Talk:Meatotomy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Prince Albert piercing aftereffects
I had a Prince Albert peircing which I was very proud of, after 1 year the peircing began to irritate - sure that this would pass I continued to wear the peircing. After about 6 weeks I notice that the Glans of my penis were starting to seperate and removed the peircing immediately.
I am now left with a unsightly hole in my penis which while not uncomfortable, creates a few physical issues: Urine Flow, Semen Flow & Power of Semen flow. As well as this my penus head remains moist for the majority of the time and this excess moisture (and depite bathing twice daily) tends to cause an unpleasant smell.
I understand that there are many cases far worse than this, but I beive that this was cased by a combination of factors: 1. Peircing was not positioned far enough down the urethra conbined with the weight of the peircing itself.
The problem here is that there is a mass of information about the benefits and the proceedure of the peircing but very list information relating to the issues which may arrise as a result.
-
- Are you sure that the meatotomy entry is the proper place for your comment? If you are concerned that the Prince Albert piercing entry is lacking in information, that would be the proper place for your input on the matter. One of the reasons that I have not addressed the long term impact of transurethral piercings, both with and without jewelry, is that there is little to no citeable data to support a variety of anecdotal issues. In other words it's hard to tell the causes or prevelance of situations like yours. Glowimperial 13:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] If I cite the frenulum as erogenous can I say...
Crushing it will destroy erogenous tissue?TipPt 16:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
At least make readers aware that they should really consider and push home diliation with their doctor.TipPt 16:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, no original research. Anyway, no tissue is removed, so saying that erogenous tissue is lost is dubious. Jakew 16:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I have two citations ... the Hass human sexuality (UCLA textbook) stating that the frenulum "...contributes stantially to the pleasurable feeling experienced during sexual activity" and a UCLA reference desk sexuality encyclopedia that states that the frenulum is "particularly responsive to stimulation" (relative to other zones on the penis).
-
- How about ... The upper frenulum is crushed and split during the procedure, and to potentially preserve erogenous tissue (cites if you want), other techniques may be employed....TipPt 16:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, Tip, but policy explicitly prevents novel syntheses such as this. I can't find any examples where authors have said anything like this before.
- How about ... The upper frenulum is crushed and split during the procedure, and to potentially preserve erogenous tissue (cites if you want), other techniques may be employed....TipPt 16:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Out of interest, what methodologies did the UCLA authors use to determine these 'facts'? Jakew 16:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
-
They are both university books ... long reviewed and used by folks not involved in any circ debate. You reviewed the Hass and said it was OK, the other is a from a reference book in the UCLA Central library ... their only reference encyclopedia on sexuality.TipPt 17:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
