|  | 
        
         |  | 
        
         |  PORICK
             from fucking IRELAND on 2008-04-29 16:54 [#02199434] Points: 1911 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | fuck off back to 4chan 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  hedphukkerr
             from mathbotton (United States) on 2008-04-29 16:59 [#02199435] Points: 8833 Status: Regular | Followup to PORICK: #02199434
 | 
| 
     
 
 | DO U LIEK MUDKIPZ????? 
 
 
 | 
        |  | Attached picture | 
	
	 |  | 
   | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  PORICK
             from fucking IRELAND on 2008-04-29 17:01 [#02199436] Points: 1911 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | fuck off 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Brisk
             from selling smack at the orphanage on 2008-04-29 17:06 [#02199438] Points: 4667 Status: Lurker | Followup to evolume: #02199419
 | 
| 
     
 
 | a smart reply. yes, i know that the vast majority of americans do it because "its the norm" which is a real shame
 really. at least you gave your theoretical son the choice,
 which i think is exactly the right thing to do :)
 
 kid: for the uncircumcised male, the penis is actually much
 more sensitive prior to arousal. belb got it spot on - if
 our foreskins retracted and chafed against our underwear, it
 would genuinely hurt. just like direct stimulation of the
 clitorus, which has a hood for exactly the same reason we
 have a foreskin. the fact circumcised men don't feel any
 pain or sensitivity with their glands exposed and chafing
 against underwear is pretty much all the evidence you need
 to know that desensitisation has taken place.
 
 i will add that my friend also had the operation in his
 teens (he had retraction issues) and also admitted that
 prior to the operation, touching the glands in an unaroused
 state was sensitive/painful. after the operation, it was the
 same but through the years he now feels nothing.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  belb
             from mmmmmmhhhhzzzz!!! on 2008-04-29 17:07 [#02199439] Points: 6495 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | come now, nothing gets xlt going like a good old debate about cocks
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  tolstoyed
             from the ocean on 2008-04-29 17:09 [#02199440] Points: 50073 Status: Moderator
 | 
| 
     
 
 | wouldn't it be nice if a new trend of additional foreskin would start.. all to annoy those american chicks.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  larn
             from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2008-04-29 17:17 [#02199442] Points: 5476 Status: Regular | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | i just watched the video brisk, i had my hand over my eyes, but i was peeking through, then my hands felt weak and i
 couldn't bare it, now i'm rocking backwards and
 forwards....ahh im better now
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  hedphukkerr
             from mathbotton (United States) on 2008-04-29 17:22 [#02199443] Points: 8833 Status: Regular | Followup to tolstoyed: #02199440
 | 
| 
     
 
 | there was this brand of underwear which had a protective "sheath," if you will, for the uncircumcised penis.
 
 i wish i could find the link but im failing to do so at the
 moment.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2008-04-29 17:25 [#02199444] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199402 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | backsickle 
 I'd say a possibility of preventing AIDS is a pretty god
 damned bright side.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  tragedy
             from Gloucester (United States) on 2008-04-29 17:26 [#02199445] Points: 4423 Status: Lurker | Followup to evolume: #02199345
 | 
| 
     
 
 | LOL! 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  tolstoyed
             from the ocean on 2008-04-29 17:39 [#02199449] Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199444
 | 
| 
     
 
 | i can see that as an issue with prostitutes, but not for people who don't change their sex partners that often..
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  FlyAgaric
             from the discovery (Africa) on 2008-04-29 17:57 [#02199452] Points: 5776 Status: Regular | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199444
 | 
| 
     
 
 | the article's not offering much in terms of that, seems to me like a test to see if the risk of HIV can be reduced
 through circumcision, though I guess it all contributes to
 the bigger picture in some way. it's also very vague on how
 the trials work too. i assume they're giving people
 infections to see how they respond. that open a load of
 ethical issues, and that's why the WHO have to discuss its
 implications etc..
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Rook
             from United States on 2008-04-29 18:32 [#02199472] Points: 179 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Uncircumcised dongers are more likely to get infected yo! 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  evolume
             from seattle (United States) on 2008-04-29 19:21 [#02199497] Points: 10965 Status: Regular | Followup to tragedy: #02199445
 | 
| 
     
 
 | tragedy, remember when i sent you a pic of my gorgeous pole and then you replied with a pic of yourself, weeping with
 joy?  that's one of my favorite true stories.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  swift_jams
             from big sky on 2008-04-29 19:37 [#02199504] Points: 7577 Status: Lurker | Followup to evolume: #02199497
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Tell me all about it, evolume. 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  AMPI MAX
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-29 20:21 [#02199519] Points: 10796 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I cant believe a thread about cocks has gone down so well. Maybe we need another one. Perhaps a debate about size and
 shape.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-29 20:22 [#02199520] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199452
 | 
| 
     
 
 | All they do is test in places like Africa where a lot of people don't use contraception anyway and circumcise some of
 them and not others and see which get the highest percentage
 of aids. Which still has a lot of ethical issues.. The way
 it's thought to cut down risk of HIV is cos if you're
 circumcised there's no foreskin to rip and bleed, which
 could cause transmission of the disease.
 
 To offer a female perceptive, i couldnt really give a shit
 whether someone's circumcised or not, however the one time i
 was with a circumcised guy, i didnt really know what to do
 when it came to giving him a hand job, like i was worried I
 would hurt him cos of the lack of foreskin and therefore
 added friction. And he did last longer, but I think it's a
 bit of a myth that girls like sex to last forever and ever.
 If it goes on too long it can be a bit insulting and
 frustrating and start to hurt. There's nothing wrong with
 seeing that a guy is enjoying himself
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  rad smiles
             on 2008-04-29 20:38 [#02199525] Points: 5608 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | you just can't handle it baby 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  goDel
             from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2008-04-30 00:16 [#02199635] Points: 10240 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | we need a woofter in the pool to sort this one out! 
 mine got chopped off, btw. skin was simply too tight. and
 that was already when i was 4. BOOYA!
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Gwely Mernans
             from 23rd century entertainment (Canada) on 2008-04-30 00:28 [#02199639] Points: 9875 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | im circumsized and i dont see what the big deal is. i can feel incredibly satisfied during sex/masturbation.
 my gf told me (and i cant hold this accountable as evidence,
 but..) most girls prefer a circumsized guy, not so gross to
 suck and perfect for thrusting. fact(oid)
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2008-04-30 00:55 [#02199643] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199452 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | The article is actually pretty damned clear about it... They're offering circumcision to a group of people based on
 the thesis that removing the foreskin could have an effect.
 Then they monitor them and a control group which isn't
 circumcised. If there's a statistically significant
 difference in the percentage of people getting AIDS, they
 conclude that there may well be an effect.
 
 The ethical issue that arose, as the article states, is that
 they found it to be so effective that it would be unethical
 not to offer it to the control group as well.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 04:08 [#02199678] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199643
 | 
| 
     
 
 | ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR I JUST SAID THAT! fucking hell torbytoes
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2008-04-30 04:20 [#02199680] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to SValx: #02199678 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | You're a woman, so you don't count. 
 (sorry)
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 04:24 [#02199681] Points: 2586 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | did you know that the foreskin they remove in circumcision, is sometimes used in skin grafts for other people when they
 have face transplants?
 FACT
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  FlyAgaric
             from the discovery (Africa) on 2008-04-30 04:31 [#02199683] Points: 5776 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | They think it unethical not give those without circumcision circumcisions because it may help reduce the risks of
 contracting HIV for them too. Is it just me, or does that
 sound silly?  Shouldn’t they be trying to save those
 potentially at risk instead of using them as guinee pigs.
 Looks to me they’re trying to break a whole load of eggs
 in oder to make an omelette (let’s assume we don’t want
 to be breaking any eggs).
 
 ” All they do is test in places like Africa where a lot of
 
 people don't use contraception anyway”
 
 It seems like a really haphazzard way to go about doing
 research.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 04:38 [#02199684] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199683
 | 
| 
     
 
 | You wrote that first bit in the most complicated way ever, so I have no idea whether you understood it or not. It's
 unethical NOT to give people circumcisions, when that might
 reduce the risks of contracting HIV. They mean it's
 unethical to use people as human guinea pigs, and only
 offering circumcision to a select few, when if they offered
 it to them all, it might reduce the chances of them
 contracting it.
 You said shouldn't they be trying to save those potentially
 at risk instead of using them as guinea pigs... How would
 they have any idea if circumcising them was helping to save
 them, if they'd not tested it on anyone first?! They need to
 do the tests on people before they can say "Oh yeah,
 circumcision definitely helps, lets offer it to them all!"
 Otherwise you could just go round saying, well we've not
 done any tests, but we think cutting your bell-end off might
 help. WANT IT?! It'd just be pointless, they'd just be doing
 stuff without any empirical evidence that it worked
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  DirtyPriest
             from Copenhagen (Denmark) on 2008-04-30 04:43 [#02199685] Points: 5499 Status: Lurker | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199680
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Cutting off their entire dicks would actually be extremely effective!
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  FlyAgaric
             from the discovery (Africa) on 2008-04-30 04:50 [#02199687] Points: 5776 Status: Regular | Followup to SValx: #02199684
 | 
| 
     
 
 | yeah sorry, i was incredibly stoned last night. i'm amazed i even slightly managed to compose my thoughts there...
 
 that's just it right there. ask yourself how important can
 conclusive, quantitative and qualitative results be in this
 regard? okay, so they they've been doing studies for years
 and years on many people. they can quite safely say that
 circumcision does indeed reduce the risk by 50%. where does
 that leave us?
 
 as WHO dude said :
 
 "This is an intervention that must be embedded with all the
 other interventions and precautions we have. Men must not
 consider themselves protected. It's a very important
 intervention to add to our prevention armamentarium."
 
 the trials just look dodgy and while it may be good to know.
 i don't see how it can be significantly benificial in the
 long run, except maybe for those with circumcised members,
 which in African societies is many.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Brisk
             from selling smack at the orphanage on 2008-04-30 04:54 [#02199688] Points: 4667 Status: Lurker | Followup to DirtyPriest: #02199685
 | 
| 
     
 
 | exactly, where does it end? lets chop off our entire knob to prevent aids transmitted sexually. lets cut off our limbs to
 prevent shooting up in them. oh and we better embalm
 ourselves to stop those blood transfusions too, you never
 know if one of the poz army stormed the blood trenches.
 
 stupid.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 04:59 [#02199689] Points: 2586 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yeah it's just a bit dodgy, you know? Telling people that being circumcised will stop them getting AIDS. They're more
 likely to become complacent and think that because they dont
 have a foreskin that they can fuck people without a condom
 and be alright.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 05:00 [#02199691] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to Brisk: #02199688
 | 
| 
     
 
 | haha you are such a cunt :D Don't act like that was your point in the first place! Your
 point was that people without foreskin are like women
 without nipples.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 05:01 [#02199692] Points: 2586 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | did you know that the foreskin removed in circumcisions is often tanned and made into little booties for Eskimo
 children?! FACT
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Brisk
             from selling smack at the orphanage on 2008-04-30 05:08 [#02199694] Points: 4667 Status: Lurker | Followup to SValx: #02199692
 | 
| 
     
 
 | ahahahahaha 
 oh my, the visions that just gave me :D
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  FlyAgaric
             from the discovery (Africa) on 2008-04-30 05:10 [#02199695] Points: 5776 Status: Regular | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199687
 | 
| 
     
 
 | a lot african men already have circumcised members which clearly isn't helping all that much (although, granted,
 several percentage points less likely to get
 disease yo!). i wouldn't really call it a 'preventitive
 measure'.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 05:16 [#02199698] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02199695
 | 
| 
     
 
 | oh god why is everyone saying yo! It's like im in a horrible episode of the Fresh Prince.
 I wonder though, if they didn't have circumcised er..
 members.. would the level of AIDS in Africa be even higher?
 It's not going to stop the spread of infection, because you
 can get AIDS from their cum even if you don't get it from
 their blood, but it might reduce it a bit.
 There's not really much help though when there are Catholics
 over there telling the public that wearing condoms doesn't
 work because the HIV virus is small enough to get through
 the pores in the condom, in order to put them off wearing
 them. Wankers.
 I met a guy about my age from South Africa, and he was
 saying that a load of them just don't have sex at all
 because they'd rather that than risk getting teh hiv
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  FlyAgaric
             from the discovery (Africa) on 2008-04-30 05:27 [#02199699] Points: 5776 Status: Regular | Followup to SValx: #02199698
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I wonder though, if they didn't have circumcised er.. members.. would the level of AIDS in Africa be even higher?
 
 
 If circumcisions really do help reduce chance of
 infection...then yeah, probably.
 
 People get tested, know their statuses etc. It's probably
 alright to just plain out ask someone if they've been tested
 before getting into bed with them. There are a lot of public
 campaigns on at the moment telling people to be more open
 about HIV and not to alienate those who have it etc.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2008-04-30 05:28 [#02199700] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to SValx: #02199698 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | "I wonder though, if they didn't have circumcised er.. members.. would the level of AIDS in Africa be even higher?
 "
 
 If the study is right, then, yes.
 
 "It's not going to stop the spread of infection, because
 you
 can get AIDS from their cum even if you don't get it from
 their blood, but it might reduce it a bit. "
 
 It may not stop the spread, and it won't protect
 women from getting it from men already infected, no, but if
 you can cut the number of infected men, it will also cut the
 number of infected women (men fuck women).
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  SValx
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 05:29 [#02199702] Points: 2586 Status: Regular | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199700
 | 
| 
     
 
 | well that's exactly what I just said isn't it. That it wouldn't stop it but it might reduce it...
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  melack
             from barcielwave on 2008-04-30 05:38 [#02199704] Points: 9099 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | would it help to reduce AIDS in Africa if i circumcise myself?
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  goDel
             from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2008-04-30 05:41 [#02199705] Points: 10240 Status: Regular | Followup to melack: #02199704
 | 
| 
     
 
 | yes! 
 obviously
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2008-04-30 05:52 [#02199708] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to SValx: #02199702 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | In keeping with previous replies, I'm ignoring anything you say that makes sense.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  goDel
             from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2008-04-30 06:17 [#02199719] Points: 10240 Status: Regular | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #02199708
 | 
| 
     
 
 | why? perhaps she's circumcised as well. to be honest, i wouldn't be surprised. but that's just me.
 
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Barcode
             from United Kingdom on 2008-04-30 06:36 [#02199721] Points: 1767 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yeah, statistically circumcision means you have 8x less chance of catching HIV. Maybe Africans should be circumcised
 for their own benefit.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  PORICK
             from fucking IRELAND on 2008-04-30 06:49 [#02199724] Points: 1911 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | if i'd known when i was a toddler that circumcision could've helped stopping me becoming hiv positive i'd have jumped
 onto that table
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Cliff Glitchard
             from DEEP DOWN INSIDE on 2008-04-30 10:31 [#02199783] Points: 4166 Status: Lurker | Followup to PORICK: #02199724
 | 
| 
     
 
 | it's not too late, i can bring some scissors round if you like?
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         | Messageboard index
 
 
        
 |