How much foreskin do you have? (UPDATED w/ More Choices)
- Thread starter matt121matt121
- Start date
There seem to be more long foreskins here than what I perceive to be the average - though this is very subjective of course - and I wonder if this sort of poll doesn't attract people at the extremes. Is it more likely that someone with a long foreskin - a C1 9 or a CI 10 - will be more willing to reply than someone with an average length, who thinks 'why bother?'
My impression after many years of observing as closely as I can decently is that the average is between CI 7 and CI 8, but there are more men with longer foreskins than there are with shorter.
There also seems to more variation in the one individual with a short foreskin than with long ones, but it may be that it is just easier to notice. I
work out with a man who is anything between CI 4 and CI 6 in the shower, and quite often CI 3 with the foreskin pulled back behind the rim.
This is really interesting, but I find some of the outlying results quite difficult to understand. According to the poll there are three cut guys who have as much foreskin or more than I do at CI-7 and uncut. Were these partial circumcisions later in life to relieve a phimosis I wonder? Otherwise it makes you wonder if they left that much skin whether there was any point in circumcising at all.
silentview
Experimental Member
UC when soft I have the appearance of a CI-3 but I have more skin along the lines of a CI-4 but its distributed along the entire shaft as opposed to just below the head so I just don't get any coverage. when erect I am along the lines of a CI-3, again with even loose skin distribution along the shaft.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2004
- Posts
- 15,642
- Media
- 62
- Likes
- 5,034
- Points
- 433
- Location
- London (Greater London, England)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Perhaps I understand wrong, but I think there is a difference for uncircumcised men between a short foreskin and a tight foreskin, and you can have one without the other. My foreskin is short - doesn't cover much more than the rim (and I'm interested to see that there are quite a few others in the same case), but the skin in very loose, so I can't keep it back behind the rim for very long.
Keep in mind Jake that some men don't know their real status. That is why studies that rely on self-reporting have some built-in error, including this one. If you click on the numbers in the poll, you can see the usernames of those who voted. In the Restored or In-Process Restoring category CI-9, we currently have four voters. Three without galleries, but the fourth, rich1980uk, I find difficult to believe that he is not intact from birth. (Please correct me if I am in error rich1980uk). Either he doesn't understand the categories or misread the poll or something.
I've been restoring for a very long time. I started with nothing, and now about CI-5. For me the look is not the same as a man who is intact from birth. The preputial closure is destroyed by circumcision, so it has the opposite effect of that Ionto just described. I have a fair amount of skin for glide, so sex and masturbation work better--haven't used lube for years, but the damn thing's default position is back rather than forward. It stays forward easily if I wear some kind of form fitting underwear--don't have to be tight. Boxerbriefs work well. But when I'm nude it still often rolls back to expose my glans. My glans is kind of largish--probably why. So I am still working on full unassisted all season coverage. For those restoring, KOT. It works--sooner or later.
Last edited:
Similar threads
