Man chops off his own manhood

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:14pm

smash wrote: »

"The most common procedure is to cut the ligament that connects the penis to the pelvic bone. This allows a little more of the shaft -- on average less than an inch -- to become visible outside the body. It's not really lengthening the penis so much as revealing more of what's usually hidden."
http://www.m.webmd.com/men/guide/penis-enlargement-does-it-work

So there is more visible and the penis is, for all intents and purposes, longer as there is more available to both see and use externally. Got anything else?

realdanbreen · 24-10-2014 2:21pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

Is that 5 to 6" erect or on 'standby' so to speak?

?

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:25pm

realdanbreen wrote: »

?

Erect presumably. The size on standby is mostly irrelevant.

smash · 24-10-2014 2:27pm

Beano wrote: »

So there is more visible and the penis is, for all intents and purposes, longer as there is more available to both see and use externally. Got anything else?

"visible outside the body" when flaccid. When erect it can only fill the area that's there to fill. You'd want to be seriously stretching to gain anything. The article even says continuous stretching required because the ligament will tighten again.

realdanbreen · 24-10-2014 2:28pm

Beano wrote: »

Erect presumably. The size on standby is mostly irrelevant.

Whew!:D

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 2:28pm

DiegoCosta wrote: »

In our society for one, mutilation of a man's genitals is comedy whereas mutilation of a woman's is tragic which it is.

So because some people think a man mutilating his own genitalia for the reasons he gave is utter stupidity, that's the same thing as a woman having her genitalia mutilated?

I've no doubt there are people in society who would find a woman mutilating her own genitalia for the same reasons as those given by that man in that story would be the height of utter stupidity too.

Shakespeare's Sister · 24-10-2014 2:30pm

The reverse the genders thing here is valid, not points-scoring or trying to inflame a gender war like it can sometimes be.
Guy is emotionally in turmoil to say the least - so much so that he chops off his own penis. Think about the horror of that... On the surface it's due to his ex finishing with him for being bad in bed, but that often happens and the guy doesn't chop off his penis, so it's something a bit deeper than just break-up upset/ego-bruising.
If the equivalent was experienced by a woman - that level of emotional trauma, that level of self mutilation, an ex breaking up with her over something he is also responsible for but holding her entirely responsible... there would NOT be jokes or tolerance of jokes, there would not be placing the blame on her, and there would not be ridiculing her. There would just be sympathy.
The difference in the treatment of each is all people are pointing out and it's a fair observation.

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:32pm

smash wrote: »

"visible outside the body" when flaccid. When erect it can only fill the area that's there to fill.

The area that is outside the body is bigger as there is a piece outside that was once inside. Can you agree on that? So if there is more to become erect then surely the erection will be bigger.

smash wrote: »

You'd want to be seriously stretching to gain anything. The article even says continuous stretching required because the ligament will tighten again.

thats not relevant to anything i have said.

smash · 24-10-2014 2:37pm

Beano wrote: »

The area that is outside the body is bigger as there is a piece outside that was once inside. Can you agree on that? So if there is more to become erect then surely the erection will be bigger.

Less than an inch, because like I said already - you can only fill what's there to fill. Cutting the ligament doesn't stretch the skin that the erection has to fill. The skin will only stretch to it's capacity. You'd gain more visual length by losing weight! The surgery makes feck all difference.

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 2:40pm

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

The reverse the genders thing here is valid, not points-scoring or trying to inflame a gender war like it can sometimes be.
Guy is emotionally in turmoil to say the least - so much so that he chops off his own penis. Think about the horror of that... On the surface it's due to his ex finishing with him for being bad in bed, but that often happens and the guy doesn't chop off his penis, so it's something a bit deeper than just break-up upset/ego-bruising.
If the equivalent was experienced by a woman - that level of emotional trauma, that level of self mutilation, an ex breaking up with her over something he is also responsible for but holding her entirely responsible... there would NOT be jokes or tolerance of jokes, there would not be placing the blame on her, and there would not be ridiculing her. There would just be sympathy.
The difference in the treatment of each is all people are pointing out and it's a fair observation.

It's not a fair observation, simply because it's pointing out that just because people care, or in this case don't care about one thing, means they should equally care, or indeed not care, about something entirely different and in no way comparable.

"Reverse the genders" is a simplistic, idealistic notion that takes no account of the psychological and physical differences between men and women, and people cannot be forced to care about something they just don't care about.

Berate people for laughing at a man who sliced off his own genitalia - fine.

Berate people for laughing because it wasn't a woman - not so fine.

smash · 24-10-2014 2:43pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Berate people for laughing because it wasn't a woman - not so fine.

We need a fanny chopping thread... Designer Vagina FTW!

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:45pm

smash wrote: »

Less than an inch, because like I said already - you can only fill what's there to fill. Cutting the ligament doesn't stretch the skin that the erection has to fill. The skin will only stretch to it's capacity. You'd gain more visual length by losing weight! The surgery makes feck all difference.

Less than an inch is still better than nothing. when you only have 3 that little bit might mean a lot.

Anyway, enough of this pointless bickering. It is a bank holiday weekend after all. There are better things to be thinking about that little willies.

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:46pm

smash wrote: »

We need a fanny chopping thread... Designer Vagina FTW!

Judging by the documentary on botched plastic surgery i watched the other night you are better off sticking with what you have.

smash · 24-10-2014 2:46pm

Beano wrote: »

It is a bank holiday weekend after all. There are better things to be thinking about that little willies.

Bank holiday or not, there's always something better to be thinking of than little willies!

OldNotWIse · 24-10-2014 2:52pm

They actually do have surgery now for vaginas. Need a lift? not a problem! Labia too big? Not a problem!

The thoughts of someone coming at you with a scalpel.....

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:52pm

smash wrote: »

Bank holiday or not, there's always something better to be thinking of than little willies!

we have reached an accord. A very good day to you.

OldNotWIse · 24-10-2014 2:52pm

Beano wrote: »

Judging by the documentary on botched plastic surgery i watched the other night you are better off sticking with what you have.

better the er...bits you know

Beano · 24-10-2014 2:53pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

They actually do have surgery now for vaginas. Need a lift? not a problem! Labia too big? Not a problem!

The thoughts of someone coming at you with a scalpel.....

the thoughts are not as bad as actually watching it happen. I couldnt look away from the screen. I was frozen in terror.

OldNotWIse · 24-10-2014 2:56pm

Beano wrote: »

the thoughts are not as bad as actually watching it happen. I couldnt look away from the screen. I was frozen in terror.

I remember once the subject of neutering came up in conversation in our house and someone referred to the "poor guy getting his balls chopped off". Without thinking I replied, " they dont actually chop them off you know...they cut them open, suck out the inside and then sew them up again" - the horrified looks from all the males present

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 3:01pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Analogies can be useful in explaining concepts, not very useful in drawing comparisons.

Analogy = a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

Yup, not used for comparisons at all :rolleyes:

smash · 24-10-2014 3:02pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

they dont actually chop them off you know...they cut them open, suck out the inside and then sew them up again

/crosses legs

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 3:04pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's not a fair observation, simply because it's pointing out that just because people care, or in this case don't care about one thing, means they should equally care, or indeed not care, about something entirely different and in no way comparable.

"Reverse the genders" is a simplistic, idealistic notion that takes no account of the psychological and physical differences between men and women, and people cannot be forced to care about something they just don't care about.

Berate people for laughing at a man who sliced off his own genitalia - fine.

Berate people for laughing because it wasn't a woman - not so fine.

Lol you actually dont have any idea of what point was being made yet got all worked up over it. And despite it being explained to you, you still have no idea. :pac:

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 3:14pm

Peist2007 wrote: »

Analogy = a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

Yup, not used for comparisons at all :rolleyes:

"Useless for drawing comparisons between two completely different concepts"

There, does that clarify it for you?

Peist2007 wrote: »

Lol you actually dont have any idea of what point was being made yet got all worked up over it. And despite it being explained to you, you still have no idea. :pac:

Nobody getting worked up here only you -

Peist2007 wrote: »

How was it nonsense talk you complete muppet? I was making a point that i see another poster has outlined for you. Keep up good ladeen

Because you can't explain what you mean. I may be dense as a kilo of osmium, but if you want me to get worked up about something that gets you worked up, and understand where you're coming from, the onus is on you to help me out here.

I'm not trying to be obtuse or twist what you're saying or any of that nonsense, I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from?

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 4:17pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

"Useless for drawing comparisons between two completely different concepts"

There, does that clarify it for you?

Nobody getting worked up here only you -

Because you can't explain what you mean. I may be dense as a kilo of osmium, but if you want me to get worked up about something that gets you worked up, and understand where you're coming from, the onus is on you to help me out here.

I'm not trying to be obtuse or twist what you're saying or any of that nonsense, I'm genuinely trying to understand where you're coming from?

You dont seem to think it is in any way relevant that you are the only one who doesnt understand the point i made? Others have come in and tried to tell you. You have responded in terms which show you do not understand it. All that has happened here is you jumped in a little too quickly and told someone they were talking nonsense without getting what they were saying. Makes you look a little silly is all.

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 4:53pm

Peist2007 wrote: »

You dont seem to think it is in any way relevant that you are the only one who doesnt understand the point i made? Others have come in and tried to tell you. You have responded in terms which show you do not understand it. All that has happened here is you jumped in a little too quickly and told someone they were talking nonsense without getting what they were saying. Makes you look a little silly is all.

But they are talking nonsense, and you're talking nonsense, because there is no comparison between a man who removes his penis, and a woman who would have to remove her labia, clitoris, urethra and uterus.

They're not even in the same ball park. I don't think you actually acknowledge the complexity of reconstructive surgery for a man in comparison to reconstructive surgery for a woman.

"Reverse the genders" tells you squat about the complexity involved in either scenario. Like I said - it's merely simplistic and ideological.

OldNotWIse · 24-10-2014 5:00pm

Peist2007 wrote: »

How was it nonsense talk you complete muppet? I was making a point that i see another poster has outlined for you. Keep up good ladeen

Peist2007 wrote: »

Holy crap that was the most clear example of someone missing the point i think i have seen here. And to be so certain of it too. Hilarious!

Peist2007 wrote: »

So are you saying that using an analogy is invalid in all cases? LOL

Peist2007 wrote: »

You're actually too stupid to even try to explain this to. As you were :rolleyes:

Peist2007 wrote: »

Lol you actually dont have any idea of what point was being made yet got all worked up over it. And despite it being explained to you, you still have no idea. :pac:

Peist2007 wrote: »

You dont seem to think it is in any way relevant that you are the only one who doesnt understand the point i made? Others have come in and tried to tell you. You have responded in terms which show you do not understand it. All that has happened here is you jumped in a little too quickly and told someone they were talking nonsense without getting what they were saying. Makes you look a little silly is all.

It is my opinion that people who resort to childish name-calling and overuse of smileys and "LOL" to falsely convey that they are amused by someone else's purported stupidity, have very little to say. If you actually had a point, you wouldn't need so much fúcking window dressing.

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 5:30pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But they are talking nonsense, and you're talking nonsense, because there is no comparison between a man who removes his penis, and a woman who would have to remove her labia, clitoris, urethra and uterus.

They're not even in the same ball park. I don't think you actually acknowledge the complexity of reconstructive surgery for a man in comparison to reconstructive surgery for a woman.

"Reverse the genders" tells you squat about the complexity involved in either scenario. Like I said - it's merely simplistic and ideological.

Wow. Point missed 5 times in a row.

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 5:36pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

It is my opinion that people who resort to childish name-calling and overuse of smileys and "LOL" to falsely convey that they are amused by someone else's purported stupidity, have very little to say. If you actually had a point, you wouldn't need so much fúcking window dressing.

Another genius. My point was extremely simple and, i thought, well made. Check out those that seem to agree. The window dressing is me having to explain that simple point to someone who has completely missed it. How many times have you quoted me there? Well, that's how many times One Eyed Jack missed the point.

You're just jumping in because you announced in a thread yesterday that you "hate people" and i pointed out that someone who really hated people wouldnt have over 7000 posts on a discussion board forum like Boards. You're bringing your sandy vagina in to this thread over that i'm thinking. Which is actually childish.

Fat Christy · 24-10-2014 5:43pm

Beano wrote: »

If they have insecurities they are based on the fact that they have a small dick. I dont think they need anybody else to confirm or validate that for them. My original post was in reply to somebody that said that a 3 inch dick was a normal size. It isnt. Its a medical condition.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/271647.php

Some people are growers not showers. 3 inches when flaccid is hardly a medical condition. Who needs a 12 inch cock when they're not using it?

Once it grows when it's hard I'm happy.

I also don't see the fascination with huge dicks, 6 inches when hard, be grand.

wazky · 24-10-2014 5:47pm

Fat Christy wrote: »

Once it grows when it's hard I'm happy. I also don't see the fascination with huge dicks, 6 inches when hard, be grand.

Has your girlfriend ever complained about the size of yours?

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 5:47pm

Peist2007 wrote: »

Wow. Point missed 5 times in a row.

Your point seems to be (and please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) -

Society (not just some people, but all of society) has very little empathy for a man who removes his genitalia. That point in itself has some merit, if you weren't trying to extrapolate it out to wider society.

But the point you seem to be making, as I understand it, is that if a woman were to remove her reproductive and sexual organs, society (again, not just some people, but all of society), would not find it quite so amusing?

I can guarantee you for a fact that some people would indeed find amusement in the idea of a woman removing her genitalia, in much the same fashion as there are some people who find the circumstances of a man removing his genitalia amusing.

Personally speaking, I don't find either idea amusing, both justifications would be incredibly stupid, but merely from a physiological perspective, one has far more detrimental consequences than the other for the person involved, and that's why you can't simply "reverse the genders".

Such an ideology simply trivialises both circumstances, and gives no regard to the actual reality of either situation, regardless of the gender of the person involved.

Fat Christy · 24-10-2014 5:49pm

wazky wrote: »

Has your girlfriend ever complained about the size of yours?

Not now hunnybuns. The dildo is in the top right hand drawer beside the bed.

wazky · 24-10-2014 5:58pm

Fat Christy wrote: »

Not now hunnybuns. The dildo is in the top right hand drawer beside the bed.

Is that what you say to her when you can't your four inch penis to come out of its flaccid state?

Peist2007 · 24-10-2014 6:01pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Your point seems to be (and please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) -

Society (not just some people, but all of society) has very little empathy for a man who removes his genitalia. That point in itself has some merit, if you weren't trying to extrapolate it out to wider society.

But the point you seem to be making, as I understand it, is that if a woman were to remove her reproductive and sexual organs, society (again, not just some people, but all of society), would not find it quite so amusing?

I can guarantee you for a fact that some people would indeed find amusement in the idea of a woman removing her genitalia, in much the same fashion as there are some people who find the circumstances of a man removing his genitalia amusing.

Personally speaking, I don't find either idea amusing, both justifications would be incredibly stupid, but merely from a physiological perspective, one has far more detrimental consequences than the other for the person involved, and that's why you can't simply "reverse the genders".

Such an ideology simply trivialises both circumstances, and gives no regard to the actual reality of either situation, regardless of the gender of the person involved.

You have missed the wider point again. And i assume that by talking about being amused you have taken me literally. Oh dear.

Fat Christy · 24-10-2014 6:09pm

wazky wrote: »

Is that what you say to her when you can't your four inch penis to come out of its flaccid state?

I find your posts rude and distasteful. Grow up.

One eyed Jack · 24-10-2014 6:10pm

Peist2007 wrote: »

You have missed the wider point again. And i assume that by talking about being amused you have taken me literally. Oh dear.

Well at least be assured that I'm making some attempt to understand your point without descending to taking personal swipes at you (I don't understand your necessity to take personal swipes when you're trying to explain to me the idea of society taking swipes at a man who took a swipe at his penis).

I'm trying to understand where you're coming from, but you're making no sense to me. I'm not picking at you and trying to take you literally. I'm trying to take your opinion seriously, but you're making that very difficult for me personally when you resort to taking personal swipes instead of discussing what seems to be your actual beef with wider society as you see it?

wazky · 24-10-2014 6:10pm

Fat Christy wrote: »

I find your posts rude and distasteful. Grow up.

You've some "growing" to do yourself...

Fat Christy · 24-10-2014 6:12pm

wazky wrote: »

You've some "growing" to do yourself...

Haw haw haw, look at the comedian over here. You're so funny.

24-10-2014 7:11pm

Poor guy must have problems over and above his penis. A small penis on it's own probably isn't going to prompt him to maim himself, maybe he had body dysmorphic disorder, distorted perception, or some other factor contributing to his actions. Either way, the poor guy is ill and deserves compassion, not blame or ridicule. It's not the action of a healthy human being.

El Guapo! · 24-10-2014 7:21pm

Mod: Peist2007 banned for personal abuse.
Wazky banned for trolling.

Everyone else, stay on topic and keep it civil please.

GreenwayM · 24-10-2014 7:23pm

That p*nis will never again trust him!

Imagine he's shaving after he gets out of the shower and the poor f*ck*r is down there going "here we go again" . .

Beano · 24-10-2014 7:54pm

Fat Christy wrote: »

Some people are growers not showers. 3 inches when flaccid is hardly a medical condition. Who needs a 12 inch cock when they're not using it?

Once it grows when it's hard I'm happy. I also don't see the fascination with huge dicks, 6 inches when hard, be grand.

all references to length refer to length when erect. length when flaccid is irrelevant.

GreenwayM · 24-10-2014 7:59pm

I knew a guy in Germany - he was a mechanic and he was seriously self conscious about how large his penis was . . .

Not just in length but thickness . . . He actually had circulation problems in it eventually and had to have treatment - so big is not always best . . .

He would never wear tight jeans or loose trouser - and would often have it bound with a martial arts protective strap . . .

Women are not that concerned about it - I actually found his reaction to it a little shallow and it reflected on him more negatively than any physical feature could . .

MonsterCookie · 25-10-2014 12:12am

Beano wrote: »

I wasnt speaking to somebodies face. I was writing on an anonymous message board. In a forum that is not noted for being, shall we say, delicate. If what i said offends you then perhaps AH is not for you.

In a thread about someone mutliating their own genitalia, calling a three inch dick pathetic? Really clever.

In fairness, although AH regularly attracts dickish comments, such comments are called out for what they are and long may that continue.

smash · 25-10-2014 11:47am

GreenwayM wrote: »

I knew a guy in Germany - he was a mechanic and he was seriously self conscious about how large his penis was . . .

Not just in length but thickness . . . He actually had circulation problems in it eventually and had to have treatment - so big is not always best . . .

He would never wear tight jeans or loose trouser - and would often have it bound with a martial arts protective strap . . .

Women are not that concerned about it - I actually found his reaction to it a little shallow and it reflected on him more negatively than any physical feature could . .

I'm sure women are very concerned about it when a bloke walks towards them with a meat bat.

And you found it shallow that he had issues about it, even though it caused him medical problems?

Man chops off his own manhood

Comments