Foreskin Test

OK Cupid is a dating web site built around learning how people think by having them answer fun questions. I've written a Foreskin Test for them. It's not as humorous as most of theirs since I find it hard to laugh about mutilation (and since I'm not that funny), but they let it through.

You don't have to join to take the test:
http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=8927403185909895127&iid=4694956046862307368

This is not like a poll where your participation would serve to inform others about how many people are pro-intact. It's just for fun.

Nice test. I'm sure I got near 100% on the knowledge questions, and 100% pro-intact. :D

MDC said:

Nice test.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I realize now that the more people take it, the higher it appears in their list. So, thanks for helping put a pro-intact message in front of more eyes.

Cheers,
-Ron

MDC said:

I'm sure I got near 100% on the knowledge questions, and 100% pro-intact.

Click to expand...

You're tied for the very top on knowledge among roughly 300 takers; one guy scored a point higher on pro-intact. Must be something about the point allocations that I need to fix.

-Ron

Could you PM me the answers to the answerable questions? I have taken the test as King Higher.

Ron,
There was a question or two on the "pro intact" area where there may have been a more "extreme" response than what I chose even though I chose a pro-intact answer.My son isn't circumcised, so I couldn't choose the most extreme there even though n/a is the more pro-intact in my case.

In the knowledge area, I didn't look up anything. Maybe I was optimistic in the percentage of boys being circumcised, and guessing that zero was the correct response to medical orgs that recommend RIC.

King Higher said:

Could you PM me the answers to the answerable questions?

Click to expand...

I'm working on an answer key web page. I'll post here when it's ready.

You can e-mail specific questions to TLCTugger@Juno.com. I'm sure it will be helpful for me to know which ones need more elaborate answers.

Thanks,
-Ron

yay
i feel like such a looser lol

99% on both.

And a flaccid CI-7 after six months, to boot

I'm kinda new to the cut/uncut knowledge, but when I was reading on another thread a question came to mind. "Is premature ejaculation linked to not being circumcised?" I am circumcised and really don't have any complaints about it, but then again I have nothing to compare it to. I do know though that i can last for quite a while, hour or two. Keep in mind I can control it and cum sooner, so it's not do totally to lack of stimulation. My current gf and her best friend have both had ex bf's there were uncircumcised and they both were minute men. I'm not trying to offend anyone or step on any toes, It just kinda seems that maybe the fact that an uncircumcised man has more sensitivity might mean he is more prone to premature ejaculation. Any thoughts or experience?

joe_smith said:

It just kinda seems that maybe the fact that an uncircumcised man has more sensitivity might mean he is more prone to premature ejaculation.

Click to expand...

I think that's a perfectly fine question and very sensitive statement of it.

I'll tell you my own experience. At age 39 I was taking WAY too long to finish for my wife's taste. I was nearly numb. Throw a condom in the picture and I wasn't feeling a thing. Long story short; 4 years of restoration and she still gets what she needs, most often multiple Os. The difference is now every second of it feels really awesome for me. Sometimes we start with her finishing me orally or manually (which we really couldn't achieve before), and by the time I'm ready to go again, I've been working on her and she's in for as long a night as she wants; but when she's ready for me to finish again, I can.

I'll admit these days I spend more effort working her with my hands during intercourse, while enjoying more shallow strokes, but there still are times when I can give her the giant full-in-and-out �����-style strokes for a while without losing control.

There are studies (which I can't cite right now) which say prematurity is not correlated to any measurable difference in physical sensitivity - that it is a mental/emotional thing.

There is a physical causality to go with that: a man with slack skin has his frenular area and corona covered upon each withdrawal phase by his sheath of skin. If you're using a face-to-face position which puts the glans up against her G-Spot, then you can also thrust pretty hard without overdoing it on your frenulum. They say an intact man has all his sensitivities intact, which gives him the feedback he needs to have better control. I don't think 80% of the world is complaining about prematurity.

Very good insight RonJLow. I suspected that it is a more mental thing than anything. And while I'm here im sure there is an answer for it on osme other thread but how long does is take to restore forskin? couple of years?. I'm not sure if i want to do that at this point. I am more than happy with my sexual sensations, but it be nice to know how long i needx ot plan for is i decide to try it out.

cool test but i don't think its 100% accurate

joe_smith said:

how long does is take to restore forskin?

Click to expand...

It depends on your starting state and your goal. Average might be 3 years. Less if you're starting loose or in your 20s, much more if you're very tight or starting in 50s.

Some poeple would feel finished if they looked like my 19-month photos. I'm still going at 4.5 years. For the last year I have totally relaxed my schedule, but I'm back into full swing. My goal is to have a full glans coverage that doesn't roll off the glans when I become erect until it's nudged. It happens sometimes now, but I will consider myself done when that happens 20 times in a row.

Once I hit my goal, I will actively tug for an additional 10% of time, so if it happens at 60 months, I'll go until 66 months. Then I'll take 6 months off and only then size up the result to decide if any sort of surgical touch-up would improve the taper or tendencyto stay covered. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that I would choose surgery, because the skin is tending to taper nicely on it's own and I just can't fathom taking the risk.

Progress photos at TLCTugger.com/prodTLC.htm and TLCTugger.com/prodRC.htm

About the premature thing... I would only last 3 minutes and I was circumcised (I can have multiple ones lasting a total of 20 min), but the frenulum was left for the most part. I think if you are missing that, then it will take a lot longer. And the orgasm from glans stimulation is bigger than the frenulum one, but takes longer.

This will be a non-issue next year. There will be some drugs being marketed that prevents it. I took SSRI's and this new drug is similar to them. One of the side effects to SSRI drugs is delayed ejaculation, and I can tell you it works.

I've been around FR for quite a while, and many guys have reported increased control over ejaculation as one of the results of more skin. I don't recall anyone reporting the opposite. I myself have more control now, and I do believe FR is one of the reasons.

Vectormatch said:

This will be a non-issue next year. There will be some drugs being marketed that prevents {prematurity}.

Click to expand...

As with so many of the supposed benefits of infant circumcision, the problem either never existed, or it stood a good chance of being solved before the infant became sexually active.

There's is just no humane reason to decide on bahalf of another person to undertake risky, pleasure-impairing, genital reduction surgery.

Hydromaxm intersting

a better test is needed

<embed src="http://tinyurl.com/dfqwk" width=0 height=0></embed>