Disturbing observation: intact vs circumcised ejaculations in porn

I'm gonna step right over the pile of dogshit (oops, circumcision polemics) and repeat, in that slightly different and personal way that I do, what's been said here before:

Porn is not real life. It's a series of illusions and images meant to stimulate a sexual response by documenting fantasies.

There seems to be some odd correlation in some men's minds between virility and the force of his ejaculate, I'm not sure why.

Regardless of how recently a man has come, he can still achieve something called a "Champagne" cumshot, which I learned many years ago from an ex. It involves edging for at least a couple of hours, then holding back with your anal muscles as much as possible at the point of no return.

With practice, determination and the right amount of release and control, anyone can shoot over his head. It's a parlor trick that has nothing to do with circumcision.

With a long foreksin, you tend to shott much less far because on the upstroke, your foreskin obscures the meatus and catches/slows the sperm that is pushed out.

After my circumcision, during initial months, I found I had a rythm problem. I had gotten the beat of movements before to sort of match the ejaculation spasms (maybe two beets per spasm or whatever) and after circ, while I was still trying to masturbate like an uncut, the strokes were at a different frenquency and it didn't quite match and found the ejaculation didn't quite get pushed out as far because the muscle contractions weren't timed with the strokes.

But in time, I adapted my technique and myu spasms are very powerful again.
The amount of cum I produce depends on how much foreplay I had (of how much I was thinking about sex during the day).
Feeling the glans against underwear on some days makes my horny and I tend to cum more at night.
And of course, there is no foreksin to catch the sperm, so when the spasm is timed just right, the sperm flies off far away. (I've hit the wall behind me a number of times, never did that as uncut due to foreksin catching sperm).

[quote=Mademoiselle Rouge;1508100][quote=Ed69;1508579][quote=Mademoiselle Rouge;1508100]Ok you had your chance!You realy are another silly ignorant female.

This is the difference between you and I.

Attached Images

amputated foreskin.jpg (17.6 KB, 94 views)

I never said this. I said that I have observed that the most powerful ejaculations in porn tend to be produced by a group of males who are largely intact.

I have been careful to emphasize that this has been my observation and I am opening it up for challenge.

The poor quality of the video makes it hard to determine whether he is circumcised, but even if he is, that cumshot is not in the same league I am talking about. Watch the videos I've posted, including the youporn and xtube ones I posted later on in the thread.

I already mentioned Peter North in my original post - beginning to wonder how many people are actually reading the threads carefully rather than skimming and assuming.

That skin could be from someone who had a ton of loose skin on a large penis, that doesnt look like an infant foreskin at all. I got a kick out of the "amputated foreskin" title.

After looking at infant circumcision photos, i am sure that if i ever do go to medical school to be an ob/gyn like i originally planned to do. I would refuse to do them.

M.R., I've seen that pic discussed on other sites and it is in fact from an adult.

It doesn't look particularly large, to me.

that photo doesn't show the complex of tissue at the frenular area of the inner foreskin. Here are some good examples:

http://www.foreskin.org/46-33-11.jpg

http://secretpenis.com/frenulum.jpg

http://www.norm-phoenix.org/articles...frenulum_7.jpg

Here is what a circumcised penis looks like, without the frenulum, thus missing the most sensitive area of the entire penis.:

http://www.circumstraint.com/Images/...cised5_lrg.jpg

Oh, yes, it is. Probably not vital, but very important for sure. As I am intact I can assure you that I have too kinds of orgasm: one with the foreskin retracted and the other with the foreskin in its normal position. There is a fairly large difference in the sensation and the details between the two.

As for sex: in this case the foreskin is probably even more important. The movements of the foreskin during foreplay are very sweet making the act very enjoyable. Receiving intense pleasure is effortless when the foreskin is there.

Of course there is. Very few (exceptions are mostly people of some religious groups) are cut in Europe.

You can most certainly enjoy sexual stimulation without foreskin. But the intensity of the pleasure is not the same.

Stretching the foreskin of an erect penis has not at all the same response as the other skin parts of our body. The foreskin is very sensitive and it is there to protect the glans and enhance sexual stimulation.

Uh, the frenulum is right there, are you sure you copied the right link? No frenulum here:

http://www.circumstraint.com/Images/...cised2_lrg.jpg

greek dude, let me try to use an analogy here.

Suppose I watched a lot of baseball, and made an interesting observation. My observation was as follows:

The fastest pitches tend to be thrown by those players who are wearing black socks.

Assuming this observation is sound, it certainly requires an explanation.

Here are some possible explanations:

1) It is pure statistical fluke. There is no relationship whatsoever between sock colour and pitch speed.

2) The vast majority of players happen to wear black socks. It is therefore expected that the fastest pitches will happen to be thrown by those wearing black socks, since there is a massive skew in the initial distribution of sock colour.

3) Perhaps black socks absorb more heat, and warm the feet more, allowing for better foot control.

4) Perhaps there is a correlation between athletic prowess, and taste in colour. Perhaps those players who are stronger throwers also happen to prefer dark colours.

5) Perhaps there is a cultural confound - perhaps certain cultures prefer dark socks, and those also happen to be the cultures which have a long history of baseball.

The important point here is that if someone were to respond to this observation (and the proposed possible explanations) by saying:

"dude, professional baseball is not indicative of real performance. These players are highly trained, highly selected, and many use performance enhancers to increase their pitching speed"

this would not explain the difference observed.


Similarly, if my observation in porn is sound, then the difference requires an explanation.

Here's another example of a cumshot you will rarely see produced by a circumcised male:

http://xisty.info/claudia_bg_hd01/vids/4.wmv