nullorchis (imported) wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:32 am One question about chemical "castration"?

Do the testicles still produce useful sperm?

Sperm can be surgically extracted from the testes and used.

A chemically castrated man could at least then rid himself of useless unwanted unnecessary sexual desire and gratification, but still maybe father a child.

IbPervert (imported) wrote: Sun May 31, 2009 8:10 pm To practice safe sex introduce one (or both) of your hand(s) to your pecker! One can't catch anything from yourself!

nullorchis (imported) wrote: Sat May 30, 2009 4:53 am I have heard that, due to the increasing risk of sexually transmitted disease, and lowering interest in fathering, some men are opting for a type of surgery that will prevent fathering, and prevent acquisition or transmission of disease.

They have their urethra re-routed to just below the scrotum and just above the anus, and have the tip of the urethra on the penis surgically sewn shut.

This does require that one sit down to urinate. Urine and ejaculate come out the new opening. Should they desire to father a child their semen can be collected and used in an artificial insemination process. (or sperm can also be collected surgically directly from inside the testes)

Without an opening in the penis, risk of sexual disease acquisition is almost 100% effective, as long as they don't engage in any other risky behavior.

Sexual feeling and activity are not affected.

Such operations are not simple, nor without risk, nor would I imagine that they would be performed in most countries.

Has anyone heard this to be true? And if so, where are such operations being conducted?

I am not interested in such a procedure. I was just wondering if this is one of those internet scams. It sounds like an effective method of birth control and disease prevention, so it seemed as if it might be true. For men who think they might want to father a child in the future, and who want to be sexually active but not use a condom or catch a disease, this sounds almost too good to be true. Vasectomy reversal doesn't always work. If too many men do this we will need more stalls and fewer urinals in the restrooms.

ramses (imported) wrote: Sat May 30, 2009 5:50 am It wouldn't do anything to stop HPV (genital warts) or Herpes. HPV can lead to cancer of the penis, anus, throat. You will probably see HPV vaccines for men as well as women in the near future. It seems that it would be a great solution for stopping transmission of HIV. Maybe it should be offered free of charge for anyone with HIV?

I can't believe that MOST men would tolerate having to squat to piss for the rest of their lives. It would be kinda mesy to have jizz run down the back of your nuts when you have an orgasm with your partner. I know my wife would like to not have a mess in her every time but the reroute would be even messier.

Mac (imported) wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:18 am They would adjust to the change and probably even like it over standing. Future males who have the procedure at birth would learn sitting as being natural (same as for the girls). There would be no adjustment required.

If the surgical procedure became a requirement for all then public restroom capacity could be increased with lower cost by having unisex facilities.

Mac (imported) wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:18 am They would adjust to the change and probably even like it over standing. Future males who have the procedure at birth would learn sitting as being natural (same as for the girls). There would be no adjustment required.

If the surgical procedure became a requirement for all then public restroom capacity could be increased with lower cost by having unisex facilities.

nullorchis (imported) wrote: Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:48 am Male aggressiveness, hostility, rape, sexual assaults, pornography, the spread of sexual related disease etc. etc. would then be a thing of the past.