Running around from prick to prick.
A scientific analysis of the 200 million spermatozoa in each shoot has shown that to be a fact of evolution. 100 million of them, it seems, have no other function than to kill the sperms of useless toss-pots who got there first in fairly quick succession.
Why would things like that evolve if women thought running around from prick to prick was somehow disgraceful?
Sperm banks should do cocktails and let the best man win. Darwin would have been at a loss as to disputing that.
One seldom has actually to RUN.
:wink:
OGIONIK wrote:what do women prefer?
Generally, whatever is most common in their country.
dlowan-
Quote:One seldom has actually to RUN.
That's a witty put-down chaps.
I've only read in this thread sporadically, and so have probably missed a few points. Thing is, to me, once the penis is ready for sex, the skin on the uncircumcised ones becomes a non factor, in that it does not enlarge and so does not cover or stifle anything. There could not be any real difference, except psychological, during the act. Mutilation, beyond normal circumcision, I don't know about, not enough to comment. I have never understood why this topic gets anybody worked up.
Seeing as dwollie rabbit is in playful mood I thought I would quote an alternative view and see what she says to that.
It is from Anthony Burgess's posthumously published epic verse novel, Byrne. (Part Three)
Quote:That girl had been much moved by Mistress Waters,
Whose novels answered Freud's frustrated whine
About what women wanted. All Eve's daughters
Now knew what women wanted--to decline
Sex as pure thrust. Sex they must redefine
As clitoral ecstasy, best with a vibrator,
Neck of a bottle of expensive wine,
Even a male as slavish excitator,
Cooly and fully used, coldly discarded later.
spendius wrote:Are we meant to think that you do it with the lights on?
Yes, always perform a circumcision with the lights 'on'.
