Keeps the penis toothpick
Gives the dating younger toothpick
No comment on the drugs
Ro0sh, you can give your next statement now if you are ready. (Plus answer the 3 you are behind on.) 
**Looks down
Damn…**
I’ve seen intact foreskins on patients.
Now if you had said touched instead of seen, I’d have been in the clear.
No toothpicks for WhyNot. Unless porn counts.
Yeah, it’s pretty common. What do Nordic women think of circumcised wangs?
Well, I’ve never seen one in porn, either…
I honestly don’t know, for some reason I’ve never asked any of them Maybe **Sofis **can shed some light on the matter?
But you meant in person right?
WhyNot, I keep my toothpicks.
No, I meant, I’ve never *seen *one. Period. I’ve seen drawings, but never a photo, a porno, a person… I suppose I could google it, but the curiosity always seems to not-coincide with my being at a computer.
But I agree it wasn’t clear by the statement, so I’ll let Hockey Monkey decide.
Hmmm, tough one there. I’d never seen one period till my boyfriend showed me his. Not even in porn, but I think I’ll rule that it needs to be a person to person sighting, not including porn. Unless you were in the porno, in which case it counts.
AAHHH! OKay, I took care of it by searching wikipedia for prepuce (figured it’d be safer than an internet search for “foreskin” or “penis”). So now I’ve seen a *picture *of an uncircumcised penis.
whimper
Do they all look so…swallowed by a giant worm? Trunkish? Sphincterlike? 
No offense, guys… I’m sure our labia are just as weird looking.
I’ve never cared for that look either. I’m grateful that I’m circumcised, and very grateful that it occured when I was a baby.
**Owning one makes it hard to have not seen one. ** Wait, I am potty trained, aren’t I …?
If you were in the porno, wouldn’t that be a person to person sighting?
Gee, thanks - good way to insult non-circumcised 
(and I do believe there’s much less of a difference, when it’s standing attention - which is the way you gals are supposed to see it anyway )
I know, I’m sorry! :smack: I just really wasn’t expecting so much ruffledness in front of the glans. I knew the skin came over and covered it, but it always looks very smooth and neat in anatomy text drawings. I really do wonder if they all have that much excess skin, or if that’s an unusual specimen on the wikipedia page.
I feel like such a naif now. So much for being the risque player!
Ha ha 
I can’t really say for sure about all of us, but when it’s not erect, the foreskin is there for a reason.
It pulls back very smoothly when it has to do it’s job.
And since I for some reason decided to wiki circumcision, there’s acutally a pic (probably NSFW) of an erect member with foreskin. Not much of a difference.
Now, how the hell did I end up spending my time looking for erect penises???
Oh, yes, NSFW!
But scroll up to the top and hit the foreskin link. That will take you to the page with the picture I was looking at. Much more skin than even the flaccid fellow on the circumcision page. I’m going to assume he’s an outlier until I hear otherwise.
Obviously, I had to check that first (what’s wrong with me???) and that guy at least has more than I do. I can’t vouch for anyone else.
Calling **Ro0sh **to PLEASE make the next statement very soon, before this discussion turns any more ridicilous
That one does look like something out of Dune.