Talk:Micropenis/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Scientifically inaccurate

http://www.nature.com/ijir/journal/v17/n3/abs/3901292a.html

"A total of 15 men (ages 17–30 y) defined having a micropenis with a stretched penile length of less than 9.3 cm were constituted the study group."

That's 3.7 inches. People like a laughing stock, well if that's the case that means whatever is different about them is open to ridicule as well.

As it stands the mean is being taken as the top end of the range.

In the study the mean is:

"stretched penile length was 6.8plusminus1.6 cm (range 3.6–7.8 cm)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.137.58 (talk • contribs) 22:26, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

external links

how about adding these sites in the external links? micropenis follow up a follow up of micropenis people treated with testosterone

micropenis a site with images, videos and lots of other info about the condition

I would edit the article and add them as sources but it seems to be locked :/

Picture

I just uploaded a pic of my micropenis. Perhaps it could be useful! Pic called Flacid_Micropenis.jpg. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Misoel (talk • contribs) 07:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

STFU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.116.9.121 (talk) 18:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't listen to 79.116.9.121. He will probably soon be banned. Twipley (talk) 03:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Your contribution is appreciated and I'd like to add, for a guy with a micro penis, you have a lot of balls. Seriously, respect man. I hope this does not prevent you from living a fulfilled life. I'm sure it won't. --Jan-da-man (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Micropenis Discussion Forums

Perhaps you should put a Micropenis Discussion Forum in Relative Links? Some people do use this website on checking for conditions they might have.--4.233.29.253 (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)Anonymous for Good Reason

Couldn't you use google for that? TheLou75 (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Defining a micropenis

I thought this was a good indicator of a micropenis:

Micropenis is defined as a normally structured penis that is below the normal size range for an infant. Normally, the length of a newborn boy's penis is between 1.4 to 3.2 centimeters with a circumference of 0.9 to 1.3 centimeters. This measurement is taken by carefully stretching the penis and measuring from the tip of the penis to the base of the penis. A penis length of less than 1.9 centimeters is usually considered micropenis.

Anyone care to add this? Bipartisan185 (talk) 16:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

if you can give a reference, add it yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jan-da-man (talk • contribs) 21:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Blacks Can't get Micropenis?

The first time I heard of a micropenis was on the Howard Stern tv show and he had like 45 guys with micro penises and they were all white guys. I also saw a white guy on Dr 90210 with a micro penis and another white guy with PBS once. In fact, all the pictures of micropenises you find on the internet are of white guys. Does this mean that black people can't get micro penis so its kind of like the white man's sickle cell disease? Just curious. CadillacJarome (talk) 02:15, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I have seen a middle eastern man with one. I'm not sure if they are more closely related to blacks or Caucasians, but I thought I mention it. Btw, I removed the comment of the fool who can't distuinguish between questions about biology and racist rants. 'White man's sickle cell disease' as in like sickle cell patients cant get malaria, guys with micro penises don't catch STIs? --Jan-da-man (talk) 21:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

From my experience, there are some who are small/short. But they are not at a micropenis level. 67.78.233.99 (talk) 07:29, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, Americans and their goofy racial theories. 67.78.233.99, what exactly is your "experience"? Are you a glory hole attendant? OP, Stern has a overwhelming white audience so that would account for much of the disparity, although I think that contest did include a few black guys. I know that he did have a contest back in the 90s that included a couple black guys.

There are black men who have micropenises. You can find pictures of men of every race with micropenises in the internet. I found photos of black men with micropenises in the worldwide web.--95.113.215.161 (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Why?

Why is it we have an article for this and not flat-chested-ness? Shadoman (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

See micromastia and then stick to the game character articles. 76.117.81.78 (talk) 01:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

why is there picture's of king on this page? 74.78.112.129 (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Photo of "Man" with micropenis, hypogonadism, and gynecomastia

Is there any proof that this is actually a man? To me it looks like a woman with a large clitoris. Note the apparent vagina and areola that resembles a female. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.124.128 (talk) 06:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

His facial features certainly seem masculine, what of them you can see that is, and I think its a bit insulting for you to say things like that. It seems to me that you are trying a "nice" sounding insult. If I have misjudged your intentions, I am sorry. I would just be careful, we all want to be respectful on here. I mean, can there be anything worse, for a man, than this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homicide Hank (talk • contribs) 20:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

How do I add a picture of a micropenis?

Penis Enlargement Surgery

In 2002, an FDA approved method was developed by urologists in Beverly Hills, California using a subcutaneous, silicone implant to permanently increase both girth and length in the penis simultaneously. The surgeon inserts a semi-soft silicone implant between the penile skin and the corpora. The implant is soft and covered with mesh on one end to fix and hold it beneath the glans. The implant constantly stretches the penis, promoting gains in length, while simultaneously (and immediately) increasing the girth. With a silicone implant, patients generally see gains of 1 ½ to 2 ½ inches in both length and girth. The procedure takes less than an hour to perform in an outpatient surgery center. The patient is able to return to light activity like walking immediately, and return to work in 3-5 days following surgery; full recovery time totals six to eight weeks.

The subcutaneous silicone implant also increases length over time. Once inside the penis, the weight of the implant gently pulls down on the penis, stretching the suspensory ligament, and promoting permanent length gains of up to two inches without the use of vacuums or devices.

Another major advantage of this method is the option for total removal, which procedures like Alloderm and Fat fillers do not allow. The silicone implant is also non-absorbable, unlike alloderm and fat fillers.

This technique was presented for the first time at the American Urology Association Western Division and also the American Society of Sexual Medicine by Dr. James Elist of southern California. SFM2013 (talk) 21:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

NPOV Violation/Lack of citations

Presented without comment from the article:

"In extreme cases of micropenis, there is barely any shaft, and the glans appears to sit almost on the pubic skin. From the 1960s until the late 1970s, it was common for sex reassignment and surgery to be recommended. This was especially likely if evidence suggested that response to additional testosterone and pubertal testosterone would be poor. If parents accepted, the boy would be reassigned and renamed as a girl, and surgery performed to remove the testes and construct an artificial vagina. This was based on three now questioned assumptions:

gender identity and sex differences were solely a matter of social learning rather than biology.

a male with a penis too small to put into a vagina could not find a satisfactory social and sexual place in society.

a functionally acceptable vagina could be constructed surgically."

Discuss. 98.154.119.91 (talk) 04:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

New article picture

I don't think that the current photo is a good photo for this article, for a few reasons. Current photo here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropenis#/media/File:Flacid_Micropenis.jpg

1) The man in the photo is flaccid. Micropenis is defined in terms of erection length, or stretched flaccid length. It is possible to have a small flaccid penis, and not have a micropenis. For example, a man could have a 1.5" flaccid penis which grows to 5 inches. This is not a micropenis. Another man could have 2" flaccid, but only grows to 2.5" erect. This is a micropenis. But if you look at their flaccid sizes, we would include a picture of the man without a micropenis in the article about micropenis.

2) The person is obese, and the penis appears buried. This can obscure an otherwise normal sized penis to look very small.

3) The posture of the person in the photo makes the penis appear smaller than it is(the person is sitting - any man can measure his penis when sitting vs when standing up and see that when sitting, it is shorter).

I recommend choosing a picture which has a man with micropenis standing with an erection, taken from the side or from the top down. I looked through the relevantly tagged photos, and only found one which really matched the criteria, found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Micropenis#/media/File:7_cm_micropenis.JPG

74.71.23.192 (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2015

I would like to add another name to Micropenis. It is usually refered to Permapenis. It's refering to the coldness and the shrinking of the penis when it's cold outside (Permafrost). For example changing from Micropenis is an unusually small penis. to adding Micropenis, even known as Permapenis, is an unusually small penis.

Kophun (talk) 01:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. This sounds like UrbanDictionary nonsense.... -- ferret (talk) 02:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2016

I also have an edit request. Under the Causes subheading, final line, bullet point #3: "delayed puberty with every reason to expect good future growth"

In my opinion, the word "good" does not sound impartial in this sentence, and subtly reinforces the standard that more growth (a larger penis) is "good" and therefore more valuable than a smaller ("bad") penis. I would like to request that the word "good" here be replaced with -any- more neutral word, such as normal (though people find bias in this word as well), typical, regular, conventional, average, natural, standard, ordinary, or any similar word that doesn't imply value. This is a sensitive subject, and people could potentially find offense in most of these words, so I extend the offer to leave it to your discretion which word to use. However...

To avoid ambiguity, I will officially request that the last line under Causes be changed to: 3. delayed puberty with every reason to expect standard future growth

Thank you very much for considering my request, and I sincerely apologize if this is not the right way to go about it!

99.20.90.114 (talk) 06:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2019

Picture I just uploaded a picture of my micropenis. The picture I have uploaded and am requesting to be added is called Micropenis 1 inch hard.jpg

and while the current picture Flacid Micropenis.jpg does a decent job, I believe mine would be more accurate for the page. Mine is a full body picture showing the micropenis fully erect. Micro1522 (talk) 20:52, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading, but your picture is rather blurry and I don't feel it demonstrates as much as the close up pictures in this article – Þjarkur (talk) 21:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Can you at least add it as a secondary picture to show an angle from further away as well?

Micro1522 (talk) 22:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

The image is too blurry and does not demonstrate much. I'm also somewhat concerned that the individual in the photo is not you, as if it were a new iPhone selfie it would not be this blurry. – Þjarkur (talk) 22:19, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

It's not a new iphone, as you can tell it's a very old model iphone. If I can prove to you certain things, can you consider using the picture on here?

Micro1522 (talk) 22:21, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Please stop making these requests and uploading this image on multiple projects. This is a very likely case of cyberbullying as the folks over at Commons explained to you. – Þjarkur (talk) 22:36, 18 May 2019 (UTC)