Vasectomy after the operation
Bill
Walked into vasectomy not really knowing how it would affect me.
Doctor said there is no difference between before and after.
Been a month, couple of things bug me. My wife thinks I'm being a
little sensitive to the changes regarding the operation.
I'll start on a positive note:
Benefit -- no blue balls (that crampy feeling in the testicles after
ejaculation). Never the ache of the testicles after making love
anymore.
Detriment -- didn't realise just how much of the sexual drive was
triggered by the testicles being 'full' and cycling through the
full/empty process. Initially after the operation everything worked
great for a week after the first week (felt always full and raring to
go -- we had sex every night for a week it seemed), then the testicles
shut down production and stopped giving that good feeling before and
after sex.
There is some correlation between the testicles getting full and
needing to have sex that is missed after a while. My wife think
there's nothing that's not in my head, but I'm not an unreasonable guy
-- I feel it.
There's a distinct loss of interest in sex -- there isn't that big
payoff at the end like there used to be and no feeling of a need to
release, so it doesn't preoccupy me like it used to -- good for
getting some chores done anyway =)
My wife and I were very sexually active before the operation and it's
not emotional -- nothings changed since Mar. 28th (date of operation).
Anyone have the same results? Does it get better?
(one other disappointment that I didn't mention that doesn't really
bug me is the loss in volume of seminal fluid -- it's about half or a
third of what the volume used to be -- one ounce instead of ounces.
Didn't really expect that)
Steve Law
You will receive responses from several viewpoints, here is mine on
some your observations:
[] Ejaculate volume seems to have much study, that is real measurments
made, there is an assumption that is stays close to the same. I read a
news article many years ago that said volume dropped by half at 5
years post vasectomy, but only that one reference, never another
mention on the Web or any article [yes no cite]. My experience is that
my volume did not seem that different at first and by five years if it
dropped slowly it would be hard to tell.
[] Certainly some men as the pressure fills in the vas and ampulla
(near the prostate) this could trigger more of an urge that would be
diminished by a vasectomy. There is no longer the filling of the
Ampulla nor the pressure in the vas to urge release. The connection
between seminal vesicle and prostate fluid triggered by full ampulla
has not been studied. I noticed a difference in spurt strength of the
ejaculate, but not in overall orgasm release (the two are distinct).
[] After my reversal I noticed an increased in ejaculate pressure
almost immediately and a change in color, less clear more the misty
white.
[] The real risks and changes are rarely related to men, some men find
out by experience.
[] As to mental, there may be some component in that, but less than is
often stated here and by doctors. The mental is an easy way to not
address the physical and sort of blame the patient and not the
procedure.
God's Speed,
Steve L
trifold
> Hey, here's my current story.
I guess I have to say my experience has been entirely different from
yours. (My vasectomy will be 5 years old in August.)
> I'll start on a positive note:
>
> Benefit -- no blue balls (that crampy feeling in the testicles after
> ejaculation). Never the ache of the testicles after making love
> anymore.
The first year after mine, I *did* get a crampy feeling on the right
side after ejac., esp. after long "teasing" or multiple ejacs. in one
session. This was never bad, and it went away after the first year.
Now I get something similar if I go more than two days or so without
ejac. I think both symptoms are prob. due to congestion/irritation in
the epididymus.
>
> Detriment -- didn't realise just how much of the sexual drive was
> triggered by the testicles being 'full' and cycling through the
> full/empty process. Initially after the operation everything worked
> great for a week after the first week (felt always full and raring to
> go -- we had sex every night for a week it seemed), then the testicles
> shut down production and stopped giving that good feeling before and
> after sex.
I haven't experienced any reduction in sex drive nearly 5 years after.
And my balls still move around and pull up the hornier I get. I'm
not sure what you mean by "full" balls, but I don't believe the balls
get less full after vasectomy. While some theorize sperm production
reduces over time after vasectomy due to sperm backpressure affecting
the sperm producing cells in the testicles (and others say this never
happens), I've never read anything suggesting sperm production ever
shuts down altogehter, still less that it would shut down after only
two weeks, which is what you think has happened. In fact, sperm
backpressure after closed ended vasectomy bothers many men, esp. in
the first three months afterward, before the body begins dealing with
the stuff. And in some cases it can cause an ongoing problem. (Which
may be a good reason to go for the open-ended version of vasectomy--or
at least for closed ended version in which the tubes are seals far
back from the testicles. By the way, which version did you have?)
>
> There is some correlation between the testicles getting full and
> needing to have sex that is missed after a while. My wife think
> there's nothing that's not in my head, but I'm not an unreasonable guy
> -- I feel it.
> There's a distinct loss of interest in sex -- there isn't that big
> payoff at the end like there used to be and no feeling of a need to
> release, so it doesn't preoccupy me like it used to -- good for
> getting some chores done anyway =)
Have you checked out the online survey at the website? Most guys say
they are hornier afterwards.
>
> My wife and I were very sexually active before the operation and it's
> not emotional -- nothings changed since Mar. 28th (date of operation).
>
> Anyone have the same results? Does it get better?
>
> (one other disappointment that I didn't mention that doesn't really
> bug me is the loss in volume of seminal fluid -- it's about half or a
> third of what the volume used to be -- one ounce instead of ounces.
> Didn't really expect that)
Again, doctors will tell you this is impossible, since so little of
the ejaculate (maybe 5%) comes from the testicles. And certainly my
experience--and the experience of men answering the survey at the
website--has been different.
trifold
> Bill,
>
> You will receive responses from several viewpoints, here is mine on
> some your observations:
>
> [] Ejaculate volume seems to have much study, that is real measurments
> made, there is an assumption that is stays close to the same. I read a
> news article many years ago that said volume dropped by half at 5
> years post vasectomy, but only that one reference, never another
> mention on the Web or any article [yes no cite]. My experience is that
> my volume did not seem that different at first and by five years if it
> dropped slowly it would be hard to tell.
That's a good point, Steve. A slow drop over 5 years would not only
be hard to notice, but possible due to normal aging. (Especially when
you consider many men get snipped in the mid to late 30s--or even
40s--when ejac. volume begins to decline anyway.)
Giraud
I think vasectomy causes a volly of sensations, both mental and physical,
and although I see it as a positive experience for many reasons, I have
pondered all of the ramifications quite a lot.
You are right in the fact that it *is* a change physically. I am not
saying that the change can necessarily be felt in very many aspects, but
the plumbing sure is different.
My experience, having a closed-ended about 7 months ago, is that I do still
have that full feeling. It does not change sex drive in my case, but the
difference is that after sex the feeling is relatively unchanged, whereas
I *think* before the vas it *maybe* changed a bit.
But the previous paragraph illustrates an important point: after and
perhaps just before a vasectomy, we (and some of us more than others) start
to think about these details a *lot* more than we ever did. There are many
sensations that are mostly subliminal, including a lot of the feelings
during sex, etc. For those of us (sounds like you, and me definitely) who
are fairly introspective about things, we may notice nuances more than
others. Now these nuances may or may not be different than they were
before the vas, but now we cannot go back and test the theory that they are
different, and in fact it may just be that now we are noticing things more.
Maybe we "think too much!"
Don't discount the emotional too easily either. I think it's very possible
to be affected emotionally without being consciously aware of it. I know
that even though I *love* not being fertile, it still makes me think about
sex a little differently. For example, I sometimes toy with how strange it
seems to ejaculate sperm-less stuff. Almost seems "pointless." But notice
that this concept is sometimes used by men who regret vasectomy (i.e. that
sex is "pointless."). We were wired by evolution to intrinsically know
that sex has this procreative purpose, and even though we go to great
lengths (condoms, etc.) to avoid pregnancy to experience the pleasure of
sex itself, somehow the total disconnection of reproduction from sex in
such a profound way (as vasectomy achieves) might potentially have a
strange, if not negative effect on one's psyche.
There is a story on the website by a guy named "Fern" who had this
experience. I find it fascinating although illogical, and yet I believe it
does happen.
All this said, it might be worth reflecting on the whole deal. Nature has
given us sex as an enjoyable thing, and the reasons evolution did this is
that it normally has the effect of furthering the species. Vasectomy makes
it so easy, and maybe this is the problem. The "taboo" is lessened. One
must learn to focus more on the joy of it (isn't there a book?).
Your vasectomy is new. I'd give it some time. Let it "sink in." I think
you'll find that over time, things may get better. If it is physical,
perhaps your body will settle down. If it's emotional, you'll get used to
the idea as time goes by and enjoy it more.
In any case, I wish you the best of luck, as we all have our own story -
this group is great in that it lets us relate ours to others!
Giraud
David
> (near the prostate) this could trigger more of an urge that would be
> diminished by a vasectomy. There is no longer the filling of the
> Ampulla nor the pressure in the vas to urge release.
The above passage seems to imply that the testicles in some way contribute
pressure to the ejaculation, and a vasectomy removes this pressure. As this
is incorrect, I'm sure you are anxious that it's corrected.
Ok - for a good diagram of the male reproductive system visit
http://www.vasectomy-information.com/pictures/diags/orig/mreprosys.jpg
There is a section of anatomical diagrams that help explain terminology in
the "Vasectomy in pictures" section of the website. This is one of them.
As can be clearly seen, the Ampulla is simply the widened end of the vas
deferens tube.
Merk health encyclopaedia definition of ampulla is:-
ampulla (am搆ul損a) (am-pul兞schwa]) [TA] gen. and pl. ampul▍ae [L. "a
jug"] a general term used in anatomical nomenclature to designate a
flasklike dilatation of a tubular structure.
The "ampulla ductus deferens" is described:-
ampulla duc┤us deferen┤is, [TA] the enlarged and tortuous distal end of
the ductus deferens; called also Henle's a. and a. of vas deferens.
A couple of other definitions:-
http://www.prostateservices.com/prostate_anatomy_defined.htm
Ampulla: The terminal ends of of the vas deferens proximal to the prostate
are enlarged and thickened and are called the ampulla of the vas deferens
http://www.besthealth.com/bguide/reftext/html/repr_sys_fin.html
The point at which the tube called Vas deferens (sperm duct) widens.
The above site has a very good description of how the male reproductive
system works.
http://www.campuslife.utoronto.ca/services/sec/minter.html (Toronto
university)
Each SPERMATIC CORD, or VAS DEFERENS is about 45 cm. long and passes from
the groin over the bladder to form a storage place for sperm, the AMPULLA.
For a description of ejaculation:-
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/safework/gender/encyclo/rep03ae
.htm
Ejaculation
Once within the vas deferens, the sperm are transported by the muscular
contractions of ejaculation rather than by the flow of fluid. During
ejaculation, fluids are forcibly expelled from the accessory sex glands
giving rise to the seminal plasma. These glands do not expel their
secretions at the same time. Rather, the bulbourethral (Cowper's) gland
first extrudes a clear fluid, followed by the prostatic secretions, the
sperm-concentrated fluids from the epididymides and ampulla of the vas
deferens, and finally the largest fraction primarily from the seminal
vesicles. Thus, seminal plasma is not a homogeneous fluid.
*****
So, as the ampulla is a storage area for sperm, any pressure applied from
the testicles would not allow storage of sperm. The above text desribes the
sperm in the ampulla being sucked along along with the flow rather than
being part of a push from the testicles.
David
www.vasectomy-information.com
PS I'm off to sunny Cornwall for a few days
Steve Law
Depends on what you read. I posted, with cite, some time ago an
article (maybe from Britannica) that the vas deferens was under
pressure, and yes a vasectomy would cause that pressure to
decrease/cease. Yes, the constant filling of the vas from the testis
probably causes the pressure. More stuff placed in the vas would
increase pressure.
But yes, I have read where sexual excitement and just general movement
helps move the sperm through the vas also (your so called sucking
action). In fact, the raising of the testis during excitement and just
before ejaculation are thought to help stimulate sperm production and
aid in moving sperm through the system. Have read so many desciptions
over the year that have variations in the description not sure which
said what.
Yes, the ampulla is a reservoir near the prostate that results from
the enlargement of the vas as it nears the prostate, so it is under
pressure like the vas. Yes, after ejaculation the void in the ampulla
may cause some suction to help re-fill.
As you have probably noted, seems every doctor or writer has
variations on the various interactions.
Steve L
David
> variations on the various interactions.
Absolutely. Hence me posting a variety of URL's - not relying solely on what
could be seen to be my own interpretation.
Bottom line is that as in the bowels, peristalsis moves the sperm through
the vas deferens, and you agree it's stored in the Ampulla until it's
ejaculated.
If the testicles exerted pressure, then what's to stop sperm dribbling out
27/7? That would not be a lot of good to reproduction, as come the time of
ejaculation there wouldn't be any left!
The thought of it dribbling out 27/7 brings to mind horrible visions of "B"
list celebs doing averts for little devices for "All day freshness"
demonstrated with blue ink.
David (who is deffinitely now off to Cornwall once I've had breakfast)
www.vasectomy-information.com
Steve Law
Your reading probably noted that there are various valves (muscles)
that hold back the sperm, urine, prostate fluid, seminal fluid though
under pressure. It is the release of this muscles along with the
spasms of other muscles that cause the release of various fluids are
there appropriate time. Our sphincter and bladder valves we have
conscience control over most of the time, the others are more
involuntary and are controlled by orgasm.
Enjoy your vacation.
Steve L
trifold
>
> Depends on what you read. I posted, with cite, some time ago an
> article (maybe from Britannica) that the vas deferens was under
> pressure, and yes a vasectomy would cause that pressure to
> decrease/cease.
If I am not mistaken, the Britannica article you posted (I include it
below) says nothing about the vas being "under pressure." Sperm is
described as moving along the vas not as a result of pressure build
up, but of muscle contractions. Nor does it say anything about the
consequences of vasectomy on the force of ejaculation. (It does
mention that the ampullae are *larger* than the rest of the vas tubes,
which I'm thinking would mean that even if there were pressure in the
tubes, it would be lessened once sperm made its way to the ampullae.)
The article also mentions that the ampullae store not just sperm
(which supply would be cut off after vasectomy) but semen (which is
composed overwhelmingly of stuff from places other than the
testicles). These juices would take up much more space than the
sperm. It seems clear, then, that the "filling" of the ampullae would
go on even after vasectomy. In any case, I think we can agree, the
force of ejaculation is not caused by pent up fluid pressure released
when muscles or valves relax at the moment of ejaculation, but by
dynamic muscle *contractions* coming from places other than the vas
tubes. The force of ejacualtion is not affected by vasectomy.
trifold
http://www.vasectomy-information.com
Below is the article you posted:
ductus deferens
also called Vas Deferens where the sperm are stored prior to
ejaculation. Each ductus deferens ends in an enlarged portion, an
ampulla, which acts as a reservoir. There are two ductus deferentes,
identical in structure and function, which emerge from the two
epididymides.
The channel of the ductus deferens is slightly larger than that of the
ductus epididymidis, the tube found in the epididymis gland from which
it originates. The tissue lining the inside wall is a moist and folded
layer of mucous membrane. Surrounding the mucous membrane are three
layers of circular and longitudinal muscle fibres. These fibres cause
the ducts to contract and thus allow the sperm and fluids to be
transported. The ductus deferens begins at the tail of the epididymis,
in the lower region of the scrotal sac, the pouch of thin skin that
covers the testes and epididymides. It extends into the pelvic region.
While ascending to the level of the bladder, the ductus deferens is
surrounded by a network of arteries, veins (pampiniform plexus), and
nerve fibres, and the whole is covered by layers of connective tissue.
(This complex tubular structure, called the spermatic cord, also
serves to suspend the testes.) At the level of the bladder, each duct
separates from its sheath of connective tissue and travels back over
the top of the bladder; the two ducts turn downward at the rear of the
bladder, and their channels enlarge to form the two ampullae attached
to the outside left and right walls of the bladder.
The ampullae act as storage chambers for the semen and contribute
secretions to it. The yellow secretions of the ampullae include
ergothioneine, a substance that reduces chemical compounds, and
fructose, a sugar and nutrient. Both secretions moisten the sperm and
help to keep them viable. The inside cavities of the ampullae have
several meshlike partitions and folds. The walls of the ampulla are
thinner than the rest of the sperm canal, and the channel is usually
larger. The size of the ampulla varies with different animal species;
in the stallion the ampullae are relatively large, whereas in man they
are only about twice the size of the ductus deferentes. The ampullae
join the ducts of the seminal vesicles to form the ejaculatory ducts.
See also ejaculation.
seminal vesicle
either of two elongated saclike glands that secrete their fluid
contents into the ejaculatory ducts of some male mammals.
The two seminal vesicles contribute approximately 60 percent of the
fluids passed from the human male during ejaculation (q.v.). In some
mammals the capacity of the seminal vesicles is much larger; the boar,
for example, may emit up to 50 times as much seminal fluid.
Carnivores, marsupials, monotremes, and cetaceans do not have seminal
vesicles.
The secretion of the seminal vesicles constitutes the bulk of the
seminal fluid (semen). It is a thick fluid that contains the sugar
fructose, proteins, citric acid, inorganic phosphorus, potassium, and
prostaglandins. Once this fluid joins the sperm in the ejaculatory
duct, fructose acts as the main energy source for the sperm outside
the body. Prostaglandins are believed to aid fertilization by causing
the mucous lining of the cervix to be more receptive to sperm as well
as by aiding the movement of the sperm toward the ovum with
peristaltic contractions of the uterus and fallopian tubes.
In the sexually mature human male, the seminal vesicles are elongated
bodies 5 to 7 cm (2 to 2.75 inches) long and about 2 to 3 cm wide. In
each vesicle is a tubule 15 cm long that is highly coiled and
convoluted; surrounding this tube is connective tissue (blood and
lymphatic vessels, nerve fibres, and supportive tissue). The tubule
itself is composed of three layers: the inner lining, a moist and
folded mucous membrane; a muscle layer of longitudinal and circular
tissue; and a fibrous outside covering of elastic tissue. The mucous
membrane secretes the fluids contributed by the seminal vesicles; it
is highly folded while the tube is empty and can be distended without
injury when its secretions cause it to fill the tubule. During
ejaculation, the muscular tissue and elastic fibres contract to empty
the vesicle's contents into the ejaculatory ducts shortly after the
vas deferens has emptied the sperm into those ducts.
The size and activity of the seminal vesicles are controlled by
hormones. Production of androgen, the major hormone that influences
the growth and activity of the seminal vesicles, begins at puberty and
starts to decline at about the age of 30. In the absence of this
hormone, the seminal vesicles will degenerate (atrophy).
trifold
> Hi Bill,
>
> I think vasectomy causes a volly of sensations, both mental and physical,
> and although I see it as a positive experience for many reasons, I have
> pondered all of the ramifications quite a lot.
As always, you're right to focus on perceptual and emotional issues
related to vasectomy--and you do it very well. I worried about how
vasectomy might affect the way I thought about sex--and even how it
would affect how I thought about my testicles. And I did this even
thogh I am "childfree" and never fantasized during sex about plowing a
fertile field or being "The Impregnator." After the first sample came
back negative, I even felt a little down for awhile, which surprised
me. So I believe the emotional stuff is serious. Re: the seemingly
less profound issue of how vas. affected how I view my
testicles--think of all the porno that focuses on them as the source
of our sexual selves--I found that nothing changed. I think the
reason for this is that the buggers still "act" like they are the
center of my sexual self. Feeling them gets me excited. They still
move around alot and pull up before I cum. (To get even more
physical, I suggest that the feeling of "full balls" is a real feeling
all men experience. But it does not derive from sperm loading up in
there, but from changes that occur as they tighten up during the
excitment phase.)
trifold
http://www.vasectomy-information.com
trifold
> given us sex as an enjoyable thing, and the reasons evolution did this is
> that it normally has the effect of furthering the species. Vasectomy makes
> it so easy, and maybe this is the problem. The "taboo" is lessened. One
> must learn to focus more on the joy of it (isn't there a book?).
Your posts are always thought provoking. The paragraph above leads me
to comment that social organization may be an even more important
factor than "nature" causing us to devalue "non-productive" sex.
Consider the varying degrees of shame/opprobrium assocated with
masturbation and homosexuality at different times in history and in
different societies. My own view is that "non-productive" sexual
behavior has been especially discouraged in males, especially under
capitalism. This is because under capitalism men have been defined as
worker/producers. And their sexuality (which we all know can be hard
to control) has been seen historically as potentially disruptive of
that production. To the extent this sexuality can be seen as
"productive"--that is leading to something beyond it--then it is
excusable. But once it is uncoupled entirely from the production
metaphor, it becomes deeply suspicious. So "wankers" or "jerk-offs"
are seen as unmanly wasters of time (even their own time).
Homosexuals are marginalized and depicted as mere consumers of luxury
items. In this mental climate, it is not surprising that some of us
develop a sense that vasectomy devalues sex itself.
Giraud
> Your posts are always thought provoking. The paragraph above leads me
> to comment that social organization may be an even more important
> factor than "nature" causing us to devalue "non-productive" sex.
> Consider the varying degrees of shame/opprobrium assocated with
> masturbation and homosexuality at different times in history and in
> different societies.
I wonder if a gay man would feel any "different" after a vasectomy, since
it does not change the "productiveness" of his sexual life. Of course,
this is only a thought experiment, since there'd be no point in bothering
to get a vasectomy if one is a gay man (the whole contraception thing,
which weighs so heavily on one, is gone in both the gay an vasectomized man
- interesting)!
> My own view is that "non-productive" sexual
> behavior has been especially discouraged in males, especially under
> capitalism. This is because under capitalism men have been defined as
> worker/producers. And their sexuality (which we all know can be hard
> to control) has been seen historically as potentially disruptive of
> that production.
Really? I hadn't thought about that before. But you might have something
there. I think of taboos against sex for pleasure as mostly religious in
origin, but perhaps there is a societal aspect. I think one reason the
"work ethic" in the US is so scewed may be because of the whole theory of
living the "American Dream" by working your ass off and going from rags to
riches, etc. Later generations (like mine) who try to re-evaluate the
meaning of life and think that working too hard your whole life until you
die may be not acknowledging what's really important are labeled as
"slackers."
At the same time, hasn't society been more likely to discourage sex for
pleasure in women historically? I just saw "Splendor in the Grass," and it
has a great mother-daughter scene about this.
> To the extent this sexuality can be seen as
> "productive"--that is leading to something beyond it--then it is
> excusable.
Sad indeed, but yes, there are a lot of moral frameworks that have tried to
instill this.
> But once it is uncoupled entirely from the production
> metaphor, it becomes deeply suspicious. So "wankers" or "jerk-offs"
> are seen as unmanly wasters of time (even their own time).
> Homosexuals are marginalized and depicted as mere consumers of luxury
> items. In this mental climate, it is not surprising that some of us
> develop a sense that vasectomy devalues sex itself.
Interesting - especially true in the US given the beliefs of the current
administration. The whole "family values" thing. It's preached to us
almost as if it is our duty to have a family, and if we don't, we are some
kind of drain on society or at least deviant.
Personally, I don't think the goverment should have its hands in the
lifestyle choices of the population. The current administration is pretty
extreme in its views on this, and this is disturbing.
The great thing is that alternates to the traditional family unit are being
given more credit these days as "legitimate" (witness the popularity of the
great show "Will and Grace"). This is encouraging.
The sexual revolution of the 60s embodied a lot of the freedom to think of
sex as "non-productive." I believe the BC pill sparked that in a large way.
Vasectomy is the ultimate in converting a man into a non-productive sexual
being. Freeing, but a big change! Can you handle it? ;)
Giraud
ROB
All of those "valves" that you discussed are sphincters. As for the
movement of sperm, it's done by peristaltic contractions. Just like
your digestive tract to put picture with the description.
All good medicine,
GREENFEATHER
Paul E Garcia
>masturbation and homosexuality at different times in history and in
>different societies.
Consider also the stigma/prohibition against any artificial birth control
method in many segments of our society today. Several religions seem to make
you feel that having several children is a goal/obligation.
Ugly Person
operation proclaiming:
I hope that those religions, and all the money the rake in are providing the funding
necessary to raise those children.
Giraud
If you look at a religion as a "concept trying to survive," then the rule
that you must have offspring has "survival value." I believe the Shakers
had some rule at some point that was against sex and procreation, and it
almost was the demise of that religion.
If, e.g., the Catholic Church says you should not use condoms, there will
potentially be more Catholics in the next generation to perpetuate the
religion *and* this rule.
Giraud
David
I think this issue is getting a bit "woolly" - the issue is that there was a
post that implied 10% of the force of ejaculation came from the testes. This
is clearly wrong so I was trying to correct this potential for misreading
the post. I wasn't really too concerned with the mechanism of ejaculation,
but specifically how the sperm get from the testicle to the amulla and
consequently why pressure from the testicles does not contribute to the
mechanism of ejaculation.
Trifold's explanation, and the britannica article he reposted for you are
interesting, but the matter can be simplified. Especially as it's not a
complex issue in the first place.
Imagine the testicle as a vessel full of golf balls, and one exit. When you
add another golf ball to the middle of the vessel, there exists sufficient
pressure to displace another golf ball through the exit. The exit is a pipe,
so logically the golf balls would get displaced up the pipe.
In the case of the human, the "pipe" is the vas deferens. The vas deferens
is NOT a short pipe - one of the url's I posted (repeated below) says that
each vas deferens is about 45 cm. (17.75 inches to you and I) long and
passes from the groin over the bladder to form a storage place for sperm,
the ampulla.
http://www.campuslife.utoronto.ca/services/sec/minter.html
Clearly the length of the tube, and the fact that it rises vertically means
that the mere act of displacement cannot possibly provide the means to
propel the sperm up the tube. Any plumber will tell you that some form of
pump is needed - basic physics.
In the case of male anatomy the "pump" is peristalsis of the vas deferens.
Rob is right to compare the action to the digestive tract - works exactly
the same way. In both cases, the product is produced in one place, and moved
to another storage area prior to being ceremoniously dumped at a time and
place of our choosing by peristalsis.
When you ejaculate it's not called "Shooting a load" for nothing. It takes
considerable pressure to push a quantity of fairly sludgy and sticky goo
down to the end of the penis with enough force to make it spurt out. Mere
displacement of sperm out of the testicles could not possibly form a major
part of the effort it takes.
By chopping the vas deferens you do lose the sperm content of the ejaculate,
but no pressure as neither the displacement action within the testicles, or
the peristalsis of the vas deferens contributes to ejaculation.
> Enjoy your vacation.
Thank you.
David
www.vasectomy-information.com
David
> In both cases, the product is produced in one place, and moved
> to another storage area prior to being ceremoniously dumped at a time and
> place of our choosing by peristalsis.
Before anyone misreads, "dumping the product" is not done by peristalsis,
but how it is conveyed up the tube from point a to point b is by
peristalsis.
David
www.vasectomy-information.com
trifold
Giraud <gir...@spamsucks.com> wrote in message news:<LMdqa.888$Zx.4...@news.uswest.net>...
> trifold wrote:
> > My own view is that "non-productive" sexual
> > behavior has been especially discouraged in males, especially under
> > capitalism. This is because under capitalism men have been defined as
> > worker/producers. And their sexuality (which we all know can be hard
> > to control) has been seen historically as potentially disruptive of
> > that production.
>
> Really? I hadn't thought about that before. But you might have something
> there. I think of taboos against sex for pleasure as mostly religious in
> origin, but perhaps there is a societal aspect.
Religion *is* societal. For example, arguably, protestantism and the
"work ethic" went hand in hand--and catholicism eventually followed
suit.
>I think one reason the
> "work ethic" in the US is so scewed may be because of the whole theory of
> living the "American Dream" by working your ass off and going from rags to
> riches, etc. Later generations (like mine) who try to re-evaluate the
> meaning of life and think that working too hard your whole life until you
> die may be not acknowledging what's really important are labeled as
> "slackers."
In this connection it's interesting to consider how Playboy, the
"men's magazine" that supposedly celebrated sexual "liberty" for men
(at least heterosexual men), also tied its celebration of male
sexuality to a very aggressive marketing of upscale commodities that a
man would have to work non-stop to buy! Who'd have time to fuck?
>
> At the same time, hasn't society been more likely to discourage sex for
> pleasure in women historically? I just saw "Splendor in the Grass," and it
> has a great mother-daughter scene about this.
I haven't seen this film. But it could be argued that women's sexual
pleasure is only discouraged when it is productive in unapproved ways,
not when it is simply non-productive. Women's sexuality is scary
because it represents a threat to the "purity" of the product of male
sexuality--if a woman likes sex too much, she might fool around, and
her husband's "production" would be compromised. She might end up
producing children that aren't his. And his property might even pass
to these children at the expense of his own. In this sense, it is the
*productivity* of female sexuality that is suspect, not its
non-productivity. By way of illustration, I don't believe we saw the
same desperate measures deployed to control female masturbation as
were used against boys and men in the 19th century (e.g. rings with
jagged teeth fitted over the penis at night). And I may be betraying
ignorance here, but are there words for female masturbators that carry
the same baggage as "wanker" and "jerk-off?" As for woman on woman
sex, instead of being viewed as sexually "denaturing" women (as
essentially making them "non-women"), sex between women is generally
viewed as making women even more attractive to men. I don't believe
male homosexuals are typically shown in the same light. Male
homosexualtiy has generally been depicted as making men "less" than
men--or at least, something that permanently renders them something
"other" than men. (The reality, of course, is that many men
historically and in other cultures will move from homosexual to
heterosexual outlets with out much psychic trauma.)
>
> > To the extent this sexuality can be seen as
> > "productive"--that is leading to something beyond it--then it is
> > excusable.
>
> Sad indeed, but yes, there are a lot of moral frameworks that have tried to
> instill this.
>
> > But once it is uncoupled entirely from the production
> > metaphor, it becomes deeply suspicious. So "wankers" or "jerk-offs"
> > are seen as unmanly wasters of time (even their own time).
> > Homosexuals are marginalized and depicted as mere consumers of luxury
> > items. In this mental climate, it is not surprising that some of us
> > develop a sense that vasectomy devalues sex itself.
>
> Interesting - especially true in the US given the beliefs of the current
> administration. The whole "family values" thing. It's preached to us
> almost as if it is our duty to have a family, and if we don't, we are some
> kind of drain on society or at least deviant.
Yes. You are right. The "childfree"--even worse, single unmarried
people--are often viewed as suspect. And arguably they are penalised
in a variety of ways in public opinion and even in law.
>
> Personally, I don't think the goverment should have its hands in the
> lifestyle choices of the population. The current administration is pretty
> extreme in its views on this, and this is disturbing.
Agreed.
>
> The great thing is that alternates to the traditional family unit are being
> given more credit these days as "legitimate" (witness the popularity of the
> great show "Will and Grace"). This is encouraging.
Yes. But Wil and Grace would be more convincing if Wil ever got any!
>
> The sexual revolution of the 60s embodied a lot of the freedom to think of
> sex as "non-productive." I believe the BC pill sparked that in a large way.
Yes. But as we see, it did not "take." Witness not only the current
campaign for "family values" and against sex education, but the
efforts to recriminalize abortion. My view is that pressures to make
sexuality "productive" may relax in times of relative prosperity (like
the 60s) but that they come back full force in times of crisis, as a
way of restoring "order."
>
> Vasectomy is the ultimate in converting a man into a non-productive sexual
> being. Freeing, but a big change! Can you handle it? ;)
Well, I can handle it. But I'd rather *she* do it for me!
David
> I believe the Shakers
> had some rule at some point that was against sex and procreation, and it
> almost was the demise of that religion.
OK - wandering off a tad......
I believe the shakers were folk that got by with the minimum of trappings of
society and lived a simple life. Over here at the moment there are a *lot*
of "Shaker style" items for sale. So my question is what on earth inspired
"Shaker style" cooker extractor hoods, "Shaker style" tv/dvd cabinets,
"Shaker style" drinks cabinets etc etc. Did the shakers have such things,
and if they did exist would they buy them?? Am I missing something?????
David
www.vasectomy-information.com
trifold
"T'is a Gift To be Simple" (shaker hymn)
People like their toys AND the idea of simplicity. The Market
delivers once again. (At least on the level of fantasy!)