Talk:Masturbation/Archive 1

message: Those are most definitely not the lyrics to Chuck Berry's song "My Ding-a-Ling," which is not (explicitly at least) sexual in any way.  I googled for a song with those lyrics but found nothing.  I have removed the lyrics completely, since they are false.
:Not sexual? The lyrics are here and several other places, but they don't do it justice without the highly suggestive rap that goes along with it. Try to find a copy of the London Chuck Berry Sessions live album. The girls in the audience sing "my" and the guys sing "ding a ling", repeat those two lines then the girls sing "I want you to play with my" and the guys sing "ding a ling" again. Of course the guys get into it more than the girls, so Berry complains "there are just two girls taking care of all those ding a lings". Later after a better chorus he quips "don't these girls have a lovely passage?", and on it goes. Bless those who don't have any idea what I'm talking about. Andrewa 01:57, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Song Lyrics

message: Quite a bonny pleasure to go strokin' in the country...or in our fair dictionary.... lol Rickyrab 22:19, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Country matters

message: I know that I am technically incorrect (NT4RTFM)
Just a comment: despite of NPOV, I have another objection: an encyclopoedia has to be up to date. This doesn´t not necesarrily imply that a quite recent study (which is almost another urban legend) has to be promulgated. This time, non-mentioning would have been wise for the sake of not-being-confused-by-nonsense-data.
Comment to Rickyrab: for sure U will NOT die OF, perhaps WITH your prostate cancer..whatever U do, have fun.
[[User:guest..some slash not on my keyboard..what Time is ist, honey..OH..we have a date??  (where?)
KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THE TABLE! ...I think I should add some brackets]]
:"...came too recently"? I wasn't aware that cancer studies experienced a refractory period. ;) JAQ 12:57, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Prostate cancer study came too recently?

message: I have serious questions about this assertion: 
Ejaculation of semen can be messy, but may be controlled by wearing a condom...
Has anyone anywhere ever heard of any male person who has worn a condom while masturbating?  Any evidence whatsoever, no matter how anectodal, is appreciated, because this sounds about as bizzare and unlikely as a masturbation story is likely to get.  Moncrief 02:39, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
:All right, you asked, so I'll tell you.  I frequently use a condom when masturbating for a number of reasons:  1) It reduces abrasion when my hands are rough and dry or I've been masturbating frequently.  Otherwise, I can easily rub the skin raw.  2) It reduces the problem of seminal fluids becoming sticky and causing adhesion friction between the skin and head of my penis, which actually has caused me sores in the mucus membrane (some men, like myself, liberally seep clear seminal fluids during sex; it's actually an evolutionary advantage in providing much of the lubrication during sex, and I intensely dislike using artificial lubricants while masturbating by hand).  3) It enables me to masturbate under covers in the winter in a cold room without getting my sheets messy. 4) I find it erotic.  There are other reasons, but I think that's enough for now.
::Altternative - Use a tissue --JK the unwise 10:39, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Masturbation while wearing a condom

message: Thanks for the astounding detail you used in describing how you pleasure yourself and the amount of liquid your sweaty, throbbing cock releases. We were all quite enlightened by it and feel our worth as human beings has increased due to this very necessary description of you choking your meaty shlong on a boring day.
 64.26.82.18 20:27, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply 

message: Doug, I shifted your commentary on the alleged health effects of prone masturbation to...the section dealing with health effects of masturbation.  I have further clarified the reference to make sure that people can make the link to the prone position described in the previous paragraph and the alleged health effects.  What more do you want (other than for us to turn this and the TMS articles into screeds warning of the horrible perils of prone masturbation, which we simply aren't going to do)?  --Robert Merkel 06:35, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, no.  I did make a further change, though, describing the face-down position explicitly as prone to help make the link in people's minds.  --Robert Merkel 19:58, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  TMS 

message: I am currently testing an automated Wikipedia link suggester. Ran it on this article, here are the results:
* Can link sexual relationship: ...re less likely to masturbate while in a sexual relationship than men. Both sexes occasionally engag...
* Can link corpus cavernosum: ...quent injury to the tunica albuginea or corpus cavernosum results in a localised fibromatosis, di...
* Can link support group: ...ll number of clinicians and an internet support group claims that masturbating prone (laying ...
* Can link 4th millennium BC: ...dance in nature. A clay figurine of the 4th millennium BC from a temple site on the island of M...
Notes: The article text has not been changed in any way; Some of these links may be wrong, some may be right; You can leave positive feedback or negative feedback; Please feel free to delete this section from the talk page.  -- Nickj 07:03, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Wiki Links

message: I am at a loss to exactly why this article is suposed to be non-nuetral. I have read the talk padge and no one seems too outraged by anything. Is the problem that anti-masterbationist think its pro or vice versa? Or the stuff about for-skins? My point is - the red POV hand is ugly, so remove it unless its really needed --JK the unwise 10:50, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Robert Merkel added it a couple of weeks ago; I don't know why, at the time the only edits going on seem to have been on minor matters such as use of the word "prone" and a reference to another section in the description of a frottage technique of masturbation; it is possible however that I have missed what was going on.  There don't seem to be any serious NPOV disputes here now.  I think we should probably remove the NPOV notice. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:58, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: It's gone. --Nigelj 22:05, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  The neutrality of this article is disputed 

message: Could someone please explain why this is being done repeatedly?  It doesn't seem justifiable to claim that these statements, which appear to be based on verifiable observation, are being removed under the guise of POV. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 08:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes on contrast between circumcised and uncircumsized masturbation keep being removed

message: While the picture is well drawn, I'm not sure it's particularly a) informative, and b) it might be a little confronting for some.  Would anybody object if I shifted it down the page a little? --Robert Merkel 22:14, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move.  It is a perfect fit for the section on female masturbation. Johntex 22:28, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture... 

message: "Tony Sidaway (Talk | contribs) Revert User:Nigelj. Please explain your removals on talk. I can't see what's up here."
Is this article 'finished' then, or just perfect as it is?
"The Wikipedia community exhorts users to be bold in updating articles," says the 'Style and how-to series'... 
I just felt that the emphasis on socks and toilets was a bit over-prominent for this article and this context.  Just trying to make it a bit more pleasant 'round here ;-)
Forget it - keep it how you like it. --Nigelj 23:47, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't really see what you mean.  Male masturbation does, I think, tend to be a pretty socky, toilety sort of thing.  I can see a good argument for moisture-absorbent mousemats in there, too. ;)  --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:07, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Socks and toilets?

message: This section needs more work.  Whyever is the non-scientific study by the Canadian magazine NOW! being given so much attention when there are many scientific studies on the question available which could be cited?  The statement about masturbation frequency declining after age 17, especially among females, is patently untrue, although I did not change it because I don't have the correct stats in front of me.  It is certain that adult women masturbate MORE than adolescent females (many are not even orgasmic until after age 18), and the decline among males is anything but "drastic." Doug22123 00:08, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Masturbation frequency age and gender

message: WANK FOR GOD!
WANK FOR G-D!
WANK FOR ALLAH!
WANK FOR THE BUDDHA!
HARI WANKA HARI WANKA DING DONG!
Wanking off is a Sacred and Religious activity
and Shame on the religions that consider masturbation
a sin or haram or trayf or verboten. 
WANK FOR AMERICA! 
I LUV TO WANK!
204.52.215.107 02:31, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wanking and Religion

message: In general, individuals of either sex who are not in sexually active relationships tend to masturbate more frequently than those who are.
:In a human sexuality class I took, I was given the impression just the opposite was the case -- i.e. those in an active sexual relationship with a partner actually masturbate more often than those not in a sexual relationship. In any case, such statements (and a lot more in this article) could use some fact-checking and source-citing.
::It's the kind of thing that seems like mere common sense, but as we all know common sense isn't necessarily correct upon investigation. Whichever is the case, it should be backed up with a study cited as evidence. Everyking 15:06, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Correlation between masturbation and having a sexual partner

message: There seems to be a logical contradiction between these two sentences in the first paragraph: "Masturbation is the manual excitation of the sexual organs [...]" and "In the animal kingdom, masturbation has been observed in the male of every species of mammal." RodC 14:15, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why ? Never seen a monkey masturbating ? Rama 14:56, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm, no. Have you? In any case, I've seen dogs, and they didn't use their "hands". RodC 15:50, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Do animals use their hands too?