It is true blonds have more fun ??? ;-)

[edonline]

 

[edonline]

 

[edonline]

 

[LittleDicky]

My gosh he is handsome!

Jack Harrer:

 

[edonline]

 

[circedbychoice]

I like everything about this one. The thickness, the upward curve and the circumcision.

 

[LittleDicky]

Matthew F. @ NextDoorMale.com.....

 

[LittleDicky]

Roger Lambert.....

 

[Uncutsouthernboy]

I like everything about this one. The thickness, the upward curve and the circumcision.

He's circumcised? He don't look it to me.

 

[circedbychoice]

He's circumcised? He don't look it to me.[/QUOTE
I'm talking about #147 above.

 

[Uncutsouthernboy]

Yes, I know which one you are talking about. He has his frenulum and foreskin pulled back. His foreskin is naturally short. Nor do I see a scar. IMHO he is uncircumcised.

 

[circedbychoice]

Yes, I know which one you are talking about. He has his frenulum and foreskin pulled back. His foreskin is naturally short. Nor do I see a scar. IMHO he is uncircumcised.

You know you are correct. If he had been circumcised when he was born, there would be a noticeable scarline. He's simply a wannabe circumcised.

 

[edonline]

 

[circedbychoice]

Nice tie.

 

[Hairylegs]

Huh? #147, most definitely UNCUT. You can see the pulled back skin on the side view. He has the classic inverted Y on the underside - full frenulum, the slanting, pulled back sides of the fskin. Now Mr 150 above, that boy is CUT. You can see the scar, the light pink inner foreskin layer, the darker shaft skin. Yeah, sometimes it's really hard to tell, but these boys could be joint poster boys for cut vs uncut. Vive la difference, but I'll take the cut boy, given the choice. Of course, a few more pictures to improve the research wouldn't hurt. Keep 'em coming.

 

[RICKY_27]

Roger Lambert.....

View attachment 771853 View attachment 771854 View attachment 771855 View attachment 771856 View attachment 771857 View attachment 771858 View attachment 771859 View attachment 771860 View attachment 771861 View attachment 771862 View attachment 771863 View attachment 771864 View attachment 771865 View attachment 771866 View attachment 771867

DDDDAYYYUUUUMM! Roger's BIIIIIG CUM BAG is a genuine 'POT OF GOLD'!!! UUUUUUM
I'm STR8 UP just thinking about SMELLIN it!! I know it has a STRONG MUSKY smell!!!
RICKY

 

[YANI-1960]

Matthew F. @ NextDoorMale.com.....

View attachment 771835 View attachment 771836 View attachment 771837 View attachment 771838 View attachment 771839 View attachment 771840 View attachment 771841 View attachment 771842 View attachment 771843 View attachment 771844 View attachment 771845 View attachment 771846 View attachment 771847 View attachment 771848 View attachment 771849

Awesome

 

[LittleDicky]

Awesome

Glad you like it, Bro !

 

[LittleDicky]

DDDDAYYYUUUUMM! Roger's BIIIIIG CUM BAG is a genuine 'POT OF GOLD'!!! UUUUUUM
I'm STR8 UP just thinking about SMELLIN it!!

Ricky, get hold of yourself ! (Literally!)

 

[Uncutsouthernboy]

Huh? #147, most definitely UNCUT. You can see the pulled back skin on the side view. He has the classic inverted Y on the underside - full frenulum, the slanting, pulled back sides of the fskin. Now Mr 150 above, that boy is CUT. You can see the scar, the light pink inner foreskin layer, the darker shaft skin. Yeah, sometimes it's really hard to tell, but these boys could be joint poster boys for cut vs uncut. Vive la difference, but I'll take the cut boy, given the choice. Of course, a few more pictures to improve the research wouldn't hurt. Keep 'em coming.

No, look again. Mr. #150 is definitely UNCUT. There is even a photo with the foreskin totally covering the head. Mr.s #143, #145 and #155 are the only CUT men on this page.