Members potaetoes Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by rawhedrex so is {censored} - but I'm sure you managed to learn how to wipe your ass. if i could have a simple procedure done to remove a flap of skin and make it so i never again had to wipe my ass, i certainly would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rear Naked Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by blargh Also, peeing is a lot less fun if you pull your foreskin back. jesus christ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JKD Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by rawhedrex thats total and complete {censored} - Even if you show me some sort of documented evidence i would still say it's {censored} - I worked in health for years and not once saw any evidence whatsoever. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stm I'm sure if you used Google, you'd probably find the actual trial results that generated the news item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by JKD http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stmI'm sure if you used Google, you'd probably find the actual trial results that generated the news item. yes bleeding is less likely - due to the fact your glans toughens as it's outer layer thickens - the rest is total rubbish - ie hiv targets cells in the foreskin. of course for 100 percent protection you could simply do the following cut your dick off completeley dont have sex If people are too idiotic to deal with a part of their body - they dont deserve it - ie - they can go dickless if it's too much to clean it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bluesaholick Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by JKD http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stmI'm sure if you used Google, you'd probably find the actual trial results that generated the news item. wned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HELSTRUME Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 This thread makes me laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by potaetoes if i could have a simple procedure done to remove a flap of skin and make it so i never again had to wipe my ass, i certainly would. Get a colostomy put in - you'll never have to {censored} again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Loghead Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by blargh Well, there is no way I could walk around with my cock head rubbing against my pants all day. I have no idea what it feels like to have a circumcised penis, or if this is the same for everyone, but I have an easier time touching my eyeballs than my exposed penis head. Also, peeing is a lot less fun if you pull your foreskin back. Why the hell am I posting here Sounds like you're saying the foreskin is not very sensitive. Sounds like your describing a part of the anatomy that is superfluous.Remember, calluses make you manly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JKD Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by rawhedrex yes bleeding is less likely - due to the fact your glans toughens as it's outer layer thickens - the rest is total rubbish - ie hiv targets cells in the foreskin. It is clearly only proposed as a theory in the news article, care to point me to the latest research that indicates what you are so sure is 'rubbish'? For the record, I think circumcision amounts to mutilation also....but am just not being a dick (heh) about it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HELSTRUME Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by Rear Naked jesus christ Funniest response ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Loghead Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by rawhedrex Get a colostomy put in - you'll never have to {censored} again. Dude, am I right in assuming that your foreskin is intact? 'Cause if it is, I'm really beginning to wonder why you're shouting down guys whose parents had theirs cut off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Loghead Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by blargh Also, peeing is a lot less fun if you pull your foreskin back. Care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members starsnuffer Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 A recent study by the world health organization found that men with forskin are 50% more likely to contract HIV then men without. Something about the bacteria that live naturally under there acting as transports for the virus. That seems like a damn good medical motivator right there. Besides, every single woman I've ever known (I'm sure I'm no stud but I've known my share), is completly disgusted by the thought of sucking a guy with forskin. That's reason two and it's good enough for me. I'm glad that I have two daughters and will never have to make that decision for my kid. . . because it does give me the jeebies and it would be a tough decision to make. . . but, I'm glad I'm cut. -W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Loghead Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by starsnuffer A recent study by the world health organization found that men with forskin are 50% more likely to contract HIV then men without. Something about the bacteria that live naturally under there acting as transports for the virus.That seems like a damn good medical motivator right there.Besides, every single woman I've ever known (I'm sure I'm no stud but I've known my share), is completly disgusted by the thought of sucking a guy with forskin. That's reason two and it's good enough for me.I'm glad that I have two daughters and will never have to make that decision for my kid. . . because it does give me the jeebies and it would be a tough decision to make. . . but, I'm glad I'm cut.-W Supposing they missed a bit. Would you get it trimmed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members potaetoes Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by rawhedrex Get a colostomy put in - you'll never have to {censored} again. i said simple procedure to remove a flap of skin, and you suddenly jump to colostomy? why are you so vehement on this topic? cut wangs work fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JKD Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by starsnuffer Besides, every single woman I've ever known (I'm sure I'm no stud but I've known my share), is completly disgusted by the thought of sucking a guy with forskin. That's reason two and it's good enough for me.-W It's almost exactly the opposite in the UK in my experience, since the majority are un-cut there.....it's the bobbleheads that get all the 'unusual' comments from women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by JKD It is clearly only proposed as a theory in the news article, care to point me to the latest research that indicates what you are so sure is 'rubbish'?For the record, I think circumcision amounts to mutilation also....but am just not being a dick (heh) about it! I call rubbish because not a single fact aside from statistical numbers exists in that article - theres a whole lot of "maybes" in it. The bleeding issue is most certainly valid however, but brings me back to the notion of undue modification; you arent going to get aids because you aren't circumzised - it also fails to mention in that article weather or not they were wearing a condom - if not they run the risk of inpreganting the woman - whose child will most likely be born with aids - nice one. You know hair speads infection? - you know you are far more likely to become ill because you have hair on your body than because you have a foreskin? - should we use electrolisis on newborns to prevent this risk ever occuring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by potaetoes i said simple procedure to remove a flap of skin, and you suddenly jump to colostomy? why are you so vehement on this topic? cut wangs work fine. a colostomy is actually remarkably simple. cut wangs dont work fine - and they most certainly wont work better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by Loghead Dude, am I right in assuming that your foreskin is intact? 'Cause if it is, I'm really beginning to wonder why you're shouting down guys whose parents had theirs cut off. I'm angry at people who carry on about what a great thing circumcision is - that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Loghead Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 I suppose an appendices (whatever the plural of appendix is) analogy wouldn't work for you either. Look. I've spent nearly 45 years loving the way my circumcised penis looks and works, and you're just not going to convince me that having that snorkel-parka-hood thing cut off has done me any disservice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wtf_albino Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 peNIs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wtf_albino Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 unit:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rawhedrex Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by starsnuffer A recent study by the world health organization found that men with forskin are 50% more likely to contract HIV then men without. Something about the bacteria that live naturally under there acting as transports for the virus.That seems like a damn good medical motivator right there.Besides, every single woman I've ever known (I'm sure I'm no stud but I've known my share), is completly disgusted by the thought of sucking a guy with forskin. That's reason two and it's good enough for me.I'm glad that I have two daughters and will never have to make that decision for my kid. . . because it does give me the jeebies and it would be a tough decision to make. . . but, I'm glad I'm cut.-W and you are hundreds of times less likely if you wear a condom. The bacteria call has been widely disputed - it's far more likely in mine and others opinions to do with blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wtf_albino Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 cack:p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wtf_albino Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 weenie:confused: :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.