As a bisexual I am fascinated and aroused by both male and female bodies, but with guys I love cocks - especially uncut/uncircumcised ones. I just think they look so nice, especially the ones that are still 'sheathed' when erect. I love to run my tongue around the glans inside their foreskin when giving head. As a circumcised guy I am sad not to have my foreskin and look on the practice as mutilation unless there is a good reason for it, be it religious, health or culture. What do others think - are there whole guys who wished that they were circumcised. I am aware of the restoration movement but have so little skin left that I am not going down that road at my time of life. Simon
yeah so they say but only if they don't keep themselves clean. I think this is a leftover from times when people maybe washed weekly or (worse) occasionally. Can you image in the middle ages when people masked their odurs with perfume - and a sexually active male then......... what did his penis smell like! Urgh. Simon
I dunno Simon,i am sort of glad to be circumsised (I think i am anyway) It looks better i think w/o the extra skin.... (I originally thought if the inner tube in your straw was longer than the shaft itself,that was being UNCIRCUMSISED)
I am circumcised, but still have most of my foreskin, which I can pull entirely over the glans when soft, and two thirds over when hard - the best of both worlds.
Slightly off topic but bisexual boys make the most considerate lovers. It's a fact. Based on my experiences anyway.
based on my experiences almost all mexicans are thieves. sometimes you need to look a little beyond your own experiences...
To A Degree I Can Relate To All Of You, Just Recently I Brought Home A Most Passionate, Careing, Bi-Sexual Mexican Man Who Was Semi-Circumcised, And We Had A Great Time Together Until Shortly After He Left I Realised The Little S**t Had Stolen My Wallet.... Cheers Glen.
It's mutilation, pure and simple. Practices by my relatives for years (centuries or more) so their 'boys' were stunted in their spiritual sexual development.. It used to be the trousers could be dropped to see who was who, with Dr. Spock that all changed.. I mean it's the stuff some of the coptics do with female genitalia, as hard as that is for the females using the board believe. The little one comes out perfect, and then you (through the rep/doc) cut off the most sensitive part of his genitalia, traumatizing him right-off before he can even speak and exclaim his pain?! Pure madness. It would be better for all though if they waited until the male was of-age. If the male is over 21 and he STILL wants to get his perfect pee pee sliced up by some sick Mohel, well.. go ahead. [my relatives are from the ghetto, and they left for good reason!] peace and whole pee-pees. and no there is no correlation between cut and uncut and STD's - specifically AIDS most recently, 'they' have been pushing that s&%t for years.. bad science/medicine. Our african friends/bros have 'AID's (insufficient immune response) because of massive vaccination programs by the 'they'-related Gates household projects (Bill-Melinda Gates Foundation) and insufficient sanitation, funded internal battles, decades of 'austerity' from the rest of the world. Africa is loaded with minerals. The sooner 'they' remove our bros from their native soil, the better to get at the wealth beneath the ground [according to their twisted game-book] . ... Our african bros so, do not have a problem with their large members.
Yeah, about getting STD's, even if it DOES change the odds.... I guess it's a lot easier to cut part of your kids dick off and then let jersey shore show him what to stick it in, than to actually be a parent. I shouldn't really talk, having made a notoriously bad choice with good parents and a good foreskin, but it's still no excuse to chop up your kids genitals... I'd also like to take this time to reiterate that women who claim that they'll mutilate their son and no one can stop them, because they just think it's the right thing to do and looks better, can and should die by fire, preferably after giving birth, but before authorizing circumcision.... Where's the joker when you need him?
Hey, it's such a hassle washing hands to keep them clean - why not just chop them off instead - would lower the risk of dirty hands. I'm sorry - but the whole "get circumcised so you won't have to learn to clean *it* - or the "if you take into consideration those guys that don't clean, and form an average using them; then you have better odds of being clean when circumcised (as compared to that contrived average)" ways of thinking are just such bullshit to me. Okay, so some are circumcised. Some are not. BOTH are clean and healthy. It is "normal hygiene" for an uncircumcised guy to clean himself (just as he cleans other parts of his body). I guess I'd just like to quit hearing bullshit about how uncircumcised guys are "less clean" - it's pure bullshit. How "clean" an individual is; is due to their hygienic habits - whether or not they are or are not circumcised. Sorry for the rant. But it would be nice to see debates about circumcision that don't hinge themselves on "circumcision is good - if you compare it to uncircumcised guys that don't clean themselves - and then act as if the comparison is valid against all uncircumcised guys - not just those guys with poor hygiene". JMO
As for the "unclean" argument... I rather destroyed a female acquaintance when she told it was unclean, and I mentioned that if having a fold of skin was unclean, a vagina is inherently filthy. She shut right up. I would suggest using this defense on any fem-nazi's in favor of male circumcision.
We are all familiar with the phrase, "Lies, Damned Lies, And Official Government Statistics", and one fact that I think we can all agree on is that whether you are pro or con circumcision, there will always be 'Official Statistics' available to back the argument up. One thing I have not seen mentioned in these statistics is whether or not they were taken & compared like with like - i.e. Were all the samples taken sexually active? One of the primary reasons for circumcision, if not THE primary reason, is probably that of religious doctrine, such as Judaism & Islam - both of which encourage arranged marriages and, as a consequence, are more likely to remain celibate than those of other beliefs who do not require circumcision. Obviously this does not guarantee that just because someone is born into such a faith that they will necessarily abide 100% by their tenet, but surely it does raise the likelihood somewhat - thus affecting the statistics regarding the probability of catching STDs.
On that note, christianity does not require, and may(depending on who you ask) actully forbid circumcision. Judaism required that each man own up to god by taking the snip, and then jeebus jumped up on the cross, to count for all of our foreskins. Think of his crucifixion as the worlds biggest briss ever:sunny:
I love the look of cut cocks, especially nice BIG headed cocks. Although I am straight, looking at cut cocks and balls turn me on as well. I'd say I guess I'm a little Bi in that respect.
