Disturbing observation: intact vs circumcised ejaculations in porn

I think this is a great time to merge this thread with all the other circumsized whiner threads so they can be one big hap, hap, happy family.

I caught that the first time, and I explained why that is immaterial. I don't care how many uncut guys videos you watched..
Its still a self selected sample.

ANY evidence form porn videos is a biased sample.
You have no mechanism, you have no real evidence.
End of story.


What you do have is an agenda.

Hey succession, that is an interesting observation and there could be something behind it. However, the lack of scientific evidence prevents any real conclusions from being made (porn = NOT GOOD evidence).

I have wondered if circumsized men have less sensitivity and therefore less powerfull orgasms and ejaculations as well. I know that uncircumsized penis heads may appear red, pink or purple when hard, whereas a circumsized head will be the color of the rest of the shaft. This leads me to believe that because circumsized penis heads are constantly exposed to fabric, ect, they become "callous" in a sense. The uncut heads remain tender colors, possible because they are simply more tender, and more sensitive.

[quote=Mademoiselle Rouge;1508100][quote=Ed69;1507226]

I know a lot more than the average person about anatomy. And i've also had sex with plenty of guys who could orgasm 2 or 3 times per session. My husband has the predictable smaller load on the 2nd orgasm consistently in the last 10 years we've been together. It does take some time for the fluid to accumulate in the balls.[/quote]

Really?In my 7nth grade health class we were taught that the prostate produced the fluid that mixed with and carried the sperm produced by the testicles.Both combined being called ejaculate.The majority of the ejaculate being produced by the prostate not the testicles.

That however was 25 years ago.Are they teaching something different now?

P.S.Don't take this as a slam or insult,I'd like to know has something new been learned/discovered?

I fail to see how observing intact and circumcised penises ejaculating is disturbing. It's one of my favorite things to do!

I couldn't help it. Sorry.

For the 6th or 7th time, Phil, if my sample is self selected, then PROVIDE ME WITH COUNTER EXAMPLES!!!

I agree that porn is not a suitable data store for high quality evidence. If I were to publish, I would never use porn as my data!

But if used intelligently it can provide for some interesting insights.

There are thousands of cumshots available online. Of these, it is often easy to assess the circumcision status of the male stars.

If, as I have claimed to notice, the most powerful cumshots available for viewing online are produced primarily by intact stars, then it is hard to explain this away by sampling issues.

It is not as if I am watching porn, and making the conclusion that all males can last for 30 plus minutes, based on my observations of male porn stars. That would indeed be a silly generalization since there are many confounds: porn stars tend to be those who can last longer, there are editing techniques, etc.

What I am doing is altogether different. I have noticed a trend within the existing sample available.

I have left it to the readers of this thread to confirm or disconfirm my observation, yet nobody has done so. Instead, people keep harping on about how porn stars use special techniques etc.

But if that is the case, shouldn't the most powerful cumshots be produced by an equal number of circumcised and intact males?

The only way this couldn't be the case is if the initial sample of porn stars was heavily weighted in favour of intact males, but I have certainly not noticed this.

If my observation is sound, then your explanation might be part of the story. But I have seen videos where only the foreskin was stimulated without the glans at all, producing very intense ejaculations (although it is possible that the glans had been stimulated prior to filming).

All the usual suspects on here, especially those who think their own limited experience defines everyone - cannot admit of any other experience but their own. I'll try anyway. I'll tell you what, I don't agree with you succession. I think the size or distance or force of the ejaculate has little to do with genital cutting. What I have noticed is that non-intact guys pound more and more often than intact guys and sometimes have odd masturbation practices. Wringing the penis for instance, or knocking the chicks head on the headboard while her facial expression is saying, "is this good for you?"

Most intact guys use a thumb and forefinger grip until they get close to orgasm when they use a full fist grip (or not). This natural method of pleasuring oneself is almost universal for genitally intact males, so if you want to argue about that then you're not being reasonable and should keep your misinformation to yourself.

Those examples would come from professional porn too. Probably, not sure but just probably, amateur porn would be a better (less biased) place to collect samples.

I can assure you that they have less sensitivity but this does not necessarily imply less powerful orgasms and ejaculations. Less sensitivity generally implies more or much more effort to "finish".

This is true. Permanent exposure of the glans will make it more dry and rough, but this is a slow process that will take years. So you are not going to notice before long.

If I may ask, in which domain are you specialized?

To return to your points, I feel somehow that you are maybe on to something. But I am positive too that reality must be much more complicated. For example, I am inclined to believe that an intact one who cannot last for long during the intercourse because of its sensitivity, will not ejaculate in the same spectacular way. And this before considering bio-chemo-mechanical issues. But an intact one again who can last despite the sensitivity, will have the opportunity to build up much fluid and energy to produce what you have shown us. Of course this is just speculation from my part, but reasonable I hope.

This is normal because they feel less.

What misinformation have I given? I have shared an observation, and speculation. Regardless of whether my speculation is sound or not, the observation still stands, until met with counter examples.

I've noticed this in amateur postings also: here a couple of examples:

YouPorn.com Lite (BETA) - Porn

XTube Videos


Here is a great shot from a circumcised guy, but it's hard to tell how much frenular tissue he has left as it only shows the dorsal (upper) region of his shaft. Nevertheless, it is a good counterexample to my observation

XTube Videos

I'm a grad student in cognitive neuroscience, but have a small publication in a peer reviewed journal in the area of circumcision.

I would amend your statement with one qualification. It may be that having more neural modulators allows one to actually last longer, since the threshold for orgasm is increased. In other words, with more tissue from which to derive orgasm, one can not only build up a more powerful, higher bandwidth, orgasm, but can withstand more stimulation before reaching threshold.

Of course, this is HIGHLY speculative, and the research in this area is very basic.