Talk:Ejaculation

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ejaculation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 14 days

Sexology and sexuality High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Mid‑importance

	Biology portal Ejaculation is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

Pictures and video: If you are editing this page to contest the picture and video, then please check the archives for past discussions first. There is a "recurrent topics" lists that you can consult. See also WP:NOTCENSORED and Wikipedia:Options to not see an image.

Recurrent topics (links to archived discussions):

This is not a complete list and may contain errors.

Picture
Video
Both
Suggested replacements
- Medical diagram?
- Picture (moving the image down)
- Possible image? (cropped version of photo)
- Archive 1
- Combine Image with Video
- Can't a tasteful animation be done instead?
- Obligatory section break
- For paedophiles by paedophiles
Replacement by an inline link (that solution was already used for a time)
Suggested additions
- Suggestion about pre-cum
Other
- Replacing the image Ejaculation_sample.jpg with another (how the current image replaced an Older image that is now deleted)
- Image:Ejac.jpg (discussion of a now deleted image)
- Talk page template (what the message at the top of this page should say)

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Proposed deletion of the ejaculation video and photos

The video and photos are indecent for use in a general encylcopedia. If you see the number of deletion requests that the user has generated: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Richiex you can see that he is a pervert trying to get his self made porn onto the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aussiewikilady (talk • contribs) 19:11, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand how providing a video depicting the subject of the article could, possibly, be misconstrued as perversion.

What makes the video perverse? It shows a human adult male ejaculating. The article describes ejaculation.

No part of the video is unnecessary, please be objective. A Muddy Taco (talk) 14:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The video is staying. The photos are staying. This is a long established status quo.Jasphetamine (talk) 09:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sadist exhibitionists derive pleasure from exposing people to content which makes them uncomfortable.

It's disappointing that this is a controversy. I can accept that the material is needed on the site, but it limits the usefulness of the article when the mouseover for Ejaculation is obscene. Mkallies (talk) 15:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The video and images are not suitable for minors doing research on sexuality.
they could be construed in the public domain as pornographic.
These images and videos do not add to the understanding of the subject matter.
If some sort of imagery is deemed appropriate I would suggest a medically oriented computer animation would be better suited to the intent of wikipedia

172.58.187.80 (talk) 00:46, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CENSOR. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jasphetamine, Please don't say heavy-handed nonsense like this:

"The video is staying. The photos are staying. This is a long established status quo"

A long established status quo can be set aside; NOTHING in an encyclopedia exists by some authority of tradition. And Wikipedians making mistakes is similarly a "long established status quo".𝓦𝓲𝓴𝓲𝓹𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓘𝓼𝓝𝓸𝓽𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭-𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓑𝔂𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓞𝓷𝓵𝔂 (talk) 04:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge receipt of your message. Jasphetamine (talk) 21:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. (Personal attack removed) NeuroSpecter (talk) 12:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

where does the sperm come from

The urethra, the tube that urine and semen flow through, runs along the underside of them, in the spongy tissue of the corpus spongiosum.

https://www.webmd.com/erectile-dysfunction/how-an-erection-occurs

in the second stage, ejaculation proper, the semen is moved through the urethra and expelled from the body. https://www.britannica.com/science/ejaculation

I think it is important to add this information at the beginning in the description of the article because the English-language Wikipedia is a measure of the reliability of information for the whole world

if this information is not in the English wiki, then people around the world will consider that their national wikipedia contains unreliable information. TimurMamleev (talk) 03:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No citations provided in the first few paragraphs

The opening paragraphs of the article contain no citations. 2601:19B:67F:D200:B943:7493:82C7:FD98 (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CITELEAD. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to this article's recently rewritten lead section, semen is stored in the testicles before ejaculation. Isn't it stored in the ejaculatory ducts? Jarble (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarble: ~~Semen is stored in the seminal vesicle.~~ Spermatozoa are fabricated by the testicles, but not stored therein. Normally speaking, the production of spermatozoa never stops. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/100318-men-sperm-1500-stem-cells-second-male-birth-control tgeorgescu (talk) 21:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More information at https://medlineplus.gov/ency/anatomyvideos/000121.htm So, spermatozoa are first stored in the epididymis and then in the ampula. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tgeorgescu: But according to the article's lead section, semen is discharged from the testicles during ejaculation. Is the lead section incorrect? Jarble (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarble: Testicles produce sperm cells, those cells got later mixed in other parts of the body with certain fluids. So, the testicles produce sperm cells, not semen. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quality of video

With regard to the video, I see in the discussion below charges of excessive prudishness or of overzealous defence of explicitness. I think that an important consideration has been missed in the (largely ad hominem-style) back-and-forth on the topic. I would like to hear a case made against replacing the video with another in the Wikimedia Commons catalogue, namely 'Ejaculation educational ani short reboot.webm'. This video (which features in some of the corresponding articles in other languages) not only matches the photo in the article and would therefore make the article more polished through introducing a greater degree of consistency but is also more professional-looking. Granted, Wikipedia is not intended to be a professional resource, but it should nonetheless aspire to a decent standard of quality. I am neutral on the topic of explicitness, but I object to the current video on the grounds of quality. At the very least, even if a case can be made against using 'Ejaculation educational ani short reboot.webm', I cannot think of any way in which the current video could be regarded as better in quality than any other alternative. Furthermore, the line that 'Ejaculation educational ani short reboot.webm' is not representative because men generally do not ejaculate hands-free misses the point too, as the inclusion of a video in the article is intended to show ejaculation itself (which includes the spasming of the penis) rather than means of achieving ejaculation. On this point as well 'Ejaculation educational ani short reboot.webm' is superior. Flumpswithmumps (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection here. I do think that a good-quality video is genuinely helpful on this topic, and have no objection over switching it. For that matter, I see no reason why the video even needs to be of a human ejaculating. I have not checked the Commons but would not be surprised if there are good-quality videos of stallions, rams, bucks, etc. that would serve the purpose just as well. It may be slightly better to have a photo and video that match, however. Jtrevor99 (talk) 17:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed video "Ejaculation educational ani short reboot.webm" is more professional and consistent with the opening image of the article. Additionally, it shows the contraction of the Bulbospongiosus muscle which the current video does not. I disagree that the video should be replaced with a video of another mammalian species.

The article is almost entirely about human ejaculation, so it would be not relevant to include a video of some other species. There would also be a moral objection considering that any recorded video of another mammalian ejaculation would be coerced. Lastly, I would imagine that this article serves curious adolescents who wish to supplement any formal sexual education or be affirmed that the process is normal and healthy. Falling2pieces89 (talk) 07:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That any mammalian ejaculation would be coerced is a fallacy: one need only watch nature videos or videos of natural occurrences from zoos. That said, I have no qualms using a high-quality video of a human, provided it maintains its educational intention. Feel free to replace the video. Jtrevor99 (talk) 01:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated. Hopefully this can be put to rest. Jtrevor99 (talk) 05:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Under-represention of women

This is trolling. Feel free to contact me for background on this LTA. Generalrelative (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Transgender folks are underrepresented in media on articles related to human sexuality. If the current video had a trans woman instead, this would improve representation and also challenge the misconception that women can't ejaculate. Also, should the gendered language in this article be changed? At the very least I would think "men" should be replaced with "males". 24.126.12.87 (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a biological function of the male reproductive system. It has nothing to do with gender. Female ejaculation already has a full article and is linked to prominently here. There is no underrepresentation, and confusing sex and gender on a biological function would lead to just that: confusion. Jtrevor99 (talk) 04:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women can ejaculate male semen (this is NOT female ejaculation). @Generalrelative isn't this article a violation of WP:GNL and offensive to you as a trans womxn? I guess @Jtrevor99 thinks "not being confusing" is more important than than challenging cisnormative bigotry (cf. Matt Walsh) and following Wikipedia guidelines. 24.126.12.195 (talk) 12:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the gender claimed by someone is irrelevant here. This is an exclusively male biological function. You need to be EXTREMELY careful casting aspersions about bigotry. Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it's a male biological function in the sense that it's a function of those AMAB. However every top google result on ejaculation avoids gendered language like "men" in place of "male" and "persons AMAB" [1] [2]. Also, please WP:AGF, as I didn't call you a bigot. I know that you, grayfell, tgeorgescu, jasphetamine, et. al. are not bigots given your opposition to editors who think minors who want sex ed outside of porn shouldn't see educational ejaculation videos. 24.126.11.219 (talk) 13:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have said no such thing. And Google results are irrelevant. If you want to gain traction here, you'll need to find WP:MEDRS sources. Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think WP:GNL and the fact that most trans women can ejaculate semen is sufficient for most mentions of "men" in this article to be replaced. 24.126.11.219 (talk) 13:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not oppose replacing all occurrence of "man" or similar with "male" in the article (excepting any direct quotes, of course). Introducing material about non-male gendered people capable of male ejaculation would require WP:MEDRS, and I oppose on the basis only sex is relevant here, not gender. Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do that replacement. 24.126.11.219 (talk) 13:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also please be aware of WP:CANVASSING. Jtrevor99 (talk) 13:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yes I realize that rules like this are important since I may be overstimulating many editors as per WP:AUTIST. 24.126.11.219 (talk) 13:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]