no tactile sensation whereas uncut men did. And most men report similarly significant drops in sensation in sex with condoms. So you put the two together, I mean, in my own life (anecdotally) I could count for you on one hand the American male friends I had who didn't rather vocally complain that condoms killed sex for them, or vastly decreased its quality.
Just thought I'd throw it out there, because I think it is a confounder in a discussion between Americans and Europeans about whether or not condoms "ruin sex" for men.
Bookmarks