![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Calling an intact penis "un-circumcised" is a bias. Un-circumcised implies that:
These are POVs and systemic bias (probably from generic circumcision in the United States, creating a bias about the normality of being "cut" and the abnormality of being "un-cut"). The neutral precise term for an intact penis is intact penis. Definition of the word intact: not altered; whole; untouched; complete. -- 89.226.117.72 ( talk) 23:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
oppose merge; as stated above "glans" & "glans penis" ARE NOT synonymous. there is an important difference, & "glans" merits at the very least a "disambiguation plus" page of its own.
Lx 121 ( talk) 08:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I would like to propose a few changes. The topic of circumcision should be a "see also" not part of this article. The numerous other Wikipedia articles on circumcision cover this subject. In addition, the Morris/Waskett "study" isn't really a study. It's more of a propaganda piece by two non-MDs pushing a point of view. Furthermore, that "study" has numerous flaws and logical errors. Morris & Waskett are not reliable sources, they are not medical researchers, and they are not held in any sort of esteem in the scientific or medical communities. In fact, Morris has been discredited by his Australian contemporaries on numerous occasions. Also, Morris/Waskett have a conflict of interest as they run a pro-circumcision propaganda website. Crimsoncorvid ( talk) 00:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Zad
68
00:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Zad
68
04:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)I believe that an evolutionary change could serve more than one adaptive function, and that therefore, I do not imply that other contributors are wrong. Without recorded references, and without demeaning any other theory, I suggest that the glans' form evolved to increase the pleasure experienced by the female during the "start" of intercourse, when the glans meets the labia and vulva. In this theory, the soft and gentle glans causes gentle flexing of the pre-vaginal parts, including tugging on the clitoral hood. The key word for the female is "gentle". The pleasure from this flexing helps the female to relax her vaginal muscles and accept complete entry of the penis which, of course, would enhance the likelihood of pregnancy. Also, with a more pleasurable experience in memory, the female is more likely to welcome and encourage intercourse at later times.
With this theory in mind, before love-making the male can plan for continuous, superior flexing of the vulva and tugging on the clitoral hood throughout intercourse. In preparation, he cuts pieces of foam rubber to fit into finger cots; then he uses fine medical tape to attach the filled cots to the sides of his erect penis. Foam rubber and the glans flex in a similar way.
In this way, the thrusting penis does not merely slip past the labia and clitoris. It gently and continuously pushes and tugs on both. The effect might be enhanced --- or at least the male might be amused --- if the female knows nothing about the advance preparation.
The germ of this idea came to me about a decade ago from one paragraph in the novel THE RED TENT. FYI: THE RED TENT appeals to women more than to men.
In 2005 I sent a description of my idea, along with a finger cot with foam rubber inserted, to three male acquaintances. One man stopped communication right then. Another man ridiculed my idea. But the third man wrote back, "Maybe you are on to something."
I believe that the third man does not think as I do, but that he is quite comfortable with talking about sex in mixed company. My guess is that one or more women told him of possibilities.
Also, if this idea were to catch on -- which I do not expect -- then a urologist could develop permanent inserts or attachments to eliminate the need for finger cots.
Furthermore, the concept could be applied to strap-ons for lesbians. The cost of strap-ons would increase, but there are wealthy lesbians. PoRusskii ( talk) 17:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
The article's lead section (in its present state) is misleading: it implies that the glans penis only occurs in humans. However, it is present in many other mammals as well. Jarble ( talk) 16:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Under "Medical considerations," this article solely focuses on a potential complication that results from circumcision. It ignores the well-documented health benefits of circumcision, which include the prevention of certain forms of cancer and sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS. The scientific basis for these health benfits is so definitive that infant circumcision is promoted by the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antxvz ( talk • contribs)
I removed the alleged theory that the shape aims at maximising pleasure because it had no sources and is inconstistent with scientific evidence from the latest 50 years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8c09xz-La0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.81.130 ( talk) 15:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm reverting this edit, for three reasons:
Due to the rare instance of cancer, or other issues, what would be the purpose of glans removal only? Leaving the rest of the penis intact. What effect on the patient would be experienced? Examples of side effects of surgery involving removal of the glans could include urination, obtaining and maintaining an erection, obtaining an orgasm, ejaculation. How much may some psychological effects hinge on how much of the penis is left after surgery? ( Burdzzo2 19:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)).
After remove glane can re grow Geetgauri ( talk) 10:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Content was added here and restored here about possible complications of circumcision, based on a 1947 paper. Per WP:MEDDATE we don't use references that old for content about health. I will also note that our article on Circumcision, which is closely watched, doesn't mention this at all. I looked at the recent reviews about complications of circumcision that are cited there, and this is either not mentioned or described as being very rare. It is therefore entirely UNDUE here. Jytdog ( talk) 22:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I deleted the statement that the glans was homologous with the glans clitoris but this was reverted without reference. This claim of homology between these parts of the male and female body is very common however it is incorrect. While the penis and the clitoris are homologous the glans of both are not. The glans penis is the distal end of the corpus spongiosum extending beyond the corpus cavernosa. The glans clitoris on the other hand is the distal end of the corpus cavernosa not the corpus spongiosum. In the female the corpus spongiosum is like the corpus cavernosa in two equal parts each side of the body, meeting distally in the midline far from the glans. See Grays Anatomy referred to in the article. They are therefore not homologous structures. Tyreric ( talk) 22:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
This is confusing here: Some researchers have suggested that the glans has evolved to become acorn, mushroom or cone shaped so that during copulation it acts as a semen-removal device in the vagina of previous sex partners. It looks like saying it won't remove semen from a man's present sexual partner, and might mislead readers into thinking it aids contraception. A clarifying rephrase would be in order Cloptonson ( talk) 09:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have recently learned that the ventral surface is the front of the body, and dorsal surface is the back of the body. So, why is the dorsal surface of the penis the surface of the penis that is in front of the body? And why is the ventral surface of the penis the surface of the penis that is facing at the back of the body? Jas9777 ( talk) 16:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Calling an intact penis "un-circumcised" is a bias. Un-circumcised implies that:
These are POVs and systemic bias (probably from generic circumcision in the United States, creating a bias about the normality of being "cut" and the abnormality of being "un-cut"). The neutral precise term for an intact penis is intact penis. Definition of the word intact: not altered; whole; untouched; complete. -- 89.226.117.72 ( talk) 23:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
oppose merge; as stated above "glans" & "glans penis" ARE NOT synonymous. there is an important difference, & "glans" merits at the very least a "disambiguation plus" page of its own.
Lx 121 ( talk) 08:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I would like to propose a few changes. The topic of circumcision should be a "see also" not part of this article. The numerous other Wikipedia articles on circumcision cover this subject. In addition, the Morris/Waskett "study" isn't really a study. It's more of a propaganda piece by two non-MDs pushing a point of view. Furthermore, that "study" has numerous flaws and logical errors. Morris & Waskett are not reliable sources, they are not medical researchers, and they are not held in any sort of esteem in the scientific or medical communities. In fact, Morris has been discredited by his Australian contemporaries on numerous occasions. Also, Morris/Waskett have a conflict of interest as they run a pro-circumcision propaganda website. Crimsoncorvid ( talk) 00:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Zad
68
00:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Zad
68
04:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)I believe that an evolutionary change could serve more than one adaptive function, and that therefore, I do not imply that other contributors are wrong. Without recorded references, and without demeaning any other theory, I suggest that the glans' form evolved to increase the pleasure experienced by the female during the "start" of intercourse, when the glans meets the labia and vulva. In this theory, the soft and gentle glans causes gentle flexing of the pre-vaginal parts, including tugging on the clitoral hood. The key word for the female is "gentle". The pleasure from this flexing helps the female to relax her vaginal muscles and accept complete entry of the penis which, of course, would enhance the likelihood of pregnancy. Also, with a more pleasurable experience in memory, the female is more likely to welcome and encourage intercourse at later times.
With this theory in mind, before love-making the male can plan for continuous, superior flexing of the vulva and tugging on the clitoral hood throughout intercourse. In preparation, he cuts pieces of foam rubber to fit into finger cots; then he uses fine medical tape to attach the filled cots to the sides of his erect penis. Foam rubber and the glans flex in a similar way.
In this way, the thrusting penis does not merely slip past the labia and clitoris. It gently and continuously pushes and tugs on both. The effect might be enhanced --- or at least the male might be amused --- if the female knows nothing about the advance preparation.
The germ of this idea came to me about a decade ago from one paragraph in the novel THE RED TENT. FYI: THE RED TENT appeals to women more than to men.
In 2005 I sent a description of my idea, along with a finger cot with foam rubber inserted, to three male acquaintances. One man stopped communication right then. Another man ridiculed my idea. But the third man wrote back, "Maybe you are on to something."
I believe that the third man does not think as I do, but that he is quite comfortable with talking about sex in mixed company. My guess is that one or more women told him of possibilities.
Also, if this idea were to catch on -- which I do not expect -- then a urologist could develop permanent inserts or attachments to eliminate the need for finger cots.
Furthermore, the concept could be applied to strap-ons for lesbians. The cost of strap-ons would increase, but there are wealthy lesbians. PoRusskii ( talk) 17:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
The article's lead section (in its present state) is misleading: it implies that the glans penis only occurs in humans. However, it is present in many other mammals as well. Jarble ( talk) 16:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Under "Medical considerations," this article solely focuses on a potential complication that results from circumcision. It ignores the well-documented health benefits of circumcision, which include the prevention of certain forms of cancer and sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS. The scientific basis for these health benfits is so definitive that infant circumcision is promoted by the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antxvz ( talk • contribs)
I removed the alleged theory that the shape aims at maximising pleasure because it had no sources and is inconstistent with scientific evidence from the latest 50 years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8c09xz-La0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.81.130 ( talk) 15:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm reverting this edit, for three reasons:
Due to the rare instance of cancer, or other issues, what would be the purpose of glans removal only? Leaving the rest of the penis intact. What effect on the patient would be experienced? Examples of side effects of surgery involving removal of the glans could include urination, obtaining and maintaining an erection, obtaining an orgasm, ejaculation. How much may some psychological effects hinge on how much of the penis is left after surgery? ( Burdzzo2 19:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)).
After remove glane can re grow Geetgauri ( talk) 10:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Content was added here and restored here about possible complications of circumcision, based on a 1947 paper. Per WP:MEDDATE we don't use references that old for content about health. I will also note that our article on Circumcision, which is closely watched, doesn't mention this at all. I looked at the recent reviews about complications of circumcision that are cited there, and this is either not mentioned or described as being very rare. It is therefore entirely UNDUE here. Jytdog ( talk) 22:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
I deleted the statement that the glans was homologous with the glans clitoris but this was reverted without reference. This claim of homology between these parts of the male and female body is very common however it is incorrect. While the penis and the clitoris are homologous the glans of both are not. The glans penis is the distal end of the corpus spongiosum extending beyond the corpus cavernosa. The glans clitoris on the other hand is the distal end of the corpus cavernosa not the corpus spongiosum. In the female the corpus spongiosum is like the corpus cavernosa in two equal parts each side of the body, meeting distally in the midline far from the glans. See Grays Anatomy referred to in the article. They are therefore not homologous structures. Tyreric ( talk) 22:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
This is confusing here: Some researchers have suggested that the glans has evolved to become acorn, mushroom or cone shaped so that during copulation it acts as a semen-removal device in the vagina of previous sex partners. It looks like saying it won't remove semen from a man's present sexual partner, and might mislead readers into thinking it aids contraception. A clarifying rephrase would be in order Cloptonson ( talk) 09:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have recently learned that the ventral surface is the front of the body, and dorsal surface is the back of the body. So, why is the dorsal surface of the penis the surface of the penis that is in front of the body? And why is the ventral surface of the penis the surface of the penis that is facing at the back of the body? Jas9777 ( talk) 16:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)