this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
21 points (95.7% liked)

People Twitter

5210 readers
2090 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

So, for anyone that’s curious, testicles are weird pain wise. They have a lot of pressure sensitive nerves on the surface of the testicles themselves. But if you, for example, were to hypothetically push a needle like object into the center of a testicle. You would feel the pressure of the needle pushing on the testicle, but once it pops through there is very little sensation at all.

Edit: Even though this is true this is NOT medical advice. Do not do this as it could have potentially serious consequences. I feel like I shouldn’t have to say this, but here we are.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Congrats on making me squirm on the couch.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I'll just file that under "things I never wanted to know."

The closest I can relate is having a vasectomy but even then the pain is in the recovery.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

A lot of organs are the same, the nerves that detect pain are on the surface of the organ and they are mostly detect changes in external and internal pressure, but there isn't a lot of nocioceptive nerve action inside the structure.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Interesting. That makes sense, but I never thought of it like that. I only have experience with testicles.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

"Not offensive" fucking narcissist lol. It doesn't offend the trans community, no, instead it raises one of the biggest problems that 49% of the population has, for which there is no reason beyond that our meritocracy - not all, just ours - operates on sexist principles. If it doesn't offend you you aren't paying attention to what's really important, which of course is always the problem with the sex obsessed.

I mean, it's a good joke, but to call it not offensive is to self identify as male.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

So, uh, that's the joke.

We should probably call some physicists to document this, as it's rare that you see such a perfect superposition of both getting the joke and not getting it. You may in fact be entangled with the joke now... Do you feel unusual in any way?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Attitudes about gays and transgenders actually got worse coming from the 1960s into the 1980s. The sexual revolution actually created a generation far more open and accepting, and the culture that lead to things like the Satanic panic, war on drugs, and resurgence of patriotism and religiosity in the United States actually made things worse for gay and trans.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I think it’s also important to understand the real nuances there. For trans people it got worse into the 80s, like a lot worse. For cis gay people it got different. In the 60s being openly gay would probably get you fired and arrested and it was considered a mental illness. And the sexual revolution was somewhat open minded, but not particularly, better but by no means good. By the 80s it was a culture war issue. The people who’d discounted you as mentally ill were now crying for your death by aids as a sinner spreading your sin. Where before they could ignore you now they were acknowledging you.

For trans people it was just unequivocally worse. In the 60s you were a medical curiosity and possibly a cure to homosexuality. Your forebears had been so aggressively stamped out that the cultural hate had been somewhat forgotten. But by the 80s everyone had found a reason to hate you. The right considered you no different from gay people except sneakier, and second wave feminism had decided that you were antithetical to feminism and deserved to be shunned. All while if you weren’t pretty and straight you couldn’t even get access to hormones and if you couldn’t completely bury your past your job options mostly involved sex work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Indeed, and in a broader view, humanity has literally always had trans people as long as it has had a concept of gender. So "in the 80s" is emphasizing the cultural lie that acceptance is a recent phenomenon, when actually bigotry about it is the recent phenomenon. The 80s were certainly not an amazing time for LGBTQ folk, but Playboy at least would have been sex-positive and accepting.

So this isn't a "stopped clock is right twice a day" situation, because sex-positive spaces and media would have been more reliable clocks than the culture at large, when it came to this subject.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The joke itself does a kind of bait & switch, it makes you think it’s going to be a trans joke, but then the last line sort of subverts expectations. The trans portion is necessary for the setup, as the punchline doesn’t make much sense without it, but it’s more a gender inequality joke.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Thanks peter

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Not the worst, although I'm not a fan of the continuation of the idea everyone seems to have that bottom surgery for trans women is the same as "chopping off your dick and/or balls".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Where do they put the balls, and therefore, the pee?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Pee is stored in the ovaries.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Well sometimes a joke likes to be vulgar and ridiculous to distract you so the punchline hits harder

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wasn't Play Boy rather progressive at all times? What's the broken clock?

I really hate peoples' misconstruing of attraction with objectification. The presence of nudity doesn't make something bad, exploitative, or wrong. The presence of someone attractive does not mean that is the entire point.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Good lord no, playboy was always super misogynistic. Hugh Hefner was MASSIVELY problematic lol.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

He wanted Playboy to be progressive (on abortion, weed, euthanasia, sexuality, etc), and he wanted equality for women, but he personally didn't live by those same rules. Rules for thee, not for me, etc.
That's just my opinion, though.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I won't defend Hefner, but the articles genuinely were (and are) as far to the left as you'll see in any widely circulated publication. Being associated with porn gave them cover to write whatever they wanted.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

The hilarious part is that as the number and availability of nude photos has increased geometrically, buying old vintage Playboys for the articles is legitimately a thing now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Penn Jillette was a writer for playboy, and Margret Atwood, Kurt Vonnegut, Roald Dahl

Like tons of famous autrhors.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Don’t forget your favorite kids poet, Shel Silverstein

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

For sure but that doesn't mean he couldn't be progressive especially for the time. Know nothing about him tbh but many historical progressive figures are pretty problematic

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

There is definitely something to be said of context. Any learned feminist should know that. First and second wave feminism would be (and are) downright toxic by today's standards, but back then, that veneer of vicious independence was absolutely necessary when pitted against that very ingrained patriarchy of the time.

Not to say the patriarchy is solved by any means, just that fewer and fewer positions of power are gendered by expectation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I actually love this