Talk:Diphallia

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What the... What?!?

"Most men with diphallus learn to use it for intercourse, though they cannot penetrate two partners at the same time." No, really, can anyone please explain to me what the author meant by that? What does "though they cannot penetrate two partners at the same time" mean? Doesn't that just sound wrong? 151.21.34.242 (talk) 16:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Double Circumcision

Someone circumcised both dicks in the picture. LOL? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.79.39.60 (talk) 04:46, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed phrase

Inclusion of this phrase has been disputed - "The condition in pigs and other mammals has been documented. It is also commonly mistaken that sharks have two "penises", but this is false."

from Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Duopenis

- And so you merged highly suspect information into diphallia? Why? Had you found external verification for the "myth" of sharks or pigs? Geogre 16:36, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  - Yes I did find external verification, as anyone would looking at this for more than two seconds . pig shark -- Netoholic @ 20:45, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- And you didn't feel that you needed to insert any references? You also felt that this was of vital importance to the diphallia article? Have you ever heard of the importance of negative findings? Read many papers about things not being found in sharks? I'm not interested in churlish edit wars with you. Geogre 01:26, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  - We don't link external sources for every tidbit of fact in an article. But then, even if I wanted to, you've protected the page (against policy) to prevent my attempts. -- Netoholic @ 01:56, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Is it true that plankton do not have diphallia? How about clams? How about coral? Why aren't you including those "facts" that don't need documentation? Is it true that diphallia occurs in most mammals and is usually fatal? Anyone who does more than two seconds of research knows that mutations and birth defects occur in all forms. Why haven't you included that? Could it be that you are so in love with your decision to "merge" and redirect that you cannot listen to the community, cannot follow sane article construction, and would willingly go into an edit war over an irrelevant and unsubstantiated sentence? You keep putting it in, and I'll keep taking it out, without violating the 3 revert rule until someone decides to listen to the community. Geogre 02:33, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

- - Hi Geogre, I am sorry to say that you are falling pray to all the faults that you are criticising your protagonist of having in this context. Can you see that? Above all: respect and politeness is needed across the spectrum. Thanks.

Query

"It is estimated that one out of 5 million live births " of all live births or male live births? Rich Farmbrough 22:47, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

MedicineNet article says 5-6 million, but provides no references. We should be suspicious of this estimate!

picture

I saw some pictures of a guy that had this condition on steackandcheese.com back in 2000 or so. The pictures were taken in a pornographic context, though (he was having sex with a woman). They were defintely NOT photoshopped!

Information

This article barely has anything on the second penis, does it work? Size? Deformities? etc.

"Does it work?"... Wow, the penis fulfils enough roles that that question is amusingly open... I've seen a video of someone urinating with both penises simultaneously. I've heard that there is little problem with erections, however, as the page says, congenital defects may accompany diphallia, and those may have higher incidence of problems. Granted, I suppose I need to look for sources to back that up. samwaltz 07:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At least they worded it nicely.. 'difficulty of application' =P

rare disorder

The intro says it's an extremely rare disorder with only approximately 100 such cases of diphallus reported throughout the world. But then it says than one in 5 million men have it. That would mean there are about 500 men alive with diphalia. Are those 100 cases 'ever recorded' or 'alive today'? The latter I can imagine, with 80% of the men who have it hiding it out of shame or something. DirkvdM 05:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot answer the question but I can offer up that a medical textbook owned by a dermatopathologist I work for stated '100 cases ever recorded'.70.74.138.126 (talk) 01:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

seems unlikely that it can regularly be concealed, given the accompanying malformations. question remains, how surgically correctible is it?Toyokuni3 (talk) 19:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, this condition is easily concealable; most men do wear clothing in public. —Lowellian (reply) 09:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plural: Penes vs. Penises

I can't believe I'm posting this, but as there has been a revert, I suppose it's worth mentioning. The standard Latin plural of "penis" is "penes" (3rd declension noun, and such), however current standard English tends to view 3rd declension nouns the normal English plural of +(e)s. I'm going through a more descriptive grammar phase at the moment, so I'd be inclined to agree with the latter. Does anyone else have a preference? samwaltz 15:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, penes sounds better to me, but for most people it impedes understanding. Let's eschew obfuscation and use penises. —Keenan Pepper 03:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really?

The following removed for clarification. It does not agree with the succeeding paragraph. WBardwin 05:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for this is because the infant often has a parasitic twin situated inside them, specifically in the dipygus position. In other words, the lower regions of the parasitic twin are well-developed, but not the upper regions

Clarity for laymen

I think also in bold at the very beginning it should also be known as "multiple penis disorder". Anonymous 00:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.39.78 (talk) 02:32, 7 July 2009[reply]

Only if it's actually known as that already. The article says it "is a medical condition in which a male infant is born with two penises" so it's already been clarified. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction in "Characteristics"

"Sterility due to difficulties of application" sounds just the opposite of "most men learn to use it for intercourse". Unless federal law mandates all diphallics to pull out. --NetRolller 3D 02:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a contradiction because sterility isn't the same as impotence. Infertile men can still have sex. Plus it says "tend to be sterile", not "all men with a diphallus are sterile". Anemone Projectors 11:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Picture added.

It's a free picture. It looks like the guy has two glandes and one sheath. Freakish, yes? It looks like the surgeon circumcised both heads. PBF1974 (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the picture is gone now. Even though the website I obtained it from said it was free. Hey, I tried. PBF1974 (talk) 06:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found a picture made and published by the CDC. It should be bulletproof. PBF1974 (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your first image didn't contain a licence template, and also it was not possible to tell from the source if it was actually free as you just put "imageshack.us" and not where it actally came from. The new image is an example of genital bisection rather than diphallia. Anemone Projectors 17:22, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, make the pic smaller, it'll have less of a shock factor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.34.157 (talk) 06:42, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotect plz

Seems to have been vandalized recently. Also looks like a topic particularily enticing to vandals, most common addition is "Diphallia is common in [insert etnic group/ country here]". — Preceding unsigned comment added by HTMLCODER.exe (talk • contribs) 10:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture added from commons

Disgusting picture, but it is what we have to work with. Also, you asked for it. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 21:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reddit AMA

Someone on Reddit with Diphallia recently did an AMA. He posted pictures of his genetalia as well. Maybe we can use these pictures instead of the weird blue waffle thing we have. Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1u75hh/i_am_the_guy_with_two_penises_ama

He's received non-sensational(ish) mainstream press coverage as well, with direct interviews by the media: BBC News, Rolling Stone, so this appears to be a genuine case, not a hoax, and should be considered for addition to the article. Having two fully functional penises is very unusual indeed, as (as this article says) diphallia is normally associated with other developmental abnormalities. -- The Anome (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We could use the image of his genitals for this page. BrxBrx(talk)^{(please reply with { {re|BrxBrx}})} 01:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be a negative nancy but this post here calls out a lot of strange stuff that the supposed user has been doing that I feel calls his authenticity into question. Unless any of the news articles actually claim to have independednt proof I would say the Reddit AMA guy is a fake. All the news sources just seem to take the reddit mods confirmation at face value.★Trekker (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See here also.★Trekker (talk) 22:57, 4 October 2017

Yeah he seems, under closer scrutiny, to have been lying about the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:101:F000:2C07:1:0:0:3DD (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unless anyone objects I will go ahead in a few days and remove all the stuff about him in the article.★Trekker (talk) 16:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. A litle late but done.★Trekker (talk) 00:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Diphallia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130215082228/http://hypervocal.com/culture/2012/blanche-dumas-juan-baptista-dos-santos-two-penises-vaginas/ to http://hypervocal.com/culture/2012/blanche-dumas-juan-baptista-dos-santos-two-penises-vaginas/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated Paragraphs and Poor Grammar

This article has major problems in the way it's written. The first section repeats the same information twice. Similar repititions occur later in the article as well. The writing also very frequently leaves the articles out of sentences and has other serious grammar problems. Serveral paragraphs refer to "figure 1", "figure 3", "figure 4" which are not included. It looks, honestly, like the article is made entirely of chunks of text stolen from other sources and positioned semi-randomly, some of them poorly translated using machine translation. 2601:441:4480:53B0:6816:A5FB:BC73:719A (talk) 02:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

one hundred cases have been reported until today

It doesn't sound plausible with 1 in 5-6 million people having it. More than 60 million have been born since then. --94.134.89.1 (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Diphallia 01.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notable clinical cases - may need checking for COI?

Having just had a comb over the Notable clinical cases section, I noticed that about four paragraphs had 'refer figure [X]' in them at some point, with no corresponding images in-text.

I've dug up the diff where this was added; it doesn't mention text being incorporated outright from a source, but I still find the mention of 'figures' in an article section with no images fishy.

I don't have access to the medical journals cited in this section, so if someone with access could check the clinical examples against their sources for plagiarism, I'd appreciate it.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Note that this is the only edit the editor who added this has made thus far - and that's a *lot* of text for one edit.) --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠹⡗⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣆⠀⠀⢀⣰⣶⣄⡀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⣿⡿⣶⣤⣤⣀⢘⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠆⠀⡾⣿⣿⢿⠟⢦⣀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣿⣿⣿⣿⢻⣿⣿⢿⣿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⠆⢀⣿⣻⣧⣞⣰⣖⣿ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⣾⣿⣿⣫⣿⣾⣿⣽⣿⣿⣧⣆⣀⡀⠠⠷⠀⠀⣠⢠⣮⣶⣸⣿⣿⣟⣿⢿⣿⣿ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣶⠾⣥⣿⣿⣿⠋⠫⣿⣿⡿⡿⣾⣿⠉⠉⠁⣀⣀⡀⠃⠀⠤⠿⠿⣿⡿⠛⠿⣿⣿⢾⣷⣿ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠀⠀⢠⡿⣿⣿⡏⠳⡄⠀⠀⣠⣴⣾⣿⣻⣵⡻⣿⢿⣿⡴⠋⠙⠟⠓⠗⠍⠁⠀⠀⢰⠿⠿⠛⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⣾⣟⣏⠉⠛⣿⣧⣿⣿⡶⢷⣿⣄⣰⣿⣿⣿⡿⣟⣿⣷⣿⣈⣽⣀⠚⠃⢀⡀⠃⠀⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣹⣿⣿⣿ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⠶⠚⠋⠉⠀⢀⣼⣿⣿⡿⣟⣶⣾⣿⣿⡿⢿⡏⣉⣤⡿⠛⣉⣿⣿⡿⠏⠀⣸⠿⣷⣠⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⢀⣹⣿⣯⣿ ⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⡾⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣼⣿⢿⠻⣴⣏⣽⣿⣿⣿⣷⣾⣇⢹⡟⠀⠴⠄⣈⣿⠀⢲⣜⠛⠃⠾⣋⣤⡶⣼⣶⣦⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠑⢀⣀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣹⣿⣿⣶⣿ ⠂⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣶⡷⠟⠀⢀⡀⠀⣰⣿⣿⡿⠿⠈⣼⣿⣟⠻⣿⠟⠋⠋⣻⡿⣾⣄⣀⡀⠀⣸⣩⣶⠾⠿⠶⠶⠿⠿⠷⠶⣬⣍⡛⢿⣆⡀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣧⡀⠀⣰⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿ ⣀⠀⠀⢀⠈⠉⠩⠭⣭⣽⡿⣷⣴⣿⠋⡉⡁⢀⡾⢃⠈⢉⣿⣽⣤⣀⣠⣿⡀⡾⠛⢀⣤⠶⠛⢉⣀⣴⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣦⡀⣉⡙⠧⣍⠙⢿⣶⣦⣸⣟⢩⡃⠾⡿⢿⣿⣿⣿⠿ ⣾⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⠟⠉⣿⡇⢸⣧⣠⢈⣴⠟⣀⡼⢋⠉⢉⣀⢈⣿⣿⢖⡶⠋⢁⣠⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣿⣿⣿⣙⣿⣶⣄⠑⣤⠹⣿⣿⣧⣼⠱⣾⣡⣾⣿⣿⣏⣼ ⣿⣃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⠉⠀⠀⠈⠁⠀⣾⣶⠾⠁⣴⣿⢶⡤⠀⠉⠀⢈⡿⣁⠿⢁⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡜⣷⣿⢿⣿⡿⠀⣸⣻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⡏⢉⠉⠁⠀⠀⠈⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡼⠟⠁⢠⣾⣵⢷⢈⣄⡈⣠⣴⡟⣀⡿⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠙⠿⣿⣿⠟⠛⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣾⣿⡿⠏⠄⠈⠹⠟⠛⢛⣋⣉⣻ ⡇⢸⠿⢷⡾⠅⠀⢼⣷⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⠈⠉⠹⢻⠿⠿⠉⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⠯⠀⠈⠀⠀⠉⣀⣀⠔⠂⠉⠉⢹⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠂⠈⠙⢿ ⡇⠈⠀⢸⠃⠀⠀⢀⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠄⢀⣴⠾⣟⣋⣥⢶⣶⣶⣶⢶⣾⣿⣾⣛⣻⣷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾ ⠀⣰⣦⣽⣦⢠⣤⣾⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⠇⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⢇⣀⣴⣿⣿⣻⣯⣩⣶⣶⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠦⠀⠀⢾⢿ ⣾⣿⡿⠇⣫⣶⣀⣒⡀⠱⢴⣄⣰⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⣠⡧⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣭⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⢆⠐⢾⣿ ⣿⣷⣶⡇⣹⣭⣽⣽⡇⠐⠮⠋⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⢟⡾⢳⠃⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢿⣿⠿⣿⣿⣿⣬⣽⣿⢻⣿⠟⣦⡙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⡀⠘⢦⡀⡀⢀⢸⣾ ⣿⣽⣟⣉⣭⣽⣾⣿⣷⠄⠀⠈⣷⣄⣸⣿⣆⠠⠶⠖⢒⣒⣤⡟⠀⡏⠀⠀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣶⣂⣴⣾⣿⡟⣿⣿⣷⡀⠀⠘⠿⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠇⠀⠈⢳⡄⠀⣼⣿ ⡾⠿⠉⠉⢿⣿⣿⣿⣷⠶⠀⠈⢳⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣾⠿⠟⠛⠀⣧⢸⡄⡀⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⣾⡿⣿⣿⣿⣇⣽⣿⣿⡛⢷⣤⡀⣠⣿⣿⣿⢿⣿⠇⠠⡆⡀⢄⢸⢳⣶⠟⢻ ⣶⣶⣶⣾⣿⣻⣋⣛⣛⣀⣀⣀⣼⣳⣿⣿⡿⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⢸⣷⣇⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠁⠙⣿⣿⡁⣹⣿⡍⠙⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⣿⠀⣄⡇⡇⠀⠈⢸⡟⠘⡟ ⢷⣾⣟⢿⣻⣿⣹⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⡿⢻⡧⣽⣶⡁⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⢸⠀⣿⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠄⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡀⠈⢿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⢿⠀⢸⠇⡇⠀⠐⢸⡇⠐⡧ ⣾⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⢿⣿⣯⣿⣿⣇⣿⣿⣺⣿⣿⣖⣶⣘⣾⠀⢰⠀⣹⣦⠀⣿⠏⠉⠛⠻⣿⣿⣧⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣾⣿⡟⠋⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⣸⡀⡇⡆⠀⣸⡇⢰⣧ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢀⣊⠀⣿⣿⡂⠗⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⢰⠀⠁⢸⢀⣿⣿⢧⣇⢰⡏⠀⣸⢿ ⣄⢈⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⡋⡋⢉⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣈⣡⣌⣿⣼⡷⣦⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⡀⡟⠀⣀⡿⣾⣿⡿⠟⣾⣸⠇⡤⣿⠸ ⣷⡸⢿⡏⢹⣿⡷⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣯⣶⠏⢋⣡⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣭⡿⢋⣵⠟⠳⣿⡿⣧⣤⣥⣄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣶⣾⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⡜⢧⣤⢥⣿⣩⣿⣱⣾⣷⣿⢰⣶⣿⣾ ⣿⣿⣾⣷⣿⣿⣷⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⣁⣤⣹⣷⣿⣶⠿⣿⣶⢟⣱⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣿⡙⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣏⣻⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢀⣾⣿⣿⡏⢘⣶⠿⠁⣴⣿⣯⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠟⠋⠉⢱⡿⢹⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣷⣶⣿⣤⣥⣴⠼⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣌⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣋⢀⣿⣿⠷⠋⣵⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⡄⠀⣿⠇⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣽⣿⣿⣦⡉⢻⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⣀⡈⢉⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣯⡿⠋⣁⣰⡾⠡⠾⠿⠏⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢀⣾⣟⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣹⣿⣿⣧⡸⣦⣝⡿⣿⣻⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣏⣸⣷⣧⡀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢋⣁⡴⢿⣿⣿⢷⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠙⣿⣧⠘⣿⣏⠿⠿⠿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣎⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣏⣻⣿⡿⡿⠮⣿⢩⣷⠿⠛⡧⠰⠛⣿⣷⣾⣿⡿⠙⣺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣉⣿⡛⠉⠋⠉⠻⣿⡛⠀⠉⠉⠁⢉⣨⣿⢻⣿⣿⢿⣦⣿⣿⣶⣿⣿⣦⣴⣶⢶⣿ ⣛⣻⣟⣋⣿⣿⡟⢙⡏⠋⣹⠟⢁⡳⣶⣷⣿⣿⣰⢲⣶⣶⣆⣽⣿⣿⠻⣷⣀⢿⣿⣹⡏⣿⡟⢾⣿⡓⠉⠀⠀⠹⠟⠂⠀⠀⣀⣸⣿⣧⡾⢸⣿⡛⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⡍⣿⣏⣹ ⢿⣍⣯⡽⠿⠿⣥⠬⣥⣾⣏⣠⣿⣷⡿⢻⡿⣿⣿⣷⣿⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⣿⣿⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣀⡈⢷⡄⠀⠀⡆⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣹⣿⡿⢇⣿⣿⡏⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡼⣷⣿⣿⣿ ⣠⣿⣿⡗⣿⣀⣀⣴⣟⠁⣿⣿⣿⡟⢁⣾⢃⣿⣿⣿⣏⡌⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⡄⣾⣿⣾⣽⡏⠀⠀⠀⠻⠆⠀⠁⠀⠀⠘⠿⠙⢿⣿⣇⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠛⢿⡿⠧⢹⣯⣿⣿ !grofferropt (talk) 07:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that Braille?2604:2D80:7186:600:0:0:0:74F0 (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red growth in picture

Perhaps there should be a note clarifying what that large red growth in the picture is (situated some distance above the two penises). Is it a tumor or some sort of hernia? Visitors to this article are definitely going to wonder.2604:2D80:7186:600:0:0:0:74F0 (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple clitorises in females?

Has this ever been documented, and if so, what is the name used in the medical community for the condition? (I had a really weird dream last night in which I read about a woman who had around 50 clitorises, and while _that_ many is certainly impossible in reality, it seems likely that at least one person was born with two at some point). 2604:2D80:7186:600:0:0:0:74F0 (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

idfk bru i just have a vagina,, i know i have one lmfao 216.164.255.222 (talk) 00:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]