Talk:Douche

Redirect to Carson Daly?

article could become more accurate this way... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.100.231 (talk) 05:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Biased to say the least

This article seems to not only contradict itself, but actually _support_ douching as something healthy or harmless. No extensive research is necessary to find out how negative this practice is.. however, someone has taken the effort to find the little few studies that support douching and pasted them inside the article. Basic physiology aside, it's easy to find evidence about the association between douching and infection, ectopic pregancy, and because of this, even death. user:guruclef

What is this article about?!?!?

Is this some joke like the korean fan death? I mean, the US have some of the best doctors in the world and they allow their population to risk their health by using these devices??

Usage outside the US

I am from the United Kingdom, and it certainly is not widely used here. In fact I have never heard a British person use the term either as an insult or in any other sense! Please remove the UK from your list of places where this is commonly used as an insult.

yer this is never used in the u.k (maybee exsept london). neads removing.

Vinegar

I heard somewhere that vinegar is used as a.... 'flush' is this true? Hope not.

yep that's true people have used all kinds of liquids especially soda sprayed out of a can.

What the?!

I am English and I think that what people from the US might not realize is that this term is not understood or used in Europe (and possibly the rest of the non-US world). Is this something US women actually do?(1) Can someone give me a percentage figure?(2) And where does this practice have its origins?(3) I am totally freaked out by this discovery of this US-Europe difference.

• = (1) All women do this. Yes, even your Mom. They just don't tell you. Some use improvised devices.

uh, no they don't. my mom doesn't, my sister doesn't. none of my friends or myself ever douche. it's an outdated thing.71.232.108.228 06:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• = (2) 99.9%
• = (3) Staines, just west of London.

The spelling in Europe is 'Dousch' I think.

I'm afraid this is just ignorance. The use of the gadget may or may not be more common in the USA but there is nothing to support the idea of a linguistic difference. I don't know what the "other languages" referred to may be (it's a French word) but it can certainly have the same sense in French. Flapdragon 23:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

 'Douche-bags' are almost only used in the US, so in any romance language, "douche" (especially in france, where it is exactly the same word) means shower. It is hard for people to expect the "second meaning" of a word for something they hardly knew existed.

Its mainly just used as an insult in the US I think

yes thats true in the u.s its used as a insult e: FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING DOUCHE BAG!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think women in "Generation X" and younger do this very much anymore. I think it was really quite a common thing for women to do in the 50's and 60's. The advertisements for brands like Massengil were very widespread during the 80's, and they were pretty embarrasing, and I think that has some part in the popularization of the word as an insult. But I have never known a woman in my generation (gen x) who actually did this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Konky2000 (talk • contribs) 18 July 2006 (UTC)

For the very reasons mentioned above I would feel no compunction in altering the section on slang. Being a Brit, I too claim ignorance as to the meaning of the word "douche". Its slang usage (just like the embarrassing commercials) has not yet crossed the Atlantic. What kind of prat thought he knew the slang of a foreign country? I'm dubious as to whether the other nationalities mentioned use this term in this way too, but I am not qualified to say. I don't have a registered account so I can't alter this page but this is A CLEAR AND BLATANT INNACURACY 212.76.37.142 00:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Abstract:

Background: Although douching is common, it is a potentially harmful habit.

Goal: We studied attitudes and knowledge around the behavior of douching.

Study Design: Of 1200 women enrolled in this multisite study, 532 douched and answered questions on a structured interview regarding douching behaviors.

Results: Over half had douched for 5 or more years. Douching was most often initiated on the recommendation of female relatives and practiced for reasons of hygiene. Half of women considered douching to be healthy. Those who considered douching to be unhealthy reported that douching may disrupt vaginal flora but did not cite more serious risks. Nonetheless, women who had been advised by a health professional to stop douching were less likely to consider douching healthful and were more likely to have tried to stop.

Conclusion: Women had a limited understanding of potential adverse health consequences associated with douching. Targeted health messages may influence women to initiate douching cessation.

(C) Copyright 2003 American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association

[1]

Abstract:

Objective: The objective of this study was to identify douching patterns and their relation to sexually transmitted disease (STD) among black women seeking an STD evaluation.

Study Design: This study was a cross-sectional survey with biologic testing for chlamydia and gonorrhea infection.

Results: Of 891 participants, 46.1% were current douchers. Commonly identified reasons for douching were to cleanse after menses (65.4%) and to feel fresh (42.2%). Frequent douching was associated with douching after sex (P <0.001), to alleviate an itch (P <0.001), and to feel fresh (P <0.001). Women who douched during menses (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 4.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13-20.13) and to alleviate an itch (AOR = 3.66; 95% CI = 1.00-13.41) were more likely to have a current chlamydial infection.

Conclusions: Douching was common among this high-risk population of black women. Prospective studies are needed to determine the consequences of douching and any mediating effects of women's motivation for the behavior on reproductive health.

(C) Copyright 2006 American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association

[2]

Myles Brand

Why does the link for Myles Brand, president of the NCAA, redirect here? It was funny when it came up the first time, but I believe this mischief is now tired. Give Mr. Brand his own page with a biography, rather than just trying to get away with accusing him of being a douchebag. Thank you, Eric Mc.

It's been taken care of, and the editor warned. Zoe 06:09, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Condoms only 99% success rate?

From the article:

"proper condom use reduces the chance of conception by as much as 99/100"

This doesn't sound like a very good success rate, doesn't it? It sure must be higher than that, right?

• According to Planned Parenthood, if used perfectly, 2 out of 100 users will become pregnant. More typical usage habits will result in 15 pregnancies out of 100. Joyous (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

um... 99% is pretty good, when you consider the percentages for other non-hormonal contraception methods, so i'm confused about what your problem is here. obviously nothing can be 100% effective (except not having sex) while both partners still have their reproductive organs intact. the less than 100% effectiveness rate in "perfect" condom use probably signifies that they can and do occasionally break. if you are worried about becoming pregnant while using only condoms, perhaps you should look into using another method as well. also, if you are in a part of the world where emergency contraception (the morning-after pill) is available, this is a good alternative in the occasion of condom failure. --Romarin 22:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Please read the main article, which now gives a 97% effectiveness rate. This is consistent with (condom#Condom failure. Verne Equinox

I don't think 99% is per use, I think it's annual or something like that. Otherwise it would be pretty high (i.e. have sex 100 times with condoms and your chances are pretty good you'll have a baby) 74.104.2.135 23:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Jordan

Lies, damned lies & statistics ;) A 99% success rate means, that if 100 couples were to use condoms as their only means of contraception, in 1 of those couples, on average, the female will conceive. There are, of course, countless confounders to consider when studying the effectiveness of condom use, thus making it very hard to present an accurate success rate. Superdix 21:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism? or... something

What's with the last line in the slang section? "(name deleted) is a HUGE douchebag"

• I don't see the line you're referring to. Are you looking at an outdated version of the page? Joyous (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of all the vandalism of this page, can we try to get it locked from editing or something like that? These vandals are really annoying me recently. King Bee 04:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Page protection is usually a last resort, and only implemented for the short term. Hbackman 06:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

This page is constantly vandalized and reverted. Protect, protect, protect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.210.185.3 (talk • contribs)

Not so fresh feeling...

Should there be a reference to those awful "Mom, what do I do when I get that...um...not so fresh feeling" ads they used to show at dinner time in the late 80s/early 90s in the US? youngamerican (talk) 14:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Knowing you have Howard Dean as your party leader.

Certainly not. Advertising campaigns usually get separate articles. See VDub and The Subservient Chicken. Brian G. Crawford 16:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Miscategorization

"Douche" is listed in the "Sex moves" category. I have never heard of a sex move by this name, and I see no mention of it in this article; I'm removing the tag. --BDD 20:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Douche / douching

Since the major part of the article is about the habit/custom of douching rather than the device used, I suggest the page be moved to "douching". // Habj 23:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure "douching" is a word. "Douche" is used as a verb and a noun. A woman would ask another woman, "do you douche?" Konky2000 17:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Douche

I can see where some international folk may get thrown by the English term "douche". As the same term with the same spelling means "shower" in the French language. How it came to mean, um, this in English is beyond my scope of knowledge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.187.154.49 (talk • contribs) .

Not that hard to imangine how the two are related. Zagsa 01:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Zagsa

But it'still weird because a) in most romance languages this would mean a shower (only in the US it would be a 'shower for the genitals'), and because b) in the rest of the world douches don't exist, or are many many times less common than enemas.

Danielle douche means you...so please do not say this word in front of your mother because she is just protecting you from making from of youself..

Douchebag history

October 6, 1983-Robert Freeman was born.

69.19.182.99 06:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Might want to leave this article permanently semi-protected. --Scott McNay 16:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Might it be done to remove the semi-protection? The article is in serious need of improvement as it currently does not meet the standards for an article. Removing the protection might give newer editors the opportunity to improve on it. Bstone 11:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Citations Needed

Sorry to put in almost every other line, but this article is making lots of scientific and medical claims which simply are unsourced. In order to maintain the integrity of this article I have placed requests for citations. In it's current form i doubt this article stand up to the integrity required by wikipedia. Bstone 04:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

It's been almost 2 weeks since the plea for citations and none have yet come. I am wondering if at some point this will require the article to be deleted or significantly truncated? Bstone 21:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The safety concerns with douching (citation from US department of health): http://www.4woman.gov/faq/douching.htm

Douching is just another example of the paranoia of western society to germs and anything that makes us human. We have ten times as may bacterial cells in our GI tract than cells in our body. People, we need germs!

Not seeing how this is relevant to the citations needed for the article. Bstone 11:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

It seems various editors have removed almost all of the notes, but have not cited any materials. Perhaps they would like to discuss this, as it appears to me that this article is not up to standards of wikipedia. Bstone 14:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Are citations still needed for lines that are currently in the realm of common knowledge, such as putting unclean things inside yourself may introduce foreign bacteria. For example, in an article about surgery, would it really be necessary to cite a claim that not cleaning surgery utensils caused disease? Honestly, give the s a break. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raggedtoad (talk • contribs)

Dear Anonymous editor, Wikipedia requires that every factual claim be sourced. So-called "common knowledge" is not a basis for an article which claims to be part of an encyclopedia. You should read up on what Wikipedia is for and about. It is also good form to sign all your discussions with four tildes (~). Sincerely, Bstone 07:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added sources. I'm surprised that they didn't already exist, since it took me all of 30 seconds to find them via Google. Women in America have been brainwashed by douche manufacturers to think that men will hate them if they don't douche, and men have been brainwashed to think that a woman who doesn't douche is dirty. The opposite is actually the case - douches promote (smelly and dangerous) infections, and (according to the Science News article I found - a reliable source if ever there was one) douche users have almost double the risk of tubal pregnancies and low-weight babies. Amazing that so many insecure women have fallen for manufacturers trying to make them feel inadequate to the point that they're risking their children's lives and health.

It probably took me less time to add those sources than it took for you to add all those fact tags. --Charlene 11:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I should also point out that douches were popular back before drugs such as Monistat were devised. They stung, they caused other infections, and they could even cause you to miscarry if you were pregnant, but they sometimes cured the yeast infection. Once antifungals were developed, though, the manufacturers of these items had to find a way to keep in business - so they advertised that douches were necessary for "cleanliness" and "freshness", playing on women's insecurities. You really have to wonder why douching is almost unheard of in other countries (the UK, Canada, Japan). A source (not really suited for the main page but fine for a talk page):[3]. --Charlene 11:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Rephrase

The term "douche" is reworded and reused and is becoming a more popular term in American counter-culture. Slang has allowed the word to morph into phrases like "douchey," "McDouchester," "Oh I didn't know you were Mayor of Douchbagton."

The above content I have removed, as I feel that: (a) I myself, at the very moment, cannot rephrase such material (as I don't exactly understand what the author intended to say - I understand it from gut feeling that the author is getting at the word "douche"'s morphology and usage, leading to its "rewording" [I swear, there's got to be a better way to say that, and to rephrase the quote stuff]); and (b) that it can and should be better worded (and (c) that you can do it ;) ). Qwerty (talk) 10:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Masterhand10^{(Talk)(Contributions)} 06:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Beau Mirchoff

A redirect page for Beau Mirchoff leads here, but he's an actor, so I'm guessing that it's vandalism, but I thought I should post it on here, as I'm not too sure about what to do about it. So I'll let someone else figure that one out Em Mitchell 14:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)