Latino circumcised bottoms - the near impossible find

[Medin]

On 3/2/2024 at 3:09 PM, south_king said:

Imagine being grossed-out by a natural penis that hasn’t been mutilated… some of you are so weird. And calling it a “preference” or how you’re “wired” to hide prejudices is the worst thing you can do.

Honestly, do you guys ever go out and meet other men in the real world? Before making out with someone do you ask if they’re circumcised or not?

This is a paid service.   When was the last time you went to a restaurant and the menu listed Beef, Chicken, Fish, etc?   Most likely you want the details.   The same goes with escorting.   If I'm paying $300+/hour, I want to know what I'm paying for.   

[SirBillybob]

It’s impossible for me to see whether I have foreskin back there. SKYN episodically? Yes, consistently. 

Edited March 15 by SirBillybob

[south_king]

1 hour ago, Medin said:

This is a paid service.   When was the last time you went to a restaurant and the menu listed Beef, Chicken, Fish, etc?   Most likely you want the details.   The same goes with escorting.   If I'm paying $300+/hour, I want to know what I'm paying for.   

I agree, if you’re paying you have the right to see it all. My point is saying that you’re “grossed-out” by uncut dicks. That’s a gross comment. But if you guys don’t see the problem, you do you 🤷🏽‍♂️

[+ Socalguy]

47 minutes ago, south_king said:

My point is saying that you’re “grossed-out” by uncut dicks. That’s a gross comment.

Thank you for saying that. As someone who grew up too embarrassed to shower with the other boys in gym class because I was uncut, I appreciate you calling out the inappropriate word choice. If they don't like an intact penis, that's their prerogative but there's no need for call it 'gross' simply because it hasn't been mutilated. It took a long time but I'm actually proud of the fact that I'm uncut and a lot of the guys I have fooled around with find it a turn on. 

Edited March 15 by Socalguy

[marylander1940]

On 3/2/2024 at 11:43 AM, pubic_assistance said:

We shouldn't judge people for what turns them on.

He could also be into Latino circumcised bottoms with a big nose and tattoos with straight hair.

Everyone's sexuality is wired differently. Some are generalists and others are very very specific.

For example...I like a lot of different types of guys (and gals)...but I am often grossed-out by the sight of an uncut penis. So if I am with an uncut Latino guy, I can't bring myself to perform oral on him. 

Just how I'm wired.

 

Agreed, specially when the OP is willing to pay for what he wants

[Medin]

This is a forum.   We all have likes/dislikes and I don't find mentioning any of those to be inappropriate.  Some seem to be offended that others find uncircumcised guys gross.  Give me a break.   I happen to find felching, fisting, PAs, and face tattoos to be "gross", but is that also off-limits to mention here?   I also find using loaded language such as "mutilated" gross to describe the vast majority of American men, but I digress. 

[+ DrownedBoy]

On 3/2/2024 at 2:09 PM, south_king said:

Imagine being grossed-out by a natural penis that hasn’t been mutilated… some of you are so weird.

Well here's one guy who's definitely not Jewish.

[MikeBiDude]

9 hours ago, Socalguy said:

but there's no need for call it 'gross' simply because it hasn't been mutilated.

“Mutilated” strikes me as unnecessary as “gross” 🤷🏻‍♂️

[+ Socalguy]

1 hour ago, MikeBiDude said:

“Mutilated” strikes me as unnecessary as “gross” 🤷🏻‍♂️

yeah, that was the point. 

[+ nycman]

1 hour ago, Socalguy said:

yeah, that was the point. 

In the words of my father…..
 

"Son, two wrongs don’t make a right".

[Monarchy79]

If you’re looking for a bottom, why does the “status” of his foreskin matter? 

[Monarchy79]

On 3/15/2024 at 8:13 AM, Medin said:

This is a paid service.   When was the last time you went to a restaurant and the menu listed Beef, Chicken, Fish, etc?   Most likely you want the details.   The same goes with escorting.   If I'm paying $300+/hour, I want to know what I'm paying for.   

True, 

But when your “specifications” veer off so far from the menu, then this speaks more about the mind and intentions of the customer, rather than the restaurant or provider of the service. 

It seems some of these preferences lean towards sociopathic reflections of control more than anything. 

[Monarchy79]

On 3/15/2024 at 12:36 PM, Medin said:

 I happen to find felching, fisting, PAs, and face tattoos to be "gross", but is that also off-limits to mention here?   

Those are purposeful acts and adaptations that someone chose to perform and implement: 

One’s uncircumcised penis is something that they are born with. And one’s circumcised penis is something that they more than likely did not choose. 

This is why using pejorative terms to the latter is considered offensive and inappropriate. 

You don’t have to like it, but you don’t need to verbally describe your disgust for it in an insulting manner either. 
 

[Monarchy79]

On 3/2/2024 at 11:43 AM, pubic_assistance said:

We shouldn't judge people for what turns them on…….

 

……. I am often grossed-out by the sight of an uncut penis. So if I am with an uncut Latino guy, I can't bring myself to perform oral on him. 

Just how I'm wired.

 

In one single post, you stated how one shouldn’t judge others…. 

Then you did exactly that… judged others.

You not liking an uncut penis, doesn’t make that uncut penis “gross”. You just don’t like it. 
 

[pubic_assistance]

49 minutes ago, Monarchy79 said:

In one single post, you stated how one shouldn’t judge others…. 

Then you did exactly that… judged others.

You not liking an uncut penis, doesn’t make that uncut penis “gross”. You just don’t like it. 
 

You seem to be completely misunderstanding my point.

I said we shouldn't judge others for their turn on's. I equally believe you shouldn't be judged for your turn OFFS

We go around this wheel all the time here. Only you have ownership of your sexual preferences. As long as you're not a child molester or a rapist it's no one's place to judge what you like ( or dislike ) or  make negative comments about one's right to express said likes (or dislikes)

Edited March 16 by pubic_assistance
spelling

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, Monarchy79 said:

If you’re looking for a bottom, why does the “status” of his foreskin matter? 

I guess because he's willing to pay.

 

[Simon Suraci]

Whether you like intact or circumcised, there is no need to call the other one gross or mutilated or less-than or ‘other’. It’s mean and unnecessary. It serves no purpose except to put others down. 

Same goes for kinks and fetishes. Everyone has a yum. Everyone has a yuk. There is no need to emphasize the yuk. Share what you DO like and celebrate those things. 

At the same time, I agree it’s fair to inquire as to what you are potentially paying for. Someone’s body should have features important to you since you’re paying for the privilege of access to said body. Quite all right to pass on a provider that doesn’t align with your range of ‘yums’.

Remember, a lot of this is based on culture, traditions, and personal preferences. Circumcised men here in the US, by and large, did not choose to be circumcised. In the latter half of the 20th century, it was the default practice based on cultural norms, peer pressure, and claims about health benefits.

Some of the claims have a basis in science, but many of them are exaggerated and a means to justify imposing personal preferences on others and society at large.

Circumcision doesn’t excuse us from teaching our kids good hygiene habits and sex ed. There is no opt-out option for babies. We (society) imposed this on our newborns without their consent. Too bad if you don’t want an altered body as an adult. In my mind, baby circumcision is akin to piercings and tattoos without one’s consent.

To Jews, it’s a sacred practice of expressing outwardly with one’s body that he is set apart and chosen. That’s beautiful, but it still decides something permanently for the kid without his consent, whether he wants to practice his family’s tradition or not. It kind of defeats the set-apart symbolism purpose when the vast majority of gentiles in a given place are circumcised.

[SirBillybob]

Nicely put, S.S., and without unnecessary hubris.

Edited March 16 by SirBillybob

[Simon Suraci]

1 minute ago, SirBillybob said:

Nicely put, S.S., and without unnecessary hubris.

Thanks for the bris lol

[+ JEC]

Just now, Simon Suraci said:

Thanks for the bris lol

Never eat the calamari at a Bris 🫢

[pubic_assistance]

3 minutes ago, Simon Suraci said:

Whether you like intact or circumcised, there is no need to call the other one gross or mutilated or less-than or ‘other’. It’s mean and unnecessary. It serves no purpose except to put others down. 

@Simon Suraci If you're not  specifically addressing a person, you're not "putting others down". Not everyone subscribes to this lady's tea party attitude of:  "If you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all".  My grandmother would enjoy your company, but, personally I'd be bored.  Life would be very dull if everyone just smiled and agreed with each other. Differences of opinions make for a FAR more interesting conversation, as long as you don't sling insults directly into someone's face. I don't agree with your call for a fascist Disneyland kind of control over conversation. Sorry.

[Simon Suraci]

2 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

Differences of opinions make for a FAR more interesting conversation, as long as you don't sling insults directly into someone's face.

You do you, @pubic_assistance.
I’ll do me 😊 

[SirBillybob]

I think that to label male circumcision as “mutilation” is not outrageous because the ethical discourse surrounding it and female genital mutilation, though circumcision is obviously not monolithic, overlaps. The term need not undermine the concept of oppression of females since the physical result overrides personal autonomy and the beneficence of male circumcision is arguable. 

I think that to label genital intactness as “gross” is not valid because male, female, and intersex genital intactness is naturalistic and not behaviourally coarse or vulgar. It may be nonpreferred but if it evokes disgust that is contextually determined, assortative. Surely the total absence of male circumcision would never have induced revulsion. 

Edited March 16 by SirBillybob

[+ FrankR]

26 minutes ago, SirBillybob said:

I think that to label male circumcision as “mutilation” is not outrageous because the ethical discourse surrounding it and female genital mutilation, though circumcision is obviously not monolithic, overlaps. The term need not undermine the concept of oppression of females since the physical result overrides personal autonomy and the beneficence of male circumcision is arguable. 

 

As a male who was circumcised without my permission I can say it: I consider it mutilation of my person. Told my (very) religious parents so directly. Had an *intense* conversation with my brother when I heard he intended to have my nephew circumcised. 
 

I dont consider it gross, i am an equal opportunity slut, after all!

[Monarchy79]

2 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

You seem to be completely misunderstanding my point.

I said we shouldn't judge others for their turn on's. I equally believe you shouldn't be judged for your turn OFFS

We go around this wheel all the time here. Only you have ownership of your sexual preferences. As long as you're not a child molester or a rapist it's no one's place to judge what you like ( or dislike ) or  make negative comments about one's right to express said likes (or dislikes)

I understand you clearly. 
I simply disagree with you.

let’s be honest here,  
the term “preferences” started being used in the realm of sex, dating and hookups to as a means to soften what’s really taking place, which is bias, and a plethora of “isms” . It was a way for people to make their prejudices sound less offensive. For example, a guy saying on a hook up app… “no black guys, and no Asians” appears flat out racist….but adding the phrase “just a preference”,  gives the false illusion that the person is free from bias…. 

To give some accurate historical  context of the phrase:

”Just a Preference”, became the catch phrase of white men with bias, as a way to excuse the social protest that  racial and other minorities made against “no blacks, no asians, not fats, and no fems”, from apps such as Grindr. 

Now going back to you….

I see nothing “wrong”, with your preference for circumcised penises. And I agree that people shouldn’t be judged for their preferences. 

But if someone’s preference is rooted in bias, then they aren’t exonerated from being called out for it. And calling the people who address it “judgmental” loses its validity, the moment you call uncut penises “gross”, as that is a judgment too.