Attitude to foreskin or lack thereof

[SweatyAussie]

Following on from the cut/uncut poll, I want to know how many guys are happy with the way they are, cut or uncut, and who are not.

[SweatyAussie]

Circumcised here, and I am perfectly happy with my dick the way it is :)

[Ste]

I suspect that I would be 2...

[Onan]

I was cut at about 6, but a quite fair amount of foreskin remains. I like it the way it is.

[SmoothChris]

Uncut and love it that way.

[Nudedude]

I am cut and wish I wasn't. I would like to experience the feel of having a foreskin to play with.

[The Bondsman]

Circumcised here, and I am perfectly happy with my dick the way it is :)
And ANYONE who wouldn't be happy with such a magnificent cut dick would need their head read! Now I'd just LOVE to see THAT jutting up out of the fly of a nice pair of white briefs! I also LOVE the way a cut cock shows off the head of a dick in underwear, ....something an un-circumcised one just can't.
FAR more interesting.
A truly wonderful example of the art of circumcision SweatyAussie, ....and nice to know that while you may be sweaty in our climate, your cock head certainly isn't.
Everyone here knows, (and is probably sick of too), my rants on this subject, but your dick, (and a few others here who know who they are), just re-confirm my thoughts.
Incidentally, you didn't add a category for "Circumcised and wouldn't have it any other way, ....and would run out and have it done immediately if I wasn't !"
BTW, do hope this wasn't just a sneaky way to get dick shots on the board WITHOUT underwear! :D :D :D

[Unregistered]

"In tact", uncut and happy. Great to have my "turtleneck" because I can j/o and whank at will w/out lube (and yes, there is some truth about us with skin having a more sensitive dickhead). A personal erotic thrill is feeling the dickhead emerge and push through as the skin rolls off when boning in my undies, jocks, jeans, cut-offs or just hanging bare around the house and popping wood. There are 4 of us "play buds" that get together at least one evening a week, (usually a Fri or Sat night) starting out fully dressed watching movies, a ballgame, playing cards, etc. and slowly taking off the others clothes item by item during the evening with the hilite being around 10:00pm when we are all down to the undies, jocks or whatever when the boning, rubbing, touching, licking the fabric action moves into high gear and by this time we're all on the floor, in the hottub or on the bed. Two of the guys are cut, the other is uncut. The two cut guys think it's waaaay cool to play with the foreskins and have become skilled at manipulation with sucking, 69-ing and blowjobs. I can have fun with either since the whole intent and goal is the sex, understanding what makes it fun for the guy you're with, and he knowing what makes it good for you, so for me it's no big deal either way, the preferrance is what I can do to make sure the other guys enjoy it. Just know that I'm OK and happy with what I got personally. Never seriously considered having it "taken care of" since it seems to be a source of intrigue and fun for the other guys when we're playin'.

[SweatyAussie]

Thank you Bondsman, but you would not find me wearing any briefs with a fly... nor white for that matter.
Your suggested category sounds a bit over the top... I think that's what they call "push polling". :)
I could have worded the options better, to make more distinction between 1 & 3, and between 4 & 6. Maybe 1 & 4 should have read "(Un)cut and that's how I prefer it".
As for getting dick shots without underwear onto the board... well I did have second thoughts after posting this poll, especially since I am often the one to complain about "off-topic" postings. My excuse is that it was a follow-on from an earlier poll, and in future I shall try & make sure my postings are closely related to the fetish we all share.

....Now I'd just LOVE to see THAT jutting up out of the fly of a nice pair of white briefs!
...........
Incidentally, you didn't add a category for "Circumcised and wouldn't have it any other way, ....and would run out and have it done immediately if I wasn't !"
BTW, do hope this wasn't just a sneaky way to get dick shots on the board WITHOUT underwear! :D :D :D

[Unregistered]

It always intrests me when somebody who is uncut says, "there is some truth about us with skin having a more sensitive dickhead". How do you know that? If you've never been cut, what do you compare your "sensitive dickhead" to?

I'm cut and I can't imagine it being any more sensitive. While living in England, most of the guys I met were uncut and none of them had any more sensitive a dickhead than I do. I tried wearing boxers for period of time -- since they were required by the military at that time -- and I couldn't stand my dickhead rubbing against the rough material. So, I went back to briefs and haven't had that problem since.

[The Bondsman]

"In tact", uncut and happy. Great to have my "turtleneck" because I can j/o and whank at will w/out lube (and yes, there is some truth about us with skin having a more sensitive dickhead).
I too, grow weary of this old, old chestnut.
How the hell would you ( or any other un-cut guy for that matter) know this? :confused: Unless of course you were suddenly circumcised last week, ....and obviously that didn't happen.
Sit down, gaze at your fully curtained appendage and think hard about what you just wrote and I'm sure that the sheer stupidity of what you claim will suddenly dawn on you!
And I also have to tell you that the ability to have a wank without lube is not exactly an exclusive preserve either, ......lots of we "cut" guys can do this too.....and we are not exactly rubbing un-sensitive areas here to do it!

[The Bondsman]

Thank you Bondsman, but you would not find me wearing any briefs with a fly... nor white for that matter.
Please don't misunderstand me SweatyAussie, ....I LOVED seeing your very impressive member, ....and it's just MY fetish to imagine seeing it where I'd most prefer.
Of course you have your own preferences when it comes to underwear, BUT you can't blame me for dreaming now, can you?
Besides, SOMETIMES even I have been known to wear something that's not really MY style, just to please a partner who loves that sort of thing. :cool: :cool: :cool:

[Unregistered]

Bonds: no need to get all snarly about more / less sensitive and hashing about the old "chestnut" adage... obviously THE individual would not have the ability to self-proclaim himself more/less sensitive than the next guy. However, for those with an open mind and the ability to listen to ideas and concepts outside their own personal universe..... this "claim" is based on AMA study out of Johns Hopkins Medical Journal. Hopkins did a study using nerve / sensory activity (smiliar to EEG's registering brain activity). Body Human is essentially and electric power plant... when stimualted there are measurable changes...

J Hopkins study ran "EEG" type tests to try and determine patterns of stimulus / response on patients with and w/out foreskins... the conclusion was that in the overall population, there is scientific verifiable proof that the uncut penis has a consistantly higher rate of reactivity to stimulus (sensitivity) than a circumsized penis.

So the "old chestnut" on cut/uncut sensitivity just may be proven as a truth... still got issues? Call John Hopkins......

[deusex]

Unregistered,

Study or no, I've never met a cut or uncut guy who I couldn't get off with my masterful mouth ;) If there was some difference to the sensitivity of a cut dick to an uncut one, I doubt it's significantly enough to even debate about.

Like different breeds of dogs, dicks are all sweet in my eyes (and mouth!)

(and as all the regulars here know - I'm uncut)

[Unregistered]

this "claim" is based on AMA study out of Johns Hopkins Medical Journal. Hopkins did a study using nerve / sensory activity (smiliar to EEG's registering brain activity).

So the "old chestnut" on cut/uncut sensitivity just may be proven as a truth... still got issues? Call John Hopkins......

As the old saying goes, "Figures don't like, Liars figure..." They also did a study proving that there was reduced sprem count of men wearing briefs over those wearing boxers. That study, by the way, was a grant by a major men's underwear company that was marketing boxers due to the high profit margin of them. The New England Journal of Medicine about 3 years ago published a detailed article on the benefits of circumcision, and highly recommened it.

Then, there was another study that found there was absolutely no difference in the sperm count of men wearing either boxers or briefs, but there are different counts among men at different times of the week, month, etc.

So, it's whaever floats your boat....

[SweatyAussie]

Right... and a recent statistical survey revealed that the average Australian has one breast and one testicle.

[Unregistered]

Right... and a recent statistical survey revealed that the average Australian has one breast and one testicle.

That's okay, as long as he still has that beautiful cock!

[deusex]

...and speaking of sperm count (and going a bit off topic)....this just came through my google news alert for "underwear"

"THE SPERM CRISIS
Michael Castleman

The effect seems clear: The average sperm count of American males is dropping. Studies have indicated that the proportion of men who have 100 million sperm per milliliter (ml) of semen has dropped from 80% in 1929 ... to 44% in 1950 ... all the way down to 22% in 1977! But what is the cause of this problem? Well, for a while, much of the popular news media offered lighthearted speculation that the lowered sperm counts might be related to a society-wide increase in sexual activity (which supposedly left males with depleted reserves) or to widespread use of tight-fitting underwear (which may, indeed, subject heat-sensitive sperm to injurious temperatures by holding them unnaturally close to the body).

In September o 1979, though , the topic suddenly became less than funny when Robert C. Dougherty suggested—in Chemical and Engineering News that toxic chemicals, not sex or underwear, were the main causes of the decrease in men's sperm counts. The Florida State University professor found high levels of four toxins in semen samples taken from 132 student volunteers. Three of the seminal pollutants—polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), DDT, and hexachlorobenzene—are widely recognized as carcinogens and teratogen's (sub stances that cause birth defects by mutating DNA in reproductive cells) ... while the last, the wood preservative pentachlorophenol, is quite possibly carcinogenic as well. The students' most frequent sperm count was 20 million per milliliter of semen. This is an ominously low figure. (Compare it to the 60 million/ml sperm count most prevalent in a 1974 study and 100 million/ml found in 1929!) In fact, a sperm count below 20 million/ml generally indicates a man with a fertility problem. The FSU chemist even said that 23% of the young adults he examined had counts so low that he considered them almost certainly sterile. "

[The Bondsman]

Bonds: no need to get all snarly about more / less sensitive and hashing about the old "chestnut" adage...
When I hear the "same old same old" again and again, I do tend to get a bit fed up. (I tend to get a bit this way talking to Mr Unregistereds too!).
Look, NO apologies for anyone who quotes so called research which to anyone with even half a brain, is as flawed as Paris Hilton's life-style.
See below!

So the "old chestnut" on cut/uncut sensitivity just may be proven as a truth... still got issues? Call John Hopkins......
Yeah, ...guess what? I STILL got "issues".
Now let me run this passed you, ...did your Mr John Hopkins (yes I've read him) check whether his circumcised subjects had been wearing soft cotton underwear, free-balling, or even running around in sand-paper g-strings for that matter? I'm betting "NO", and I'm also confident to say thet I bet he found a great deal of variation in his uncut guys too. If he had bothered to use his test machine even on the fingertips on a large sample of guys, ...and remember here ...none of us have foreskins on our fingers, ....I'm betting he would find a VAST difference in sensitivity in the skin ANYWHERE in all men....yet our fingers are not covered by anything. Some of us have VERY sensitive nipples and some don't. Surely you are not going to tell me that this is because some of us have un-circumcised nipples? Little secret here for you unregistered. I happen to have VERY sensitive balls and can cum just from the stimulation of these alone, ....now my balls have never been doctored in ANY way, but not all men can do this. Your explanation?
No, despite his great reputation, and bizarre experiments,Mr John Hopkin's theory is flawed, simply because ALL penises have a great variation in sensitivity, regardless of status. Have a talk to some guys who suffer premature ejaculation, even if circumcised! Others can take a massive amount of stimulation before even coming, ...despite their being in possession of their curtains or not!
I know guys who cum from two strokes, ...and others who can last all night, ...and I believe if you actually think about this, you will too.
Just because some research is put forward, and by some great "name", don't forget to engage your own brain before you swallow some cock-a-mamie theory from a guy who should know a whole lot better if he actually thought about it.

[Onan]

Right... and a recent statistical survey revealed that the average Australian has one breast and one testicle.

Have met about 5 guys with 1 testicle. Nice guys. I liked them all. Mostly due to illness in youth (orchidis).One because of football injury.They were all extremely virile as if that one testicle overcompensated for the lack of the other. Astonishing lovable guys.

[Twain]

Bondy, you've touched on a good point, as I'm sure you have often! I think, no, I know that what kind of underwear one wears affects sensitivity. When I've tried different kinds of underwear (cotton boxers vs. briefs), I did feel a perceptible change in my head's sensitivity. (This time the better head was the lower one.) When I wear silk or microfiber, as well as the smooth, sexy feel, I feel increased sensitivity all day. Of course, I can't get anything productive done, but who cares?

[The Bondsman]

Bondy, you've touched on a good point, as I'm sure you have often!
I'm lovin' you already!
Of course, I can't get anything productive done, but who cares?
Productive? Why you're producing the most pleasurable sensations known to every underwear loving bloke. How much better can it get? ;) :cool: ;)

[SweatyAussie]

Yikes! Never tried a dog in my mouth... not sure that I wish to. Every day I read about a new unfamiliar fetish.



Like different breeds of dogs, dicks are all sweet in my eyes (and mouth!)

(and as all the regulars here know - I'm uncut)

[SweatyAussie]

OK, now that this poll has closed let me summarise the results:

Out of 61 respondents:
- 40 were cut, 21 uncut.
- 45 (75%) prefer to be the way they are.
- 10 (16%) would prefer to be the other way... most of these were cut guys who wanted to be uncut.

These results more or less confirm what I believed, and which was the main reason I started the poll in the first place, which was that most guys are happy the way they are.