Talk:Cock and ball torture

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

This article was nominated for deletion on 13/11/05. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here. |}

Prior discussion regarding images: Wikipedia:Content_noticeboard/Archive6#Image use in cock and ball torture (NSFW), gangrene and others

Initial[edit]

This article is why we can't have nice things. 76.95.40.6 (talk) 13:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amen to that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.63.203 (talk) 03:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


This has gone too far! Where are the Wiki editors ? The pictures ARE disturbing for the general public. I will complain to Wikipedia admins to remove this article as whole because this entry and its vulgar title do not belong to a general education encyclopedia. Why would anyone who is not involved in Sadomasochism need such a detailed account of a practice perceived as shocking and disturbing by ~95% of the population? I find even more irritating a strong feeling that the authors displayed their images only for the purpose of their own sexual gratification. These photos seem so exhibitionistic! Why is there a need for a detailed and graphic description of the devices and techniques? This article definitely belongs to a specialized fetish site or a fetish encyclopedia, which Wiki is not! If Wikipedia really finds this text indispensable for "enlightening" the young generations, I (objectively) believe that it is entirely sufficient to put: 1) introduction as it is, 2) safety risks, End! No photos, no detailed stories explaining their pains and pleasures...and the title has to be changed! I also do not see in this rational approach any kind of discrimination, censorship or restriction of freedom of speech, as claimed by the supporters of various violent fetishes (again,which represent a very small portion of the population). Unfortunately, they have to understand that the term PUBLIC encyclopedia means it has to stay accessible to everyone and that we also have to consider the moral boundaries of the absolute majority. Some people would be frankly horrified and shocked if accidentally arrived at this page, not to mention the children. Please do not be selfish and remove this page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.199.147.44 (talk) 01:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will not happen. Wikipedia is not a "public/general knowledge" encyclopedia, it is a free encyclopedia that documents notable information. Our notability guidelines are clearly detailed here, for which a fetish frequently enjoyed by a significant minority and covered in reliable 3rd party publications unambiguously fulfills. Removing content that may shock people would remove most articles on medical diseases and the horrors of warfare. If you feel that there should be an exception to this because you believe nobody would find this informative then please consider whether you believe a parent whose child tells them they are into cock and ball torture should be searching through a sadomasochism wiki to find information or whether you believe Wikipedia would be a more "appropriate" source. The censoring of content that may shock or offend is not a practice that Wikipedia engages in.AerobicFox (talk) 02:25, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article is an example of a situation where the rationale of "Wikipedia is not censored" is being heavily abused by..."a significant minority". This article seems to have been significantly contributed to by someone or some people who are very enthusiastic about this subject, and the pictures clearly evidence the degree of this "enthusiasm". It seems quite apparent that in addition to NPOV problems, the editors of this particular article are simply (ab)using this Wikipedia policy to justify posting those pictures here.
I am not shocked by these photos; unlike the subject of at least some of them. But I do think that maybe they are too much...even one or two would be sufficient? Typically Wikipedia articles of this length only have one image, if they have any at all: this one seems to be image-heavy...
Furthermore, perhaps the text describing these fetishes suffers from some non-NPOV issues; but in itself seems to be sufficient to give information on the subject without the over-abundant photos. I agree that this article requires serious re-writing; or at least a reduction in the number of images. But I do think that the tone of the writing should be in a more 'textbook' manner, which is to say detached and clinical. 98.232.32.54 (talk) 19:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very telling that this comment is unsigned.
Wikipedia is a GENERAL encyclopeadia, this means that everything from John C. Calhoun to Pussies to the chemical synthesis for Vanillin. While I agree that Cock and Ball torture is disturbing, history has shown, from prohibition to the entirety of the USSR, that censorship only creates more of the censored information, a classic Streisand Effect.
Anyway, everything should be categorized, including sexual fetishes, period. With that, the only change I would propose is a NSFW filter for non-registered users or a filter blanking the article asking the user if they want to proceed in viewing NSFW/disturbing content.
Please direct yourself to the nearest Orthodox Church, you'll have a blast. 25eanglin (talk) 01:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Picture[edit]

I believe the "Electrostimulation applied on a penis" picture is a lot more disturbing than it contributes new informtion. Therefore, i will remove the picture from this article unless it is argued otherwise. --Section6 (talk) 00:20, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, it shows the "torture" concept far better than any of the other pictures in the article. I agree it shouldn't necessarily be at the very top of the page (it should be in an as-yet unwritten "Electicity" section), but it should not be removed. HalJor (talk) 02:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I disagree. E-stem is rarely actual torture. It CAN be, but is rarely is. I think it should be removed and replaced with something more appropriate. E-stim is more of Sensation Play then CBT and (personally) should only be considered as such. Trust me, I'm speaking with, uh, 'experience in the field we're discussing'. Theyain Riyu (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that all depends on how intense the electricity is. In my experience, those who distinctly don't want pain refer to "sensation play", while there are others who are willing to accept tolerable pain and ask for "CBT". The difference isn't necessarily what is used, but how. HalJor (talk) 16:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is one disturbing image. Perhaps it's better to put up an external link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.249.172.51 (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC) That's just your opinion man! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.75.91.57 (talk) 22:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A picture of a penis with some metal rings is hardly disturbing, certainly less so than the medical pictures I have seen on wikipedia.

(Please note the preceding comment was unsigned by another user.)

I'm deeply concerned about the picture within the subsection "Humbler." The caption in the article reads: "Man with humbler." However, the caption on the image reference page reads "Boy with humbler." The latter caption is accurately translated from the German "Junge mit Humbler." Based upon this translation, It's quite possible that this is an image of an adolescent boy. Can this be investigated? I'll admit that while I find the subject matter rather objectionable, images are important to the article. However, the conflicting language between the two captions is rather worrisome. I suggest removing the image until this can be investigated. Thanks.Venice85 (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The term "boy" is often used in sexual slang as a diminutive term for adult males. Because of the underage connotations, it is sometimes preferable to spell it as "boi", but that may have been lost in the translation. See Boi (sexual slang) for more information. HalJor (talk) 03:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Content noticeboard discussion[edit]

This article is currently being discussed at the content noticeboard. --JN466 14:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Physical Effects & Psychology[edit]

anyone know what the physical effects of doing this on a regular basis can result in? i would assume it affects sexual functioning in some kind of negative way but i could be wrong. also anyone who practices this stuff have any idea what the psychology behind this is? Gummy Dummy (talk) 15:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are two books about it, "Family Jewels" and "More Family Jewels", which are all about cock and ball torture. I haven't read them, but I think that they're the best place to get your questions answered. Asarelah (talk) 03:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about women?[edit]

Is there a page for women who like there Vagina's or Clit's tortured? I know there are a few out there and I am one of them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.205.8 (talk) 04:29, April 12, 2011‎

There should probably be an article for genital torture in general, with this one merged into it. 137.99.175.28 (talk) 19:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An article called pussy torture was created in 2017. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was that I need a shower. Ah, and moved. --BDD (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Cock and ball torture (sexual practice) → Cock and ball torture – The actual activity of cock and ball torture is much more notable than the band named after it. The current disambiguation page at cock and ball torture would be useless after this move, as the band is linked to at the top of this article, so might as well just be deleted. Mason Doering (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: Given the nature of the article on the sexual practice, it's fine behind the disambiguation wall to prevent undesired visits. If the move were performed, those seeking the band might prefer the disambiguation page instead, even if a "For the band, see..." note were present at the top. HalJor (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTCENSORED Mason Doering (talk) 13:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a question of censorship. I've defended this article several times (see my name in the "Picture" section above?) but I recognize that not everyone wants to see it. Keeping it behind the disambiguation firewall will help protect it. HalJor (talk) 00:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most people get to articles by clicking on a link, instead of by typing in the title in a WP search window, and even if they do, the available choices will include the desired link (band). Apteva (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; capitalization is sufficient disambiguation in this case. Powers T 15:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No it's not. I use caps only when writing even semi-formally, and I doubt I'm alone. Those who don't bother to use caps when searching (e.g. phones and tablets, not to mention myself in cases like this) would be taken to the page on sexual practice. Caps would make the pages distinct when shown in context with each other, but not when executing a sviewearch and being taken to the matching page based on the capitalization used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HalJor (talk • contribs) 00:09, 10 November 2012
  • Support. It is unfortunate that depraved material without redeeming qualities has not yet been deleted. But in the meantime it can be titled properly. The sexual practice got 130,000 page views in the last 90 days, the band 9,000. As Powers points out, neither article actually requires disambiguation. Kauffner (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Appears to be the primary topic pbp 17:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per arguments above. I enjoyed User:Kauffner's characterization of the subject matter. 213.246.91.158 (talk) 07:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The dis page can stay at (disambiguation), but clearly will serve no purpose. Apteva (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, primary topic for which the band itself is named. bd2412 T 22:25, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I couldn't help laughing at HalJor's concern to prevent those seeking the band being shocked when they land on the wrong page. I'm sure that 99.9 per cent of those looking for the band have a fair idea what the band were named after! Skinsmoke (talk) 08:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Plagiarism of this article[edit]

Judging by a search in Google Books, "Secrets of Male Sexuality 4" by J J Wanton uses apparently uncredited material from this article (and almost certainly others). 86.128.50.60 (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moved content from two articles to here[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tamakeri&redirect=no

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denkianma&redirect=no

Both pages are stubs that would do better in here, and due to the backlog of merge requests, I decided to do the action first and see community response after. Please feel free to change my decisions, but I'd appreciate it if you could comment here. puggo (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Denkianma should not be redirected here. Denkianma is not necessarily associated with CBT because it can be also done on women. You can find many images of women being trampled on the groin if you search for "denkianma" on Google. If you think Denkianma is not relevant enough to deserve a page, then it should be redirected to Trampling, not CBT.
But Trampling was redirected to wiktionary some months ago because it was a stub. I think the best solution would be merging Denkianma and Trampling articles.
In addition, Denkianma is generally a humorous tool/prank that is also used in the fetish industry, not the other way around. So I personally think that Denkianma should have its own page, because it is not necessarily a fetish, much less a subgenre of CBT. But if we are going to redirect it, we could redirect to Trampling and merge those pages. Redirecting to Cock and ball torture does not make sense to be honest. gabibb2 ✉ 00:32, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Hi everyone. As a guy involved in BDSM (in case that would make a difference), the images used here are of bad taste to the point of being disgusting. Clicking on them and reading their descriptions shows at least some of them were made from less than serious "editors" (if I could call them as such) that seem to find excitement in showing them off. Also, they offer nothing to the subject. I propose that we use images like is done on articles such as blowjob and anal sex that are elegant, tasteful and do a better job in improving the article's meaning.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.7.5.163 (talk) 15:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Before reciting the rules of Wikipedia let me add that this is not a matter of freedom but a matter of taste. Just because something is allowed doesn't mean it should be there.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.7.5.163 (talk) 15:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't exactly plenty of historical/Seedfeeder images of ballbusting for use here. Most of the images on Wikicommons are worse if not just as bad. Unless you're willing to create wonderful cock and ball torture images, we can't do anything about this. puggo (talk) 15:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably worth reminding ourselves of the MOS:IMAGES policy here: "...a potentially offensive image—one that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers—should be included only if it is treated in an encyclopedic manner i.e. only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate". It's not particularly clear to me that these images add more information than could be included in text. Furthermore, images should still be subject to the WP:RELIABLE sources test. We should not be adding images to provide information (such as how an e-stim machine is attached) that we are not also providing in reliably-sourced text.
In addition there is the issue of the MOS:SHOCKVALUE of the lead image: "lead images should be of least shock value". We could move the existing lead images down further down the article. They could be put into their appropriate sections, though it's interesting that the lead images (erotic electrostimulation, trampling the penis, wax play and chastity piercing) don't seem to merit their own sections. Or they could be put into a gallery section.
There is also the policy on WP:GRATUITOUS images: "gratuitous are not preferred over non-offensive ones in the name of opposing censorship". The Erotic electrostimulation article does very well in employing images of the equipment, particularly as the lead image. We could consider a similar approach for this article. And it's probably also worth remembering the point made under MOS:PERTINENCE: "not every article needs images".
Polly Tunnel (talk) 13:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Since no-one has responded, I'll suggest replacing the lead image mosiac with this image. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 18:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've waited to gain consensus on this, and nobody has objected during the last month. I don't believe that we can allow this article to accrue any number of images, however little they add to the article, on the basis that their removal would constitute censorship. I have therefore made the change I proposed a month ago. I have not retained the replaced images because:
If it is considered necessary to retain any of these images they can always be re-inserted further down the article to avoid MOS:SHOCKVALUE.
Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you, @Polly Tunnel:. But I think we should put this image as the main image. This image is much less shocking than the older ones. In my opinion, the image you have chosen does not illustrate very well what CBT is, it is just some chastity devices. What do you think? gabibb2 ✉ 12:37, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input, @Gabibb2:. It's good to be getting some comments on this issue. As you have probably guessed, the image I chose was intentionally the one with the least MOS:SHOCKVALUE I could find. As has been commented above, most of the Wikicommons images are pretty explicit. You're quite right that the chastity devices now shown illustrate only a small part of CBT, even if they were photographed at the Dore Alley Fair. The image you suggest is much better than the ones I removed, having far less potential shock value. It's also more representative of the practice that the one I've put in, though we don't have any text in the article about biting the penis or hand-squeezing the testicles. I still have some concern that the inclusion of breasts and genitals (and indeed the infliction of pain) is not ideal for a lead image. Personally I'd prefer to use a photo of the sort of CBT devices that are described in more detail in the article but without any genitals attached – the sort of image that's often found in catalogues. The cock ring article does this rather well. But unless someone can upload such an image we'll have to do without. I'd be interested to know if anyone else has any preferences between these two candidates for lead image. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 14:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Chastity devices are much more associated with orgasm denial than cock and ball torture.
I'd also "prefer to use a photo of the sort of CBT devices that are described in more detail in the article but without any genitals attached". I agree with you. You're 100% right in my opinion. But chasity devices are not necessarily CBT devices. They're general BDSM devices that can be included on many different fetishes. Chastity devices are just an accessory that can be used in CBT activities such as paddles, boots, ropes, cock rings, etc.
Ball press/ball crusher, humbler and parachute are specifically CBT devices (there are also other lesser known accessories, but these three are the best known). But we unfortunately don't have any good image of CBT devices that could be included here.
"Lead images should be of least shock value" according to MOS:SHOCKVALUE you already mentioned here. Unfortunately we also don't have good quality CBT images with zero nudity, so the image I suggested is the least shocking high quality image associated with cock and ball torture, in my opinion. That's why I chose it. I don't think the current image is related to CBT.
This image is also good. It is a high quality image that can be considered much less shocking than the older ones. But there is already another ball-kicking image in the article, I don't know if that would be a problem.
Thank you so much for helping to improve the quality of the article. gabibb2 ✉ 23:31, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2019[edit]

I have recorded an updated version of the narration for this page.

Spoken word narration for the CBT wikipedia page.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CocknBallTorture2.oga Christianitus (talk) 22:07, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing... comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 18:02, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done comrade waddie96 ★ (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good work, but there is a chance this may become a meme. puggo (talk) 02:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think the reason the original recording became a meme is a combination of the actor's gruff voice, partial distortion to the mic, and the ridiculous (read: hilarious) content of the article. 24.247.157.140 (talk) 21:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2019[edit]

170.82.50.36 (talk) 23:45, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. -- LuK3 (Talk) 23:46, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2020[edit]

HunterRssD (talk) 06:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the first paragraph, in the list, there needs to be an "and" before 'kneeing or kicking'.

 Not done: I think the intro looks good. Aasim 06:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All for educational purposes[edit]

It may be disturbing to some, but it is all educational purposes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Votoro (talk • contribs) 09:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with addition of information[edit]

Do you believe that the fact the article is an internet meme is noteworthy enough to be mentioned? Also, if it is, can someone help me? I'm trying to find a suitable source to back it but I can't quite find one trustworthy enough for the Wiki. Thanks 194.247.60.2 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2020[edit]

Revert to previous edits by User:Bugman2266. The new edits do not have a NPOV or encyclopedic accuracy. AinvalidEDitor (talk) 02:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edits you're referring to respect the gender spectrum. They are correct. HalJor (talk) 03:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, user who made the edits here. Referring to CBT as something that can only be done to men is simply false, so my corrections are in line with encyclopedic accuracy. Same with NPOV; NPOV does not mean "leave in incorrect information". Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 06:34, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was staying out of this because this article is not that great anyway and some of the gendered language was excessive, but it's clearly time to correct the record. AinvalidEDitor, HalJor, and OmegaFallon, the Wikipedia community unanimously rejected gender-neutral language to refer to sex-specific anatomy at the Village Pump. Read the discussion to see why. Crossroads -talk- 13:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, wonderful to know that it's not just this article, but the consensus of Wikipedians that are transphobic. Have it your way, then. Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's gonna take 20 years, but eventually, this decision is gonna go the other way, that much is evident in the way each generation views this issue. As more millennials and Gen Z-ers start editing Wikipedia and more old editors start dying off (or getting Alzheimer's) the consensus will change. JimKaatFan (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Genitorture[edit]

I've recently noticed that genitorture redirects to torture, which is a general article outside the scope of of BDSM. I suggest it might be more useful for it to redirect here, with the hatnote: "Genitorture redirects here. For the BDSM practice involving the infliction of pain on the vulva or vagina, see pussy torture." -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to target BDSM. RfD, disambiguation, or a hatnote are other possibilities, but that seems simplest. Crossroads -talk- 22:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for changing the target – the BDSM page is a good idea. It might be useful if we can have a reference to the term somewhere on that page for readers who are trying to find out what it means, per WP:R#ASTONISH. -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 09:35, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2020[edit]

please fucking delete this 47.149.43.84 (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: See WP:NOTCENSORED Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 00:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The damn pictures[edit]

I know wikipedia is not supposed to be censored, but this is going too far. Doesn't matter if it's for eDuCatIoNaL pUrPosE. Dullbananas (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It does have unusually many pictures. Feel free to remove some. If people want to see more pictures of this, they know where they can find them. Crossroads -talk- 04:51, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2021[edit]

"add new title and category for CBT, cbt in ficition"

CBT In Fiction

Fictional depictions of CBT have gained more popularity in recent years. One of the fictional portrayals of CBT has the famous Star Wars character, Yoda, a small and green humanoid alien strong with the force, tortures his cock and balls. The first instance of Yoda CBT content was uploaded by YouTuber Timus Papus on the 11th of May 2019, in the video Yoda crushes his balls with a rock, striving to endure maximum pain.[1] The video has since the gained over 1,487,708 views as of April 2021.[2] The video inspired further parodies where people remixed the original and performed their own versions of the concept, creating a variety of scenarios where Yoda has to endure CBT. Most portrayals are purely sound-based, however as the Yoda CBT content was gaining traction animated versions were created. One of these animated videos was: "Yoda Endures Maximum Pain", uploaded by Youtube Scott, on the 17th of April 2020, the animation being credited to @MeatCanyon, another Youtube channel. [3] Ozymandiash (talk) 13:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/yoda-cbt
  2. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ9Lt0LYiUI
  3. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOf2U8LB6-k

No. Saltssaumure (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with a strong no. A "fiction" section would need to cover this much more broadly, not just one small set of memes. To add this to the article at all you'd need to provide much stronger sources showing that this is much more widespread than I assume it is (i.e. "not very"). ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we need to differentiate between two types of ficitonal portrayals here -- the pornographic kind in person or in drawing, and the "haha CBT funny" type often stemming from spoken versions of this very article. --Artoria2e5 🌉 15:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gender Neutral language[edit]

It is very possible for people other than men to have penises and testicles.

Furthermore, the repitition of "male" genitals as an identifier is unnessecary as the specific body parts are explicitly defined beforehand. The reader knows that "male genitals" refers to penises and testicles, so why bother keeping the article gendered at all and simply refer to them as "genitals?" 2600:1700:A1C0:7780:C80F:73AD:4559:A5F5 (talk) 06:05, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, I suggest replacing terms like "male genitals" to simply "genitals" throughout the article, since the genitals in question are unambiguous in their form and are not neccessarily attached to men 2600:1700:A1C0:7780:C80F:73AD:4559:A5F5 (talk) 06:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It does make some sense; see also above request about OmegaFallon. (My partner was listening to a vocoded old version of the spoken article today and had the same question...) --Artoria2e5 🌉 15:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the graphic pictures[edit]

These pictures serve no educational purposes. Just because wikipedia isnt censored doesn't mean we need the most obscene pictures possible. Have it demonstrated on a fake model of a penis if you need pictures this badly. Per WP: GRATUITOUS I propose that the pictures showing male genitalia be removed. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 18:43, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I HIGHLY disagree. Having real pictures is essential to this article. Without these, the reader is set to believe that this is just a very niche fetish. When in reality it is very common. This photo is an example of something that cannot be conveyed through illustration or molds. We can see Cock and Ball Torture being carried out in a public setting with a large and enticed crowd. We can also see the age and ethnicity variation. This humanizes the activity immensely while showing the community is welcoming to all that would wish to involve themselves.
Frankly, without these images, the reader is more likely to leave the page feeling disgust towards those of us whom enjoy engaging in this activity. Slybirdz (talk) 18:37, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed Do the people who disagree think we should also have examples in the article about child pornography? TFighterPilot (talk) 12:38, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That has nothing to do with this article. WP:WHATABOUT HalJor (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Slybirdz "when in reality it is very common" - is this actually true? I'm not into BDSM but I would think for people who are into it (a very small percent of the overall population, see below) CBT is rarely practiced due to being on the extreme edge of BDSM since it involves pain to sensitive areas of human body, not just whipping a person's back or buttocks. Also I would imagine there is serious danger/risks involved since the genitals are sensitive area. Here is a source for my statement above: in total, 1.8% of sexually active people (2.2% of men, 1.3% of women) said they had been involved in BDSM in the previous year. This was more common among gay/lesbian and bisexual people.[1] Yodabyte (talk) 07:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That isn’t a relevant point either. The only relevant point is that Wikipedia is wp:NOTCENSORED Dronebogus (talk) 10:16, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot of illustrations of people having sex on sex position. If you are a visual learner it’s extremely important to have images if possible. While illustrations of sexual topics are preferred on WP we don’t really have a lot of CBT illustrations at the moment. Dronebogus (talk) 10:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:08, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Age Warning On All Hardcore Pornography On Wikipedia[edit]

this was immediately discussed above, is a bad violation of WP:CIR and has nothing to do with this article in particular

I understand that Wikipedia is not meant to be censored, but people not legally adults, with adult defined as between the ages of 16-25, depending on the part of the World that you live in, should not be able to view the sexually explicit stuff. Nudity is natural, but hardcore pornography should out of bounds, it can also lead to the violation of laws in some countries, be advised. Rules are not laws on Wikipedia, they are open to interpretation, don't be a slave to rules, have the rules be a slave to you. If there is Google Search, they don't need Wikipedia for it. We don't show graphic images of accidents, we don't need graphic images of hardcore porn. Not to mention all the porn that exists on Wikipedia which is not used in articles and still is present, that's not for "educational purposes", seems the only education people will gain from it is more intimacy with their genitals.Chantern15 (talk) 22:33, 29 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2021[edit]

2A02:C7F:E024:2A00:B98D:77F0:5CA0:42E2 (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because i want to make this article THE most meme worthy thing ever made

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 20:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Innacurate Cover Image, and an Irrelevant Photo[edit]

In my opinion, this image is not an accurate representation of cock and ball torture, and does not deserve to be at the top of the article. Chastity on its own does not invoke genital torture. The act of being locked in chastity is primarily done for the dominant party to have control over the subordinate's orgasms as well as providing them with a feeling of sexual frustration. I believe that either this image, or this image would be far better representation of cock and ball torture than what is being currently displayed. I am well aware that it is Wikipedia policy to choose the least shocking image from the article; however, I do not believe that the cover image should be included in the article to begin with. There is a much better chastity image on this page which includes genital torture. The former, in my opinion, should not be included in the article as it does not add much educational value in comparison to the latter. Slybirdz (wowee) 09:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. The photo of chastity cages isn't a very good lead image as there's only a small subsection about chastity cages, and chastity cages aren't always used in CBT.
However, I suggest using the 4 image gallery that's the first in devices and practices as the lead image, as that is the most relevant to this topic. Maybe add another image to the gallery, such as one of the images you suggested. 𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞 🗨️ 🖊️ 18:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I replaced the image with something non-graphic but relevant Dronebogus (talk) 10:30, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meme[edit]

In this article, is it worth mentioning the meme "Mater I need your help", where Lightning McQueen from the Cars series asks Mater to perform CBT on him? ThighFish (talk) 07:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If that meme ever became culturally significant, I might think so, but when just about anyone can create a meme and reference any topic, I'd say no. HalJor (talk) 20:00, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2023[edit]

its a slang for cock and ball torture 50.158.200.47 (talk) 05:19, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 05:40, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cock boards[edit]

A "cock board" or "cockbox" is usually a wooden board with a hole that the penis and testicles are fit through, and are often used for the genitals to be stepped on from above. It is commonly used in CBT. 142.186.19.181 (talk) 06:26, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cock_and_ball_torture&oldid=1206732107"