Is this true of all penises, or just human penises? If human only, should this be a subcategory under human anatomy?
This architecture is common to the penises of a great many animals, and almost universal among mammals, with the exception of the prepuce (or foreskin). In addition, however, some animals have additional features such as the os penis in dogs (penile bone) and such. The precise description above is only human.
the correct plural is "penes". (maybe this should be noted on the page itself).
The penis in "rest mode" is more commonly known as (slang) "dick", cock, "Percy", "Mr Robin" and "Willie", and when erect he is often referred to as : "shaft", "pole", and "hard-on". (No doubt this list will be extended in days to come).
I removed the slang terms for the penis because I don't think it adds anything to the article. We could turn the article into a massive list of slang, but what would it achieve? --Robert Merkel
I agree that this should be kept out of the article. I have Moved the slang terms to a subpage. Or perhaps there should be a Sexual slang page to encompass this whole partially taboo subject. -- The Anome
Do we really need to have slang for 'penis' in Wikipedia at all?
- Yes
I mean, how often have you been looking through Encarta or Britannica and found a page where THEIR editors tried to remember all the names for the male copulatory organ??!!! - Mark Ryan
- Irrelevant. This is an *INTERNET* Encyclopedia, and the Internet is about sex. In fact this article would be a reasonable central organizing metaphor for the entire project, as we are virtually sure that every contributor will eventually contribute to this file.
Y'know, while I'm probably among the more squeamish readers of the pedia, it's kinda nice to have a list /somewhere/, and an encyclopedia is probably the best place for somebody who just wants to know without having to wade through a lot of other crudeness. A person learning english, for example, is probably wise to be informed enough not to be left out in the cold. I was around 20 before I realized the other meaning of "Johnson"...
Wikipedia isn't a usage guide, it's an encyclopedia; please see talk:vagina. I think we were basically just trolled. --LMS
I have a question about penile piercings -- wouldn't they make intercourse more difficult, or painful for the other partner? We should mention something about this. -- SJK
Might I remind you all that, very likely, all of our ravings will be readable by our mothers, wives, husbands, children, and future employers? Food for thought. --LMS
I cannot believe that 'Penis' is one of the most frequently edited articles in Wikipedia! Can't you all find another article you can put your creative genius into? Anyway, I don't think the 'penis' article should go into too much detail about piercings, slang terms, contraception etc. Do we really need to give descriptions of whether piercings are comfortable during sex??!!! - Mark Ryan
- I was only asking because the article already discusses piercings, and if its going to discuss them, it better answer my question about them also. Besides, if its true, and since a lot of people will be interested (slightly under 50% of the world's population possess one, and most of the remainder, well, they, you know :), why not include it? I think the slang terms thing is going a bit overboard (though maybe it could belong in an article like profanity). But, in general, we shouldn't exclude useful knowledge simply on the grounds of the prudish of some. -- SJK
- I agree 100% with the latter statement. But I would also say that we shouldn't go out of our way to include knowledge just because some people get a kick out of demonstrating that they are not prudes. That's a sign of immaturity, I think, more than it is of a lack of prudishness. --LMS
- I find it preposterous that 50% of the world's population posesses a pierced penis. Where did you get that information, SJK? Ed Poor
- What I meant was that a bit under 50% of the world's population possesses a penis. -- SJK
Why was the penis bird link removed??
Could somebody provide a citation for the claim re penis length and race? --Robert Merkel
It's my understanding that subincision, as a practice, does NOT bifurcate the glans penis. In its milder form, I believe it just slits the foreskin on the underside so that it hangs partially open; the Australian Aborigine practice, if I recall correctly, is to slit open not only the foreskin but the entire urethra to the base of the penis, but without bifurcating the head. --John Knouse
removed from article pending citation:
- Some early studies have also suggested that African-American males have statistically larger penises than their Caucasian counterparts.
I've heard that this is just an urban legond and is not supported by anything other than anecdote. Please provide a reference or simply rephrase with what I just said. -mav
- Fanon covers this subject in some detail in "Black Skin, White Masks", and tends to agree with Mav (which he backs up with statistics). Interesting historical origin for the belief, though... worth reading! Graft
The only reliable penis-size studies commonly quoted in the literature are the Kinsey study, the UCSF study, and an Italian study, none of which even attempted to correlate with race. There is an ongoing government study in India as well (commissioned with the goal of helping reduce the high condom failure rate there), but it too is unlikely to answer the question. There have been many other studies and claims of varying rigor--for example, the LifeStyles condoms study, but they are generally flawed by selection bias. --LDC
- It's probably an urban legend, but I remember reading that the only race with a statistically unusually-sized penis is Native Americans, who tend to be large -- though I think there is (supposedly) one tribe in Africa that is off the scale on the large side. Just wanted to throw that out there Tokerboy
- More trivia that is probably untrue but I definitely read somewhere in printed form -- the largest minority in any society is always rumored to have large penises Tokerboy
- While totally unscientific, that would certainly explain why Norvegians recirculate all the Richard Pryor jokes about penis size, except with Finns as the "possessors" of the endowment. There are plenty of Finns working norwegian oil platforms and in northern fish factories. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick
I'd like to change this sentence:
- Erection is required for sexual intercourse and other sexual activities.
-- because erection is not essential to intercourse. However it's certainly helpful -- Tarquin 23:28 Jan 11, 2003 (UTC)
Are you seriouly planning to add penis nicknames in every languges ? The page will grow to several Gigabytes.
By the way mine is nicknamed Charles-Edouard :)
Ericd 03:57 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
It is a bit ridiculous. Do we need ANY slang terms for cock errr penis? Zocky 04:10 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
No we don't. I say it should be removed.
Hm. Having the English slang terms was dubious but the slang terms in other languages is not at all needed. Add those to the penis article in the correct languages. This is the English Wikipedia. --mav 07:23 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
mav, why don't we just get rid of all the slang terms. It's so silly
- Agreed. we don't need them. -- Tarquin 11:22 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
I took the liberty of removing the slang terms. I think there's just too much controversy over it. Perhaps a separate page could be created, as mentioned above by The Anome.
Created the Sexual slang page. I think it is nicer this way. And I also think that perhaps the piercings section should go somewhere else...maybe on Genital piercing, which currently just redirects to Body piercing.
The following could be greatly improved by slang:
- For example a man with a relatively small flaccid penis may have an above average length penis when fully aroused. The opposite is also true.
if we added something about showers and growers. Ortolan88
Over in talk:circumcision there was a thrilling debate over whether the foreskin is in fact part of the penis. I move this talk here in order that experts in the field may examine the issue and provide relevant information. Martin
What the hell is the foreskin if not part of the penis?
- The problem (and this isn't your fault) is that most people have accepted a social bias which misunderstands basic human biology. Non-biologists are usually confused about the human body, and imagine that parts that are near each other are really the same. This is very common, and I can't blame anyone for thinking this way. But its wrong. Biologically, one can trace the development of both the penis and the foreskin surrounding the penis from separate embryological tissues. Even at birth the penis and foreskin are separate; you can even grab the foreskin and pull it far back, totally exposing the penis. You can remove some, or all, of the foreskin, without touching any of the penis itself. RK
- You're being disingenuous, not to mention mildly insulting (I have an extensive medical and biological background, by the way). Many body parts involve sub-parts of different embryological origin, and that doesn't make them separate body parts. The prepuce is part of the penis, period, and it's a part that has an integral function as such. You may as well say that the nervous system of the penis is not part of the penis because of its embryological origins. Guess what? The penis wouldn't function without that nervous system. jaknouse 02:18 Apr 24, 2003 (UTC)
- I'm no doctor or biologist, but I have a foreskin and it's definitely part of my penis. Theanthrope 02:41 Apr 24, 2003 (UTC)
We need a picture....
Your prayers have been answered! :-P All the images come from http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs/altsex/penis.html and I searched around the site trying to find a copyright notice but to no avail and due to the nature of the page (a faq for alt.sex) I think they should be OK. --BL
- You should probably email Elf Sternberg <[email protected]> to ask for permission. See wikipedia:boilerplate request for permission. Martin 13:05 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- The address is dead --BL
---
Thanks everybody for this excellent article. I've learned a lot!
It's strange that photos of Penis are allowed but photos of Vulva have been removed, though both originate from the same site (alt.sex FAQ, http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs/altsex/) -- 210.214.131.161 18:41, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)