Talk:Blue balls/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents

Material moved from Talk:Blue Ball

(Two items, dated

01:00, 2004 Mar 12 (UTC) and
02:30, 2004 Mar 13 (UTC);

copied by Jerzy(t) 21:28, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC))

Source material for improving this article will be found in

LCCN: 76007000 //r85
ISBN: 0818402229 :
Author: Ellis, Albert.
Title: Sex and the liberated man / Albert Ellis.
Edition: 1st ed.
Publisher: L. Stuart,
Date: c1976.
Description: 347 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: Published in 1963 under title: Sex and the single man.
Notes: Includes index.
Notes: Bibliography: p. 309-336.
Subject: Single men.
Subject: Sex instruction for men.
Subject: Rational-emotive psychotherapy.

The author, an MD (his specialization is psychiatry), specifically discusses the condition in the 1963 edition (emphasis added above) from a medical point of view (and as a rational reason for intercourse!); presumably the 1976 one will also suffice.
--Jerzy(t) 01:00, 2004 Mar 12 (UTC)

Someone asked for a technical term. The symptom is orchalgia or orchidalgia, per Dorland's 27th edn, p. 1187. --Jerzy(t) 02:30, 2004 Mar 13 (UTC)

The orchalgia definition in wikipedia specifies chronic pain. Does Dorland's text same the same? If so, then "blue balls" is different because it is acute pain.

Treatment for women with pelvic congestion?

The gals need help too! Where is this part of the article?

Social aspects

I feel that this page needs a section on the social implications of blue balls. However, 1) I don't feel entirely qualified to write about it and 2) I've already been accused of being overly politically correct this week on the pump so I'm not being bold, and I figured I'd discuss it first. Something about blue balls being a common tactic (at one time, less so now) for adolescent men to pressure young women into sex, or as an excuse for sexual assault. And make it clear that the thing to do about them is to masturbate, not blame the person you're with for not taking care of your erection for you. moink 18:00, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

that is a good idea, I thought it was fake and used SOLEY as a trick...Oreo man 02:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
In fact, my health teacher actually told our class that blue balls didn't exist. Imagine my surprise later in life when I expereinced it for the first time :-(. (DonGaspar 01:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC))

Copied from Blue Ball

(The issues of this language are unrelated to disambiguation, but should be consistent with the article Blue balls.)

The following appears on Blue Ball but is more efficient to discuss here:

"Blue balls" is a modern slang term for a minor cramping men may get in the groin after they are sexually stimulated for a prolonged period but do not ejaculate.

--Jerzy(t) 21:28, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)

Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary conforms to common sense usage in saying a cramp is "a painful spasmodic muscular contraction", and the groin does have muscles. But blue balls is not a cramp, but an ache in the testicles (whose musculature is insignificant at most). Ellis emphasizes "congestion", which i take to imply that the pain reflects failure to release the eleveated local blood pressure resulting from failure to relieve the engorgement of the genitals that is crucial to erection, i.e., a condition related to the "pain and tenderness" of priapism. (It may be informative to consult side-effects information of Viagra and its competitors, some of which are effective for 3 days and advise medical care for erections lasting over 4 hours.) --Jerzy(t) 21:28, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)

Further, the term ejaculate, like the earlier "release semen" (that a well-intentioned editor used to replace simply "release"), misleadingly suggests that fluid pressure of seminal fluid is at issue; i think research will show that there is no significant seminal pressure except that imposed in pulses by the prostate during ejaculation. The real issue is indeed plain "release", or rather release of either sympathetic or parasympathetic (never could remember which is which) nervous-system excitation, which in turn entails destimulation of sphincter-like structures that sustain the engorgement (and that ED-medications work by affecting). --Jerzy(t) 21:28, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)

OK, i scanned the article; probably all i need to have said is "the dab should be brought in line with the article". --Jerzy(t) 21:33, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)

Medical term

Something I've long wondered: is there a more technical, medical name that answers to the colloquial and maybe even vulgar "blue balls"? Judging by the external links, it doesn't seem that there is. --Iustinus 21:25, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

someone has suggested moving the page to prostatic congestion. You can discuss the move on Wikipedia:requested moves. delldot | talk 05:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Moved. —Nightstallion (?) 11:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

But women don't have a prostate. What is the equivalent term for us?--Sonjaaa 05:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I moved it back. Prostatic congestion (Prostatosis) is not the same as this condition, it is just one symptom of blue balls. Case in point: There are other causes for prostatic congestion, such as cancer, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, birth defects, smoking, sitting for extended periods, prostatitis, cysts, and age-realted enlargement of the prostate. [. Davodd 08:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The most general term I've seen, which applies to either gender, is pelvic congestion, so I added a sentence about it and created a redirect page from that term. We could also work it the other way around by making the article more general, renaming it "pelvic congestion," and making "blue balls" redirect to it. I have no strong feelings about either option--Officiallyover 10:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I like "pelvic congestion" more as the actual article name with "blue balls" going here as it covers both genders better. That would require some article work than a simple name change though to generalize it a bit more. I think it would come across as more professional though compared to documenting a slang term, albeit widely used. -- Northgrove 12:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Factual edits I just made

I changed the word "disrupted" because it sounded like it meant something abnormal was happening. I changed the language about lymphatic fluid because I can't regard lymph as flowing to the end tissues. There could be increased production or pooling of lymph at the tissues due to a greater perfusion pressure, so that's what I described. Finally, cold water does not stimulate blood flow "throughout the body," and it does not sound like it would stimulate blood flow to the scrotum. Cold generally decreases blood flow to the skin, hence your skin turns paler in the cold and you lose less heat through it. Experiments have shown this decreased blood flow directly. [1] [2] If it worked the other way around, your skin would radiate heat even faster as it got colder. Penis_size#Flaccid_Length says that "one general physiological response to cold is decreased circulation of blood to the appendages. As the size of the penis very much relies on blood supply, this results in a decreased flaccid size." Finally, pseudoephedrine causes constriction of peripheral arterioles too, so if it does treat blue balls, this fits with the idea that cold causes the same constriction. I kept both possible mechanisms of action of the cold shower for now, however, and I wrote this long-winded justification because if I had changed the explanation to merely "decreased blood flow" then one of our references—which looks otherwise very well written—would contradict our article. --Officiallyover 11:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)



This is not a medical term!

The medical tone of this article is preposterous. "Blue balls" is of course a slang term, but there is no corresponding legitimate medical equivalent term because there is no such medical condition. It's just a slang way to say you haven't come in a while. I would delete the bulk of this article but I know someone will just revert it.

Did you even read the fucking article? It clearly defines the medical causes of this condition.
PS: "pelvic congestion" (Unsigned)
I agree that Blue Balls isn't a medical condition, and that it's not equivalent to prostratic, pelvic or vasocongestion. Like the OP said, it's simply the state of straining for relief if you haven't come in a while. Let's not make a disease out of everything, people. Maikel 09:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Blue Balls Excuse

Two things I don't like about the "blue balls excuse" part:

1.) Telling the person who's turning you on that you have blueballs doesn't necessarily mean you are pressuring them to have sex or get you off (though I'm sure that does happen sometimes, unfortunately). Often, it's merely to explain why you are groaning and limping after an intense make-out session. there's nothing shameful about being honest with your partner.

2.) Who says blueballs can only be used to pressure WOMEN into having sex? I'm sure gay men might use blueballs as an excuse to pressure their partners into having sex, especially if their partners can sympathize with the condition. that doesn't make coersion right, but I'm sure it's not limited to just guys tricking girls

AFAIK, one of the issues is historically at least it wasn't something that women (or girls more likely) knew much about or could find out much about. There is this perception at least that girls/women were led to believe that blue balls was something that could only be 'cured' by sex when in fact it will go away by itself and masturbation would work just as well. On the other hand, we can expect most gay guys would be less likely to be taken in by these claims. And as I've stated, the perception is this is primarily an excused used by teens, not e.g. by 30 year olds. And even today (and especially in the yesteryears) it's probably fair to say that many gay teens are still struggling with their sexuality and so are less likely to be having sex with guys or at least less likely to be dating guys. Of course, I'm sure blue balls can and has been attempted on men as well I'm just pointing out the fact the current gay population is only by most estimates 20% at most and the fact that it seems most likely to be a less useful excuse on other gays and the fact as I've said it's more likely to be something used by younger people all adds up to mean it probably was and is significantly less commonly used by gay men/boys. Of course, we should still be neutral and talk about partners rather then women. P.S. I am a guy. And also quite tired so forgive me for rambling. P.P.S. I forgot to mention that gay men tend to be more promiscious or less restrictive with sex also means there is probably less need for the excuse Nil Einne 23:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no move. -- tariqabjotu 14:15, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Blue balls → Vasocongestion — Simply because Vasocongestion is a more...medical term Deenoe 02:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

  • Support per nom. --Deenoe 02:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, though I'd prefer separating the articles, as I think "blue balls" is used more informally. I doubt that even 50% of the time that "blue balls" is used, there's actually vascocongestion. Croctotheface 03:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Changing my vote to oppose the move and instead have the vasocongestion article focus on the medical aspects and leaving the blue balls article to concentrate on the popular usage. The current version of the article suggests that blue balls and vasocongestion are the same, which does not seem to be accurate. Croctotheface 08:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the logic behind this move is flawed. Vasocongestion includes such things as red eyes from hay fever. It makes no sense, especially since "blue balls" is the more common and accurate term. It seems the most likely reason for the move is that some poeple are uncomfortable or offended by the article's name. Wikipedia is not censored WP:NOT. - Davodd 06:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Opppose - use common names. I don't know whether "Vasocongestion" is more broad than "blue balls", but if it is it shouldn't simply be a redirect here. Thryduulf 07:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. As has already been pointed out, vascocongestation is not blue balls. Accusation of censorship is however ridiculous. Loom91 07:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even if a proper medical term is proposed I still support Blue balls because it is vastly more common than whatever the medical term is. Vicarious 07:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. --Serge 00:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I know what blue balls is, I don't know what vasocongestation is. Furthermore, far more people are going to look for 'blue balls' than vasocongestation. ManicParroT 20:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Well, okay then, why not use Pelvic Congestion, which is (now I found) the clinically accurate word. As of yesterday, Vasocongestion was redirecting here, which was not right. But I strongly believe we should use Pelvic congestion, not Blue Balls. --Deenoe 10:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
    • And by the way, I'm not trying to censor. But Blue balls isnt a medical term. --Deenoe 20:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
      • We are a general-purpose encyclopaedia, not a medical encyclopaedia. Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), articles should be at the most common unambiguous name. There are execptions to this, but none apply to this case as there are no specific guidelines for medicine-related articles and there are no issues with any of national varieties of english, abbreviations, diacritics or technical limitations. Thryduulf 22:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
      • The words "cunt" and "fuck" aren't medical terms (i.e. vagina and sexual intercourse), either - but both slang words words are common, storied, and distinct enough to warrant encyclopedic articles. - Davodd 00:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

this page has a problem, i can`t edit all of it

there are some informations noone wants to know, fix it if you can, now (5) minutes later they just disappeared, i`m fearful of a new sort of wiki vandalism, better check that, sometimes the site has some info on someones penis on it, and no, i´m not on drugs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.47.191.232 (talk • contribs)

The history shows that this page has been vandalised a few times today, all of which was reverted very quickly
  • vandalised 01:32 reverted 01:33
  • vandalised 06:30 reverted 06:31
  • vandalised 18:04-18:12
  • vandalised 18:25-18:26 both vandals reverted 18:26
However, there were no edits to the article at all around the time you posted here (21:08 and 21:12). The most probable cause is that you saw a cached version of the page that contained vandalism, and after you clicked back from thsi talk page to the article your cache updated to the version where the vandalism had already been removed. Thryduulf 22:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that this is a terrible page and there should be serious consideration for its removal. The "source" from an MD that was sites is a TERRIBLE study. This is an isolated case with large study conducted. It is speculation of one person based on no facts and should NOT be considered a credible source.

Never Had Blue Balls

I have never had anything close to this condition, sounds like poor circulation. What percentage of the male population gets this condition? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.110.221.182 (talk) 07:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

At the risk of venturing into original research, have you been in the situation that would produce this condition? My experience is that it takes most of 24 hours of fairly constant stimulation to produce it in me, which hasn't happened all that often (thankfully). I'm sure it varies from man to man, so maybe you just take longer than most. In this liberated age, I'd guess it would be rare (but obviously not unknown) for men to be in a situation where they developed this condition... hence comments such as yours and others who don't believe it exists. My suspicion is that most men could suffer from it given the right circumstances.
But there's little information I've seen about it, and a lot of misinformation. See http://alderspace.pbwiki.com/blue%20balls for one (other) attempt at providing some accurate info. Andrewa 08:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Most definitely happens, take an uninterested anonymous user's word for it. Most definitely sucks too.


More Medical Jargon

I check the citation from Pediatrics. There was a follow up letter to the editor where two other names were provided. Here's the relevant sentence:

'The condition described, what the urologists often term "epididymal hypertension," and some have labeled "deadly sperm buildup" or "DSB," has many other manifestations of which physicians and their caretakers ought to be aware.' (PEDIATRICS Vol. 108 No. 5 November 2001, pp. 1233-1234)

If letters to the editor are permissible sources for Wikipedia, then both terms should be added to the article. Incidentally, the response from Weinzimer and Thornton is worth reading :)

New requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Blue balls → Pelvic congestion — Unlike the last move request, the primary justification for this one is not that pelvic congestion is a "more medical term". Wikipedia has articles for plenty of colloquialisms—though it's true that when dealing with medical issues, the terminology used by health professionals is generally preferable to slang. Indeed, slang is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(medicine-related_articles)#Naming_conventions:

"The article title should be the scientific or recognised medical name rather than the lay term or a historical eponym that has been superseded. These alternative names may be specified in the lead. Create redirects to your article to help those searching with alternative names. For example, [[heart attack]] redirects to myocardial infarction."

Since there does seem to be strong precedent for using the less-common medical term instead of the more-common slang one (hell, "heart attack" is much less slangy than "blue balls", yet it's redirected to Myocardial infarction!), that is the secondary justification for this move.

However, the primary justification is simply this: the article discusses both male and female congestion, but obviously females cannot have "blue balls". Having a section called "Blue balls#In women" is both misleading and inaccurate—plus it just sounds ridiculous. Yet the article isn't long enough to merit a split into separate pages for male and female congestion (and having another article called "pink ovaries" or something obviously wouldn't help with the secondary problem!), so the only really neutral and accurate way of presenting this information would seem to be replacing the male-specific term with a gender-neutral one. That, plus the strong precedent for cases like [[heart attack]] (redirected to myocardial infarction) and runny nose (redirected to rhinorrhea), seems sufficient to me to justify a page-move, despite how common the phrase "blue balls" is (in the United States, at least).

By the way, it should be noted that the main reason past move requests have been rejected has simply been because they were inaccurate: blue balls is not vasocongestion, nor is it prostatic congestion. Also note that this article move is not being proposed because "blue balls" is synonymous with "pelvic congestion": a medical synonym for blue balls would probably look more like "acute testicular congestion" or "male pelvic congestion". Rather, the move is being proposed because "pelvic congestion" more accurately describes the article's contents, which deal with both male and female congestion. -Silence 21:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

  • Support per nom. The article discusses both male and female congestion, so "blue balls" is an (amusing) misnomer. Moreover, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (medicine-related articles) is quite clear in favoring medical terminology over colloquialisms, even when the colloquialism is more common (e.g., [[heart attack]]). -Silence 21:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support as the title is misrepresentative of the article's scope, although the section on women is rather small. Someone may be able to write an article exclusively on the usage of the term "blue balls", but that is not the case yet. Pelvic congestion seems to be used more often for women, with the pelvic congestion syndrome, but the term itself is gender neutral enough. –Pomte 03:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed from blue balls to pelvic congestion as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 21:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose - The move is unneeded and inaccurate. It is trying to solve a problem that does not exist by moving a generally known term to an obscure and inaccurate word. See: Wikipedia: Wikipedia is not censored. This is an article about a slang term - like the slang word fuck, which is not merged with sexual intercourse or the slang word "cunt", which is not merged into either of the words vagina or vulva. - Davodd 21:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Somebody appears to have added a 6-word piece of vandalism to the first para of the article "Cause" ("...or a date with Ellen Truxaw"). While it's quite amusing, it's not in the Wiki spirit... As a rank newbie, I haven't done any editing, but have left that to my more experienced colleagues. I would be interested to learn how to draw attention to any apparent vandalism one spots while browsing. For example, will this contribution automatically be brought to the attention of anybody, or is there another mechanism I should use to ensure it doesn't lay dormant until somebody stumbles across it?

BTW, as a Brit I would remark that the expression "blue balls" is not particularly common in the UK, and in my experience is used more by Americans. But I'm unable to suggest a UK-English equivalent.

Geoffreywatson 07:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)