FantasticForeskin: Miguel Greco (Uncut Latino Hottie)

Watch Miguel Greco at Fantastic Foreskin

Miguel is an eager young Latino, getting naked on camera for the first time. The boyish 24-year-old has brown skin and a furry chest and legs. He’s excited and nervous as Robert Chandler strips him down and gives his foreskin a close look, stretching it and stoking it. Miguel is feeling good and his hooded dick gets stiffer and stiffer in Robert’s hand. Miguel kicks back and takes his cock into his own hands for some foreskin play and exploration. he says that he’s never played with his foreskin this much, but he loves it. The more he plays with his foreskin, the harder he gets. He strokes his cock, big furry balls bouncing, turned on knowing you’ll be watching him. Pinching his nipple, his cock throbs and a milky ribbon of cum shoots from his cock-head. Then another blast falls white against his tan skin. Miguel smiles, knowing he’s no longer a porn virgin.

Watch Miguel Greco at Fantastic Foreskin

Peach says:

November 22, 2011 at 8:34 am

Not attractive photos of his cock, I like foreskin (I don’t understand how circumcision seems to be the trend in America) but I don’t need to see the foreskin pulled, rolled, curled up like that! The glorification is kinda weird to me, really distracting the focus from his face which is definitely a big plus.

pauljorr says:

November 22, 2011 at 10:17 am

Thankfully that trend is reversing!!

Kenny says:

November 22, 2011 at 9:08 am

Face is a yes, body is a no. The foreskin pictures are a no. I don’t think I have any preference towards foreskin or not, but those shots were bad. Playing with foreskin doesn’t do anything for me.

Daniel says:

November 22, 2011 at 9:10 am

Gross.

jinger says:

November 22, 2011 at 9:34 am

Don’t like him

Fazz says:

November 22, 2011 at 11:41 am

Foreskin might be natural, but it sure is gross looking in many men.
In today’s world, foreskin is more a hindrance than something that makes life easier. I mean it does make sense to have foreskin if you’re an evolving Homo Erectus on the plains of Africa. However that’s not where we are, we’re in the 21st century, we live in houses, wear pants and having a foreskin can cause a lot of trouble; urinary tract infections, glan infection, cancer and a bunch of other ailments. It’s even proven that having foreskin will increase the chances of getting aids from unprotected sex; that’s why people in Africa today are encouraged to get circumcised. That’s not BS, just look it up.

It should be a choice, and I’m completely for that, 100%. But I think that we need the facts and we need to think about those when making a decision.

A foreskin is like the appendix, and I rather not have it and not have to worry about all the shit I can get, than have it and be aware of everything that can go wrong.

However; foreskin surgery should be taken seriously, and what really sucks is that a lot of doctors performing the procedure, suck. They botch it and leave the man with a penis that’s disfigured.

And this is why a person should wait till after puberty, when the penis is fully grown.

As for this scene… Not my cup of tea.. :( Sorry

Ted says:

November 22, 2011 at 2:14 pm

Well, first I should say that I think this guy is hot, but solos are not… and I don’t have a foreskin fetish so I probably won’t like this movie or the site to sub to anyways when they start to focus on his penis like it’s the last one on earth.

But I should say that Uncut vs. Cut is a very passionate debate right now (apparently) I’m sure you know but prepare yourself for a storm of very passionate people against it. They typically say that the dangers of bad circumcision outweigh any benefits that a person can present, and put babies though unnecessary pain for a cosmetic decision.

Personally, I’m neutral, I don’t agree with them and think Parents should be able to decide for their kids and giving them information is good enough for both. Getting your foreskin stuck in your zipper must mainly be a joke because it probably could happen even if you were cut, that much is silly to me, and I’m not sure on the HIV contraction other than potentially going against the design of a condom or in case of bareback sex, touching more exposed area of the partner and then holding onto it more. Same with Cancer, it seems like it’d be mainly because it’s more body parts to have, and it seems almost anything gives you cancer. (Though all this may not be true) And in turn, I think any operation not done by someone qualified can endanger the baby, it’s not an anomaly to circumcision, if that is truly your issue then rally for more certification or qualifications of those to perform the operation.

I think some people generally are confusing civil rights with fetishes. Maybe it is belittling to say such a thing, but there are much worse issues going on now that we can deal with rather than stretch ourselves thin on trivial (and controversial, because in a way it also just sounds like an attack on religion, making it seem like some sort of revenge attempt) issues such as banning circumcision and the only way I can guess is that a person wants more covered dick. I have a hair fetish, but I don’t campaign around genital mutilation of people shaving around their dick even though that can get infected from improper shaving like it’s a holy war. So in that sense to me it’s silly to want to waste people’s time on that issue. (Now I’m prepared for that same storm)

Fazz says:

November 22, 2011 at 4:53 pm

Ted, I think you’ve brought up some very valid points.

On the HIV issue; you really should check Google if nothing else. You’ll find a lot of information that points to it.
And it’s actually a face that people, because of that are urged to get circumcised in Africa.

And you’re right it’s a heated debate, but it has to be a debate we can have. :)

encephallus says:

November 23, 2011 at 8:23 am

I just have a few food-for-thought points for Ted. I’m not intending to get into any heated debate here.

> “Parents should be able to decide for their kids and giving them information is good enough for both.”
Should parents be lawfully able to decide to have their child’s earlobes amputated? What about their child’s pinky toes? What rationale could be used to draw a line that condemns either of these but still allows circumcision of a child without medical exigency?

> “I have a hair fetish, but I don’t campaign around genital mutilation of people shaving around their dick even though that can get infected from improper shaving like it’s a holy war. So in that sense to me it’s silly to want to waste people’s time on that issue.”
I think the analogy here is pretty weak because (1) hair grows back and (2) people voluntarily decide to have themselves shaved. Let’s try to strengthen the analogy a bit: Imagine a world in which it was popular for parents to have a non-reversible procedure performed on their newborn children that permanently prevents the growth of any body hair for the rest of the child’s life. One could further elaborate the analogy by detailing that the procedure was painful (at least temporarily), and that after the children grew up, many of them wished that the procedure had never been performed on them.

hppysmlz4u2day says:

December 27, 2012 at 1:06 pm

Did you know that in America (as well as most places) it is extremely illegal to do any kind of genital cutting to a newborn baby girl? Baby boys deserve the same protection under the law and should have the same value as any other human being. Circumcision is a decision that should be left only to the person it is being performed on. All those statistics you hear about disease and uncleanliness are the only argument that they have so that they can continue to butcher penises. There are also lots of complications with the surgery itself, especially when performed on a baby, even death results sometimes. For the love of god, have some respect for the way nature intended us to be! If we weren’t supposed to have it, we wouldn’t be born with it.

porndog says:

November 22, 2011 at 1:47 pm

Overall attractive guy, but he’s mostly average to me. I used to think that uncut cocks were mostly on the large side. This guy is def the exception. I think uncut cocks are aesthetically more pleasing than cut ones when erect; they don’t have the scar and color distortions. I would imagine it takes a little more care with hygiene. Otherwise, I don’t really have a preference. This guy’s is not appealing.

David7 says:

November 24, 2011 at 2:21 am

First and foremost, I prefer cut over uncut. Second, usually its the parents who decides if their male child gets “cut”. Third, some religions (Judaism & Islam requires “cuting”) and cultures (most Latino & European skips the procedure, while some tribal societies performs it during entering manhood ceremonies) have customs regarding being “cut” or “uncut”. Fourth, it is a very, very painful operation when done after infancy because the skin and nerve endings have set in. Fifth, not all foreskin is equal! In my opinion the full “turkey neck” is extremely gross, while the partials look better! Finally, this model has a small tool…..a la Pee Wee….LOL

David7 says:

November 24, 2011 at 2:39 am

Also I forgot to add….Hygienically “cut” is cleaner because the head or “mushroom” is dry. On uncut men, the foreskin keeps the head moist so that the skin can move forward and back over the head. When an uncut man showers or bathes he have to clean under the foreskin on a regular basis because this fluid (smegma) that keeps the head moist {NOW THE VERY GROSS PART OF BEING “UNCUT”} if not properly clean it will harden (and cake up) and smells horribly. Once you smell harden smegma you’ll have a different view of liking “uncut”!

FantasticForeskin: Miguel Greco (Uncut Latino Hottie)

Related Posts