Sensible Erection | Is something wrong with the sexual development of human males?

Sunday, 9 January 2011

Is something wrong with the sexual development of human males?

quote [ Have you noticed there aren’t as many males in the world anymore? Well, there isn’t [sic]. A growing body of evidence has begun to show something is wrong with the sexual health of human males. ]

Not mine obviously. But then again I'm old and I've been eating organic and not drinking tap-water since the eighties. So all you young guns take care what you eat and don't be wrapping your man-fruit in clingfilm m'kay?

[sci&tech] [by Raikva@10:36amGMT] [-3 Bad]

Comments

nonsense said @ 10:59am GMT on 9th Jan [Score:5 Underrated]
The article's main reference is 20 years old, the site's archives go back all of two weeks, all articles are written by "the Author", the top navigation bar dedicates an entry for "Conspiracies", and there are articles about how "being love" will save you when 2012 comes along.

Raikva said @ 11:04am GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Underrated]
Perhaps I should change from sci&tech to humor then? Feel free to down-mod tho.

Baxter_UK said @ 5:37pm GMT on 9th Jan
And that reference is dated ... September 11th!

Coincidence? Or conspiracy.

Garibaldi said @ 11:00am GMT on 9th Jan
With no desire to have kids I'd love to have a null sperm count, even with precautions sex is currently a bit like tightrope walking. Some may accuse me of not seeing the bigger picture, however.

Raikva said @ 11:10am GMT on 9th Jan
Like tightrope walking in that it helps to have a long pole?

sythe said @ 3:00pm GMT on 9th Jan
Like tightrope walking in that everyone is pointing and laughing at you?

blacksun said @ 4:51pm GMT on 9th Jan
Like tightrope walking in that you are wearing a skintight pink bodysuit with stars and sprinkles?

benjamander said @ 7:41pm GMT on 9th Jan
Like tightrope watching in that it uses a lot of rope, and it's better when it's tight?

cb361 said @ 11:11am GMT on 9th Jan
You're not seeing the bigger picture!!!

CompletelyIrrelevant said @ 11:40am GMT on 9th Jan
I hear ya, sex is playing Russian roulette every day with a bullet called life =P

Supreme_Coconut said @ 6:08pm GMT on 9th Jan
Yeah momma, called life.

granitewitch said @ 12:30pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
Vasectomy.

Garibaldi said @ 6:38pm GMT on 9th Jan
Yeah, I have considered that, society seems to see it as abnormal to get such a procedure done in your early thirties, though.

Anti-fuites said @ 7:16pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
It's not like you need to wear a sign saying "My Boys Don't Float" everywhere you go afterwards

granitewitch said @ 12:59am GMT on 10th Jan
I was 30 when I did mine. I have yet to regret it on any level- but then, I already had three kids.

drd69 said @ 11:14pm GMT on 10th Jan

When the male birth control pill comes out it could be a societal changing event. I did not wait for that however and got myself snipped after the kid was born.

papango said @ 3:59am GMT on 10th Jan
There's no reason for 'society' to ever find out. Unless your planning on making 'My Vasectomy: A four hour lecture with slides' an annual tradition, there's no reason for anyone to ever find out.

I am not having kids either, but the hysterectomy procedure is a bit more complicated and brings menopause (something society really doesn't want to see in a thirty year old).

devilsad said @ 3:30pm GMT on 9th Jan
I could post you a gif here of what you should do, but it's NSFW, NSFlunch, and NSFsanity.

Hugh_Janus said @ 12:12pm GMT on 9th Jan
How does 50% less sperm equate to less males in the world? Are the boy making sperm dieing off?

Nostrildamus said @ 12:27pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
This is laughable horseshit.

granitewitch said @ 12:33pm GMT on 9th Jan
I'd say that a far bigger concern than plastics is the advent of The Pill. There's so much synthetic estrogen in the water supplies now that it's affecting male fertility in England- they have found measurable amounts of a lot of pharmaceuticals in the Thames.

gl_thompson said @ 12:41pm GMT on 9th Jan
Sounds like the back story to Children of Men.

Raikva said @ 1:15pm GMT on 9th Jan
Exactly - hence why I don't drink tap-water.

cb361 said @ 1:29pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Funny]
Because it dilutes your precious bodily fluids?

bon35 said @ 12:46pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Funny]
Stay strong guys, forever alone!

hippoh said @ 5:02pm GMT on 9th Jan

scojam said @ 1:09pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:3 Insightful]
Yeah at my age 65 there aren't as many males around. Those who have survived are outnumbered by the old women by a factor of 8. The women that have given up on finding a man have formed into little card playing and female partying groups. It's hard to differentiate them from the other little groups of man haters who also play cards and party together. There are however a number of women who still crave men and are looking for a man, any man with a pulse. They fall on you like seagulls after a french fry dropped on the beach. The first question they ask, sometimes even before you exchange names is "Are you alone?"

A friend of mine works in a nursing home. One night she got a call from one of the inmates asking if she could come up and talk to her. My friend took a couple of cups of tea up and they started to talk. The old lady talked about her family, kids, grand kids and great grand kids. She was really a sweet old lady. When my friend asked her about her husband she turned into a miserable old shrew and said, "That bastard? I hope he's fucking rotting in hell". True story.

JOECAM said @ 2:30pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Underrated]

satanspenis666 said @ 4:30pm GMT on 9th Jan
Is he really young or really old? I can't tell, but it's creapy either way.

walkingtaco said @ 7:51pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:3]
He's 35.

Source: Here.

Krutz said @ 2:37pm GMT on 9th Jan
Not drinking tap water? In the cases of many bottled waters, yes you are. Which makes little to no difference.

About the only way you're "healthier" drinking bottled water is if your house has lead solder on its pipes. Otherwise, you're paying about 25 times more per volume than if you just drank tap water.

maryyugo said @ 4:01pm GMT on 9th Jan
As often, an overgeneralization. Depends on your local water supply where you live. A small town in India isn't the same as Chicago or New York isn't the same as Denver. And it depends on the brand of water you buy. Some are filtered and reverse osmosis treated waters, others are plain tap but many are spring water, collected high in clean mountain springs. YMMV. It's easy to forget that.

Krutz said @ 4:22pm GMT on 9th Jan
Accusations of overgeneralization from you? Wow.

And if by "isn't the same," you mean "has a different amount of various minerals and other substances but is still regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act under the EPA," then sure, different.

Bottled water is also regulated by the FDA, not the EPA. It's easy to forget that, too.

scojam said @ 4:33pm GMT on 9th Jan
And if by bottled water you mean plastic bottles than watch out. The plastic contains Bisphenol A (BPA) a chemical that is believed to work like Estrogen in the body. I guess from a female perspective it could throw off their hormone balance. From a male perspective could it effeminate males? Say does the advent of the plastic bottle coincide with the downturn in the birth of male babies leading to the male shortage today?

solitude said @ 6:00pm GMT on 9th Jan
So basically what you're saying is... drinking bottled water will improve my chances with lesbians?

ckfahrenheit said @ 6:35pm GMT on 9th Jan
speaking of Bisphenol A ~

A few months ago I suddenly got sensitized to epoxy. Before you start up: yes it's my fault I kept getting the stuff on my bare fingers when kneading the putty version. However after 30 years of occasionally fixing things with absolutely no skin reaction or symptoms, I thought I was one of those people who weren't in the "some people are sensitive" category that's on the labels.
But now it will cause a facial rash from eyebrow to chin w/ dry itching peeling cracking skin, lasts for about 1-3 weeks. I can minimize the effects with antihistamine and lotion, but nothing I can do about it but wait until it blows over. I'm lucky - some folks need hospitalization. Apparently I'm now allergic to epoxy for the rest of my life, and will have to find other materials to work with. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, virtually everyone will get sensitized to epoxy with enough exposure; it's not like peanut allergy where only an unlucky few are susceptible and the rest immune.

Point is, yeah it's my ignorance not protecting myself, but that "avoid skin contact" or "may cause sensitivity" warning is on everything, and now it just looks like a generic disclaimer. I think the labels on epoxy (or any two-part resin) should be a little scarier, like "LISTEN UP HOTSHOT: Your skin will eventually get fucked up if you keep touching this stuff."
So handle epoxy like you would sulfuric acid, kids - double up on the gloves & vapor-filter respirator. It's not Elmer's white glue.
I wonder if that's why I'm getting a little bored with some pr0n.

Krutz said @ 9:03pm GMT on 9th Jan
Do you have the same reaction to it after it sets up? And if so, what about the "food grade epoxy" that they coat wooden tankards with and so on?

ckfahrenheit said @ 9:37pm GMT on 9th Jan
No, apparently no problem with fully cured epoxy (so far). I've handled some examples yesterday just fine. If the internets is right, the uncured hardener component is the most commonly allergenic part. I would not expect any problem with sanded epoxy dust, since that's cured as well, but I've read about others who have a problem with even cured epoxy :(

I've never heard about food grade epoxy - lemme look into that.

unrelated - I love the smell of celluloid in the morning.
(I keep massive amounts of lovely, flammable celluloid guitar picks in metal canisters and I get a nostalgia rush when I whiff that camphor bouquet)

Krutz said @ 12:48am GMT on 10th Jan [Score:1 Informative]
Wow. I didn't know celluloid was used for those. Ever tried seeing what would happen if a careless match got tossed in the wrong can? :)

And mentioning guitar picks reminded me of this clever gizmo. A singer could probably make a signature "thing" out of using a credit card to make a pick right before starting a set.

papango said @ 4:10am GMT on 10th Jan
And if you're eating food cooked or washed with tap water you're getting it all anyway. Regardless of what you're drinking.

Chop-Logik said @ 7:22am GMT on 10th Jan
IT ALL COMES FROM DIRT

half said @ 2:43pm GMT on 9th Jan
what ? third sci&tech post in a row ? this is science fucking sunday or what ? where have you been se ? where's the p0rn ?

graham said @ 3:10pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
wherever you post it ;)

sanepride said @ 3:13pm GMT on 9th Jan
From the point of view of a normal, heterosexual male this isn't necessarily a bad thing. The more ladies the better!

uncletim said @ 4:07pm GMT on 9th Jan
I have to immediately discount any reporting as hyperbolic, overwrought handwringing, ill-informed and inflammatory if it uses exclamation marks in bunches.
Quote from article-
"!!!!!"

valen85 said @ 4:51pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:1 Interesting]
My sexual development is fine. Just ask Naruki's mom.

Krutz said @ 12:49am GMT on 10th Jan [Score:1 Insightful]
You flash her kitchen window every morning before the school bus picks you up?

snowfox said @ 3:13pm GMT on 10th Jan
If by window you mean tombstone and school bus you mean halfway house shuttle... then yes!

<3 valen!

anagramophone said @ 10:47pm GMT on 10th Jan
so valen's a mental with a rap sheet?
...

...yeah i guess that makes sense.

blacksun said @ 4:55pm GMT on 9th Jan
This article is horrible, but I wouldn't write off the premise entirely. Was that here at SE that I saw soemthing about world population growth leveling off by the year 2020 or something, due to decreasing female fertility rates? It was a ted talk or something. Maybe I can find it.

feeling constipated said @ 6:28pm GMT on 9th Jan
Next up, dickgirls.

gunthar said @ 7:32pm GMT on 9th Jan
OH COME ON HOW DO YOU FUCK UP AT SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT BY THE SECOND FUCKING SENTENCE

THIS UPSETS ME GREATLY

Dalej said @ 7:33pm GMT on 9th Jan [Score:-1]
The ilness is called Feminism.

sacrelicious said @ 7:50pm GMT on 9th Jan
OH NOEZ, HOW WILL THE WORLD SURVIVE WITH LESS HUMAN REPRODUCTION?!

gunthar said @ 7:54pm GMT on 9th Jan
you're supposed to have fewer males genetically, the xy chromesome is a slightly broken xx chromesome and makes survivability to birth slightly more difficult. however, countries where space is limited or sex-selective abortion is encouraged (lol china, lol india) tends to skew this number in favor of more men being born.

OK FUCK THIS

FUCK WHY AM I EVEN TRYING TO GO BACK AND READ THIS IT IS ONE SHITTY, POORLY THOUGHT OUT CONSPIRACY WITH HORRIBLE COMPARISONS IN POORLY DONE RESEARCH

yevishere said @ 3:19am GMT on 10th Jan
I will guess that NO.

papango said @ 3:55am GMT on 10th Jan
Even if there is a blip, it all evens out after a bit. The fewer males there are the more likely the gene to produce more males will be passed along (as all (or close to) the males are breeding while fewer of the females are), so it rights itself after a bit.

Naruki said @ 4:10am GMT on 10th Jan
"the gene to produce more males"? What is this gene? How does it work?

I know that any given sperm sample contains a roughly 50/50 balance of male/female producing sperm, so how would a gene affect this?

papango said @ 4:24am GMT on 10th Jan
All right, I'll try to explain this, but bear in mind that I'm a arts graduate and even though I live with a science guy who explained this all to me when I asked, I haven't absorbed any particular knowledge through his sperm (although he assures me I will in time). This explanation will also sound like the muppet babies are giving it because that's how I had to have it explained to me

A male in a world with fewer males than females is pretty much drowning in pussy and has a much greater chance of passing on his genes than the dick starved female next door. So a tendency to have male children (even if it's really slight) is a trait that will get passed along. And any male with whatever it takes (genes? something like that? maybe?) to make more males will have more of this passed along and so on until there is so many males that there are enough to go around.

Naruki said @ 4:56pm GMT on 10th Jan
Bear in mind I probably flunked anatomy class or something, plus I haven't been ingesting Science Guy Sperm(tm), but here's my thoughts on that:

A male in a world with fewer males than females is pretty much drowning in pussy
Granted. Oh, would that I could be such a man.

and has a much greater chance of passing on his genes than the dick starved female next door.
Um, not sure I follow completely. Of course he will pass on his genes if he has successful progenitive sex, but this is true of any human of any gender.

I think you are just saying his likelihood of having sex is greater than one of the surplus females, but this is always the case between those who bump uglies and those who don't, of any gender (and you are already mixing genders).

So a tendency to have male children (even if it's really slight) is a trait that will get passed along.
And this is where I believe you ran off the tracks. You assume that a man having sex implies a greater likelihood of the offspring being male. But ALL procreative sex involves men already! If men were dominant in this hypothetical gender-bias gene, then we'd all be men already. And extinct.

And any male with whatever it takes (genes? something like that? maybe?) to make more males will have more of this passed along and so on until there is so many males that there are enough to go around.
Even pretending your previous assumption were true for the sake of argument, you have no "shut off valve", and so again we'd all become all men, and extinct.

As I indicated, I could be wrong but: I think the sex of the offspring is not a genetic result, but a result of conception circumstances. Male sperm move fast but die young, female sperm are slower but longer-lived, and stress as well as positioning can play a part in that. At least, this is what some Googling tells me.

In fact, there are extremely expensive procedures that can allow you to choose (with a decent chance of success) the sex of your child. If it were genetic, I don't think those procedures would work.

papango said @ 3:45am GMT on 11th Jan
"You assume that a man having sex implies a greater likelihood of the offspring being male."

No. no. what I'm assuming is that some men (not all) have a greater likelihood of having male offspring. And that those male offspring (with that likelihood) will continue to produce slightly more male children (and that those males will continue to have a very high chance of successful reproduction as sperm will be in short supply). Until it all evens out.

Apparently this is called the Fisher Principle. Try here to have someone who has a clue explain it better than I can:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher%27s_principle