circumcision...ugh

Freya said:
Sure Stup. In the sense that every single opinion we have on anything is speculation, then I guess the choice to snip your baby is also that.

Well largely, yes they indeed are. Most people form opinions without considering any facts or reason or evidence, even the empirical kind in some cases. that is why they are opinions and not facts or lies. Becasue they are neither correct nor incorrect. They just are.

But my point was that when you attempt to predict the future, that is by definition speculation.
 
Stuponfucious said:
But why is it important? Do you believe that it's an indiaction of which is more commonly desirable among women? By that reasoning all men go for skinny bolndes with big tits, which I think you would agree, isn't accurate.

i believe it's an indication of a trend in preference for women who like to view naked male bodies, yes

why would a person purchase porn featuring people they found unattractive?

most porn involve skinny girls with big tits...because the majority of men prefer it

and i'd be willing to bet that the sales for porn featuring skinny, big breasted women far exceed the sales for porn featuring women with extra skin containing cheese in the folds
 
thegirlfriday11 said:
i believe it's an indication of a trend in preference for women who like to view naked male bodies, yes

why would a person purchase porn featuring people they found unattractive?

most porn involve skinny girls with big tits...because the majority of men prefer it

and i'd be willing to bet that the sales for porn featuring skinny, big breasted women far exceed the sales for porn featuring women with extra skin containing cheese in the folds

My boyfriend told me about a porn movie he saw once with a hugely obese woman and a skinny guy. Apparently the woman was moaning, "Oh yeah baby, fuck that fold!".

I just don't see that being a big seller.
 
Stuponfucious said:
Are you for real?

A person can't help but have thier perceptions affected by how they were raised, and for that matter what they are accustomed to. But I don't see how sexual orientiation has to do with it.


my parents didn't tell me i should prefer a cut penis, nor did they tell me dick cheese is repulsive...i decided those things when i first saw an uncut dick and then again in medicine when there were times i had to clean an uncut dick
 
Freya said:
I seem to be good at making people do that.


And no, no lesbians. As repulsed as I am by foreskin, double that for the thought of having my mouth on a girl's pussy.

Hmm, what about the thought of a girl's mouth on yours...?

Well anyway, I'm probably biased but I'm just baffled sometimes when I run across someone who doesn't appreciate the female form as much I do. Not to gush or anything, but it just seems so undeniably beautiful and attractive to me sometimes that I can't understand the disinterest.
 
Stuponfucious said:
Hmm, what about the thought of a girl's mouth on yours...?

Well anyway, I'm probably biased but I'm just baffled sometimes when I run across someone who doesn't appreciate the female form as much I do. Not to gush or anything, but it just seems so undeniably beautiful and attractive to me sometimes that I can't understand the disinterest.

Strangely enough, I can and do admire the female form. I think (some) women are extremely beautiful, and even sexy - I just don't want to fuck them.
 
Freya said:
My boyfriend told me about a porn movie he saw once with a hugely obese woman and a skinny guy. Apparently the woman was moaning, "Oh yeah baby, fuck that fold!".

I just don't see that being a big seller.

me either
 
Stuponfucious said:
Why do you say it's irrational? It certainly doesn't take a trauma for someone to form a preference for or against something.
Personally, I love everything about pussy. I love the skin flaps and the way it looks, and how it smells. I wouldn't have it any other way. and I love tits. heck, I love every single thing about the female form. and, that makes sense, because males are supposed to be attracted to females. It's rational. If you pick and choose, then it's not the same thing.
 
Now, from a genetic/evolutionary point of view... If some males were born without foreskins, and some women prefered that natural "no foreskin" look, then ok, that may be rational. because, maybe there's some natural reason why not having a foreskin would be a good thing.

But even after thousands of years of pruning, and all these women shunning foreskins, males are still born with foreskins. Why is that? There must be a good genetic advantage to having it.

So, if a woman doesn't like that natural body part, then I call that irrational.
 
thegirlfriday11 said:
i believe it's an indication of a trend in preference for women who like to view naked male bodies, yes

why would a person purchase porn featuring people they found unattractive?

because it's all that's available. The media has a tendency to hit on a widely popular or accepted formula and then run it into the ground.

Although, who finds 7 inch platform heels attractive? Not many I'd guess and yet you seem them all the time in porn.

Besides I'm not saying that some guys find big-titted blondes as repulsive as some women find foreskin, but my point is that porn isn't exactly the most reliable indicator of social trends. If that were the case the mail carrier would've jumped my bones if I had stared at her a little too long the other day.

most porn involve skinny girls with big tits...because the majority of men prefer it

That may be the case, and if it is that's at least 51% say, and even if it were much larger, fantasy and reality are two different things. I would guess that most guys, if given the opportunity would fuck a B cup brunette at the drop of a hat.

and i'd be willing to bet that the sales for porn featuring skinny, big breasted women far exceed the sales for porn featuring women with extra skin containing cheese in the folds

Most women fall in between though and porn is usually about fantasies, so it makes sense that's the case, though even a casual look with the right keywords on Google quickly reveals it's anything but a binary choice.

In any case, I think it's obvious why busty blondes are preferable to unhygienic obese women. Most people in general would agree that the former is more attractive than the latter even if they don't find the former particularly attractive. But you made such a stark contrast on purpose while illustrating yet again that you've been influenced by personal experience to believe that most men with "extra skin" have "cheese in the folds".
 
TumbledLove said:
Now, from a genetic/evolutionary point of view... If some males were born without foreskins, and some women prefered that natural "no foreskin" look, then ok, that may be rational. because, maybe there's some natural reason why not having a foreskin would be a good thing.

But even after thousands of years of pruning, and all these women shunning foreskins, males are still born with foreskins. Why is that? There must be a good genetic advantage to having it.

So, if a woman doesn't like that natural genetic advantage, then I call that irrational.

We still have our appendix though. And liking an uncut guy better than a cut guy seems as sane or rational as a guy liking blondes better than redheads. Just because you're attracted to the female form doesn't mean you have to be attracted to every female form.
 
thegirlfriday11 said:
my parents didn't tell me i should prefer a cut penis, nor did they tell me dick cheese is repulsive...i decided those things when i first saw an uncut dick and then again in medicine when there were times i had to clean an uncut dick

Like I said, one can grow accustomed to one thing or another as well, but you're obviously determined to argue with everything I say even whern I agree with you.
 
Weevil said:
We still have our appendix though. And liking an uncut guy better than a cut guy seems as sane or rational as a guy liking blondes better than redheads. Just because you're attracted to the female form doesn't mean you have to be attracted to every female form.
as for the appendix.. I don't know enough about it to say.. but I'm talking about physical attributes that people actually see. Hair has natural variations. Foreskin does not. It's *always* there at birth. I mean, how many hetero guys do you know that loves everything about women, except for their breasts? or except for their clit? or except for those pussy lips?
 
TumbledLove said:
Now, from a genetic/evolutionary point of view... If some males were born without foreskins, and some women prefered that natural "no foreskin" look, then ok, that may be rational. because, maybe there's some natural reason why not having a foreskin would be a good thing.

But even after thousands of years of pruning, and all these women shunning foreskins, males are still born with foreskins. Why is that? There must be a good genetic advantage to having it.

So, if a woman doesn't like that natural body part, then I call that irrational.

That's not how evolution works.

There is no way that a surgical procedure performed over many generations would affect the genetic code, for one.

Now there are a number of benefits to having foreskin it has been conclusively determined, most of them physical, but on the other hand there are drawbacks as well, mostly social and cultural.

Anyway, it's the former that might cause it to disappear in the evolutionary line, not womens' repeated expressions of distaste or surgical removal of it. There would need to be something about foreskin that actually lowers the chances of those with it to survive and/or pass on thier genes to a new generation.

But if it's beneficial (here's the key part)or merely not a hindrance, it will probably remain.
 
TumbledLove said:
as for the appendix.. I don't know enough about it to say.. but I'm talking about physical attributes that people actually see. Hair has natural variations. Foreskin does not. It's *always* there at birth. I mean, how many hetero guys do you know that loves everything about women, except for their breasts? or except for their clit? or except for those pussy lips?

Uh, lots? Or more to the point, I know lots of guys who love lots of things about women but don't much care for their ankles or their earlobes or the backs of their knees.

And the appendix is a completely useless organ. But we've still got it.
 
TumbledLove said:
as for the appendix.. I don't know enough about it to say.. but I'm talking about physical attributes that people actually see. Hair has natural variations. Foreskin does not. It's *always* there at birth. I mean, how many hetero guys do you know that loves everything about women, except for their breasts? or except for their clit? or except for those pussy lips?

the comparison of male and female parts you're making isn't exactly accurate, but that's not the point anyway...

Hair varies yes, but most people have it right? Well, actually foreskins do vary. Males are typicall born with them but they're not all identical. Some have more skin than others for one.
 
TumbledLove said:
Personally, I love everything about pussy. I love the skin flaps and the way it looks, and how it smells. I wouldn't have it any other way. and I love tits. heck, I love every single thing about the female form. and, that makes sense, because males are supposed to be attracted to females. It's rational. If you pick and choose, then it's not the same thing.

Do you like all tits or only certain kinds? What if a woman had a one inch clit? Would that give you pause or would you hardly even notice?
 
Stuponfucious said:
That's not how evolution works.
Exactly. I trust that our genes "know" what they're doing. Millions of years of evolution (or God) can't be wrong.
 
Stuponfucious said:
because it's all that's available. The media has a tendency to hit on a widely popular or accepted formula and then run it into the ground.

you just said it...widely popular...and popular means more people like it

Stuponfucious said:
Although, who finds 7 inch platform heels attractive? Not many I'd guess and yet you seem them all the time in porn.

you see it all the time in strip clubs too, so men have some preference for it, or women wouldn't wear them


Stuponfucious said:
That may be the case, and if it is that's at least 51% say, and even if it were much larger, fantasy and reality are two different things. I would guess that most guys, if given the opportunity would fuck a B cup brunette at the drop of a hat.

i'd bet a guy would be less quick to fuck a B cup woman with extra skin

which would you pick?... a tight, buff brunette woman with B cups or a brunette woman with B cups and baggy skin?


Stuponfucious said:
Most women fall in between though and porn is usually about fantasies, so it makes sense that's the case, though even a casual look with the right keywords on Google quickly reveals it's anything but a binary choice.

In any case, I think it's obvious why busty blondes are preferable to unhygienic obese women. Most people in general would agree that the former is more attractive than the latter even if they don't find the former particularly attractive. But you made such a stark contrast on purpose while illustrating yet again that you've been influenced by personal experience to believe that most men with "extra skin" have "cheese in the folds".

and what should be influencing factors in one's life...personal experience or the opinions of strangers?
and it's not a belief...they do have smegma...that's why they have to keep them clean all the time
 
TumbledLove said:
Exactly. I trust that our genes "know" what they're doing. Millions of years of evolution (or God) can't be wrong.

Yet we have appendixes.
 
Stuponfucious said:
Well, actually foreskins do vary. Males are typicall born with them but they're not all identical. Some have more skin than others for one.
This is probably true. and there's probably some rare boys that aren't born with a foreskin, or even a penis for that matter. But even with different sizes of foreskins, the fact remains that they're still here. Same with boob sizes. The point isn't what size I like. The point is that I like them in the first place.
 
TumbledLove said:
This is probably true. and there's probably some rare boys that aren't born with a foreskin, or even a penis for that matter. But even with different sizes of foreskins, the fact remains that they're still here. Same with boob sizes. The point isn't what size I like. The point is that I like them in the first place.

Yes, the point is that YOU like them. Some don't. My ex really didn't like boobs - and the bigger they were, the less he liked them.

It's all about the personal preference.
 
Weevil said:
Uh, lots? Or more to the point, I know lots of guys who love lots of things about women but don't much care for their ankles or their earlobes or the backs of their knees.

Really? Why? Those are some of the best parts.

And the appendix is a completely useless organ. But we've still got it.

right, I forgot to mention the appendix. An organ doesn't go away merely because it's now superfluous or obsolete, it has to actually cause enough trouble to end that lineage, IOW to prevent that evolutionary line from procreating. Because they all keel over and die. Obviously, there weren't enough fatal cases of appendicitis for this to occur.
 
Freya said:
Yes, the point is that YOU like them. Some don't. My ex really didn't like boobs - and the bigger they were, the less he liked them.
but, he still liked them, right? even just a little bit? A hetero guy that doesn't like (or is even disgusted by) boobs, has a problem.
 
Back
Top