Gay Patriot Header Image

Men Line Up For Testicle Shocks

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 5:34 pm - November 9, 2005.
Filed under: General

Um… I thought this is what got some of our folks in trouble in the Abu Ghraib scandal? )You know, the one Ted Kennedy celebrated at its one year anniversary?)

Well, it seems like some people WANT to have it done to them…..

Serbs line up for testicle shocks – Ananova (hat tip: The Corner at NRO)

Serbian fertility expert Dr Sava Bojovic, who runs one of the clinics offering the service, said the small electric shock makes men temporarily infertile by stunning their sperm into a state of immobility.

He said: “We attach electrodes to either side of the testicles and send low electricity currents flowing through them.

“This stuns the sperm, effectively putting them to sleep for up to 10 days, which means couples can have sex without fear of getting pregnant.”

You know there’s another alternative that doesn’t hurt as much. It’s called a condom.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

39 Comments

  1. Does Andrew Sullivan know about this?

    Comment by V the K — November 9, 2005 @ 5:47 pm - November 9, 2005

  2. Don’t you have anything (and I mean there’s GOT to be something) more poignant than testicle shocking? Were the elections that dismaying? The continual exposure of things like secret torture prisons too unsettling?

    Comment by gaycowboybob — November 9, 2005 @ 6:08 pm - November 9, 2005

  3. People working at the CIA disclosing secrets is very disturbing, yes.
    I’d suggest if you’d like the subjects you want to be addressed that you create a blog. I don’t need a backseat driver…. thanks, though.

    Comment by GayPatriot — November 9, 2005 @ 6:19 pm - November 9, 2005

  4. It’s always funny when trolls (particularly trolls who gave up blogging because no one gave a rat’s ass what they had to say) whine about what is, or isn’t, on the GP blog.

    Comment by V the K — November 9, 2005 @ 6:22 pm - November 9, 2005

  5. I would argue that this works, not by stunning the sperm into immobility, but stunning the sperm DONOR into immobility……or maybe mobility consisting of rolling around on the floor and screaming a lot.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 9, 2005 @ 6:23 pm - November 9, 2005

  6. #5 — Much like a date with Andrew Sullivan.

    Comment by V the K — November 9, 2005 @ 6:36 pm - November 9, 2005

  7. Life Can Be So Felicitous Sometimes

    So Robbie and I were talking a bit earlier about what a thoroughly delightful phrase Bulgarian Transvestite Gypsy Folk Singer is and how he was thinking about trying to work it into as many random posts as possible. And I shared with him how, a few ye…

    Trackback by The Malcontent — November 9, 2005 @ 6:50 pm - November 9, 2005

  8. #7 — My blog has a similar running gag with the phrase ‘Smelly Pirate Hooker.’

    Comment by V the K — November 9, 2005 @ 6:55 pm - November 9, 2005

  9. No. 2, I’m like you — I came here for some stirring conversation with Gay Patriot friends about yesterday’s elections, but alas, they all seem to have taken a group vow of silence on that. I can just see the e-mails that flew between them about 10-ish last evening, all saying the same thing: “just don’t mention the elections on GP and, if the loons come in licking their chops, just talk about the weather, or a deck of cards, or Sue Myrick for Goddess, or testicle shock — or hell, just whistle a tune, but DO NOT get lured into a conversation about the elections…or about Abramoff squeezing $9 million to hook Bush up with the President of Gabon!”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/10/politics/10lobby.html?hp&ex=1131598800&en=c143a0d022b49971&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    Comment by Queer Patriot — November 9, 2005 @ 11:17 pm - November 9, 2005

  10. GCB and PP,

    While I find this thread quite shocking, I find your comments quite the same as your other comments, low voltage. And since voltage in Newtons (force in French units) per Coulomb (rate of charge, again, in French units), your arguments do not move me.

    This is GP’s blog, so he gets to initiate topics. If he wants to talk about slavic medical techniques, that is freedom of speech, and God bless him. If you wish to initiate another topic, such as last night’s elections showing that a Democratic Governor of New Jersey has not won re-election since 1977, while two Republican Governors have in that time frame, there are plenty of places for you to do so.

    Comment by Wendy — November 9, 2005 @ 11:44 pm - November 9, 2005

  11. The #10 comment secondary addresse should be QP, not PP. Sorry for the confusion 🙁

    Comment by Wendy — November 9, 2005 @ 11:45 pm - November 9, 2005

  12. or about Abramoff squeezing $9 million to hook Bush up with the President of Gabon!”

    So, Queer Patriot, you are claiming that Jack Abramoff was paid $9 million dollars to personally arrange a meeting between President Bush and the President of Gabon.

    Please read your own article citation:

    There has been no evidence in the public record that Mr. Abramoff had any role in organizing the meeting or that he received any money or had a signed contract with Gabon.

    And as for the elections, Queer Patriot, let’s indeed talk about them — especially Tim Kaine’s election in Virginia. Are you familiar with Kaine’s stances on gays?

    Kilgore and Kaine said they support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages. Both said they disapprove of adoptions by gay couples.

    And do you know to what Kaine credits his election? Showing voters how his faith influences his political views.

    Now, let’s watch you and GayCowboyBob fall all over yourselves saying Kaine’s views are “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive” and how wonderful it is that he uses his religion as a political guide.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 10, 2005 @ 2:17 am - November 10, 2005

  13. #12
    ND111111111111111111111111111111,

    Do not play so foolishly into the hands of those that want relevant discussion.

    Bruce has already said that this is a Serbian Testicle Shock thread and if you want serious discussion, go some place else buster.

    I have to get back to the fascinating and interesting replies to the

    “Ocian in view! O! the joy” thread.

    It reads like Chekov!

    Oh, the joy!

    Comment by chandler in hollywood — November 10, 2005 @ 4:06 am - November 10, 2005

  14. I guess the elections in Virginia sure do indicate that Virginia hates Republicans and now Virginia is a blue state and a bellwether for mass rejection of Republicans by the whole country. Oh, sure, Virginia also elected a Republican Lt. Governor and a Republican Attorney General, and a state legislature that is a 59 to 41 Republican majority. But that just means that Karl Rove… um… No, it means that Diebolt stole the… um…

    Hold on… I’m sure some conspiracy will rise up from the bong to explain this.

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 7:43 am - November 10, 2005

  15. Oh, they’re finally emerging from their holes to chat about Tuesday’s elections. Took ‘em a day or two to absorb the shock, but here they are. Love Wendy’s entry in No. 10 – what a good little soldier.

    Thirty, of course I read the article. Never said it proved anything, simply that here we potentially have more evidence of the culture of corruption that now pervades the Republican Party as it governs with absolute power. The article does state that your favorite lobbyist did ask for $9m to hook up the Pres. of Gabon with GWBush. So, let’s have a special prosecutor now to sort out if he collected, what he did with the money (pocketed it or distributed some to The Party via his laundering operations), and Bush’s role in it (surely Mr. Bush knows this lobbyist quite well by now and would know if a meeting had been arranged by him and whether that involved cash). You’d only want as much for President Clinton, right?

    Re: Kaine vs. Kilgore, I don’t think either – based on their public statements – is anti-gay. As for whether one is more pro-gay than the other, Kilgore clearly wanted a Virginia Constitutional Amendment that would ban BOTH gay marriage AND civil unions (check his website, it’s still up) and he criticized the Court in Lawrence v. Texas, while Kaine at times has both supported an amendment to ban MARRIAGE, he has not supported banning CIVIL UNIONS – as Kilgore has. (And you might want to investigate his positions beyond that one line in one article in one newspaper.) Kaine’s position, it seems to me, is essentially, let’s keep marriage the way it is without banning all forms of partnership/unions. And no, I’m crazy about that position, but I understand that why it would be the position of a person of faith running in Virginia (and, no, duckies, we don’t hate people of faith, as you try to perpetrate). So, if we have to make a choice, why wouldn’t we be for the Democrat with his nuancing of the issue that would essentially protect gays until Virginians come around on the issue versus the Republican who seeks an amendment to forever ban any type of partnerships, even knowing Virginians will eventually come around to it?

    And, no, VladTK, no one is saying that Virginia is suddenly Blue – but it IS moving in the right direction, which is more than we can say of the country under Bush right now. Speaking of right direction-wrong direction, you’ve all seen the numbers. Give me your best guess as to what Bush will do to pull us out of this depressing situation (I started to say “malaise”, but this thing has moved way past “malaise”.) Everything the man touches turns to shit – can he reverse that pattern over the next 3 years while he and his party are under seige from the Dems, prosecutors, and The People in general (or, about two-thirds of them)? Or are we stuck with this man and his incompetence? If the latter, shouldn’t we all start considering whether, for the good of the country, we ought to just impeach the jerk for his mis-leadership on Iraq alone and get this country back on track? Just asking.

    Comment by Queer Patriot — November 10, 2005 @ 9:07 am - November 10, 2005

  16. The strategy of the left: Throw all the shit you possibly can at the Bush Administration and then yell, “Look at the mess you’ve made.”

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 9:26 am - November 10, 2005

  17. Also, there wasn’t any shock in my case because I’m not the kind of pathetic loser whose personal happiness depends on the outcome of elections.

    I’m an entirely different kind of pathetic loser.

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 9:30 am - November 10, 2005

  18. Now, where exactly in the Constitution does it say that low approval numbers are grounds for impeachment?

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 10:04 am - November 10, 2005

  19. Thirty, of course I read the article. Never said it proved anything, simply that here we potentially have more evidence of the culture of corruption that now pervades the Republican Party as it governs with absolute power.

    Actually, no; as I pointed out, you said Abramoff squeezed $9 million dollars to hook Bush up with the President of Gabon. When pressed to provide evidence of that absolute statement, especially since the article flatly said that there was none, you demanded a special prosecutor be appointed because, even though you don’t have evidence, you knew that it had happened.

    Of course, what you lost in your moronic partisanship is that Abramoff is already under investigation by the state of Florida, a Federal grand jury, and two Senate committees. Indeed, the information released was from those existing, ongoing investigations. So basically what you want is a special prosecutor appointed to chase ghosts.

    As for Tim Kaine’s views on gay rights and marriage, they vary by location. But it is fun to watch you and GayCowboyBob suddenly spin why it’s pro-gay to support banning gay marriage and stripping gays of rights again and how you wholly support Tim Kaine writing his antigay religious views into the Virginia State Constitution. I particularly love your “nuance” argument, where you explain that permanently stripping gays of what you before have screamed is “equality” is good.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 10, 2005 @ 10:14 am - November 10, 2005

  20. #15 –

    New Jersey now has a Democrat governor. That’s quite a shocking concept.

    Comment by Gaylord McGay — November 10, 2005 @ 10:54 am - November 10, 2005

  21. #21 — Well, Gaylord, they had to clean-up the massive corruption from the previous administration. So, they elected a senator who “loaned” half a million bucks and bought a house for his union boss girlfriend. (Hey, at least he didn’t put her in charge of Homeland Security.)

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 11:17 am - November 10, 2005

  22. ND30, I’m not going to rise to your bait. I’ve explained several times what the difference is between Democrats who approve of gay marriage bans and your assessment of me somehow explaining that it’s pro-gay to be against gay marriage. It doesn’t wash.

    If the choice is between a Republican who outright does not support pro-gay initiatives as opposed to a Democrat who mostly has a good record on pro-gay initiatives except for marriage, I’m gonna vote for the Democrat 100% of the time if that’s the defining point between their candidacies. Supporting gay marriage does not singly define a candidate or his candidacy, as well I think you know. This argument is simply an easy way, like the brownie nosed kid in class, for you to stand up and shout “he’s anti-gay! He’s anti-gay! And you’re supprting him. Anti-gay is pro-gay for Democrats!” So while you find our responses funny for some reason, it’s even more humorous to see how easy it is to goad you up on your shaky soapbox and turn into a shrill charicature.

    Comment by gaycowboybob — November 10, 2005 @ 12:41 pm - November 10, 2005

  23. So here we are talking about hot steaming balls and fried nuts, and all you want to do is talk about politics? Lame!

    PS. You could have at least been clever or something and segway with “Wow! That must be how republicans feel after Tuesday’s Democratic erections… I mean elections”.

    Comment by sonicfrog — November 10, 2005 @ 1:12 pm - November 10, 2005

  24. “Also, there wasn’t any shock in my case because I’m not the kind of pathetic loser whose personal happiness depends on the outcome of elections.

    I’m an entirely different kind of pathetic loser”.

    Good one V.

    Comment by sonicfrog — November 10, 2005 @ 1:30 pm - November 10, 2005

  25. QP’s real identity is revealed:

    We ought to just impeach the jerk..” Comment by Queer Patriot — November 10, 2005 @ 9:07 am – November 10, 2005

    “If there was ever a time in history to impeach a President of the United States, it would be now.” — Barbra Streisand, 10 November 2005.

    (Tip to NRO and Drudge).

    Comment by V the K — November 10, 2005 @ 1:57 pm - November 10, 2005

  26. PS. You could have at least been clever or something and segway with “Wow! That must be how republicans feel after Tuesday’s Democratic erections… I mean elections”.

    I could have gone to a host of other issues like Republicans’ lack of ethics in Plamegate, Frist stock sales, Delay’s money laundering, Abramoff, covert secret prisons… there’s such a host to choose from, one hardly knows where to begin.

    [So far you’ve only identified one corrupt Republican a the usual leftist list o allegations. Ed.]

    But I know. I’ll start with testicle shocking in Serbia. Now that’s NEWS baby!

    Comment by gaycowboybob — November 10, 2005 @ 2:21 pm - November 10, 2005

  27. Thirty, go back and read my Nos. 9 and 15 and you’ll see how wrong you are in your rambling No. 19. I know you bear a nasty grudge against me for my past work in identifying the source of your identity issues (bi-sexuality crossed with religious fundamentalism and obsessive partisanship), but is that any reason to twist my words?

    As for YOU, Mr. Vlad: how dare you claim that Queer Patriot and I are the same people who need other people???!!!???

    Comment by Queer Patriot — November 10, 2005 @ 2:58 pm - November 10, 2005

  28. “But I know. I’ll start with testicle shocking in Serbia. Now that’s NEWS baby!”

    That is just a variation of GP’s tag to open this post so it isn’t original, funny, or clever or anything…

    Oh, wait, a Democrat giving lectures to Republicans about ethics? OK, that is kinda funny.

    Please, lets not rehash some of the scandals that the MSM ignored during the Clinton adminisration. And before you call me a horrible name, or stereotype me as a coservative shill or lackey or something, know that I voted for BC both times, but didn’t vote for GW this time ’round. It’s unfortunate, but the longer someone stays in power, the more likely there will be scandals, because in politics, to get to the top, you (or those around you) have probably bent if not broke rules to get there. It becomes a way of life, no matter how hard you try to keep your nose clean. And I’m not excusing or condoning the behavior. If they broke the law they should be punnished. But why is it that when Republicans are indicted you rush out and proclaim them absolutely guilty, but if a Democrat has charges pending, well, then it’s a right wing conspiracy. Compair the coverage of Plamegate to the Oil-for-Food scandal. I dare anyone to say that President Bush is being treated with the same respect and “innocent till proven guilty” attitude as Kofi Annon.

    Ooops. I’m ranting.

    Anyway, in short, there are plenty of ethically challenged politicians on all sides of the political fence. So lighten up, breath, take a break from political invectives, and have some fun.

    Comment by sonicfrog — November 10, 2005 @ 3:19 pm - November 10, 2005

  29. I’ve explained several times what the difference is between Democrats who approve of gay marriage bans and your assessment of me somehow explaining that it’s pro-gay to be against gay marriage.

    Actually, you haven’t. You spin wonderful stories about how John Kerry really believes in gay marriage and would never do anything to take it away, then run and hide when you get your teeth kicked in.

    Fortunately, weasel, in your desperate attempt to dance away, we now have you saying that opposing gay marriage isn’t antigay and that supporting state constitutional amendments meant specifically to strip gays of rights aren’t antigay. I can hardly wait for your counterparts Queer Patriot and Pussy Patriot to close ranks and agree.

    Ah yes, Queer Patriot….the disconnect here is that what you write and what you think you wrote (or want to have written after you’re called on it) are two different things. Sort of like how you and Bob argue that politicians who oppose gay marriage and support state constitutional amendments to permanently strip gays of rights are antigay, then turn that around the next to say they’re not.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 10, 2005 @ 3:35 pm - November 10, 2005

  30. #9

    Let’s talk about the liberals who benefitted from Abramoff.

    #11

    QP..PP, what’s the diff?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 10, 2005 @ 5:28 pm - November 10, 2005

  31. #30 … “QP..PP, what’s the diff?” … OK, maybe not much. But they are different people, and it is never my intention to mis-direct a comment. It is not polite.

    #20 … New Jersey has had plenty of Democratic Governors in the past few years (Jim Florio and Jim McGreavy, for example). Both never were re-elected. As a former resident of the Garden State, a Democrat as governor, or a Republican, is not much of a big deal. If a conservative was elected, that would be odd. I think the last conservative to get the GOP nomination (before the current cycle) was Charles Sandman in 1973, when he defeated incumbent Gov. Wm. Cahill in the primary. A Republican in NJ is not much different than a Democrat in a sizeable number of issues.

    #15 … “Love Wendy’s entry in No. 10 – what a good little soldier.” I have tried to be polite to you many times. Never call me a soldier. GO NAVY 🙂

    Comment by Wendy — November 10, 2005 @ 9:31 pm - November 10, 2005

  32. You spin wonderful stories about how John Kerry really believes in gay marriage and would never do anything to take it away, then run and hide when you get your teeth kicked in.

    Again, it’s hilarious to see how worked up you get when you try to purport an untenable argument. Flame on ND30!

    Comment by gaycowboybob — November 11, 2005 @ 1:56 am - November 11, 2005

  33. No. 31 is certainly right about one thing — that there are very few differences between New Jersey Democrats and most NJ Republicans (exceptions being a handful of people like Bret Schundler, who are deeply committed conservatives), so much so that you sometimes wonder why the two parties don’t just meld together. Especially people like the Keans, Christie Whitman, Bob Franks, etc. — all pro-choice, pro-gay, pro-environment, pro-education, pro-union, and on and on. Even Forrester, who lost to Corzine, is basically liberal, but being a fraud, switched back and forth on key issues from primary to general election season, to the point of losing his identity and leaving himself with only mud to sling.

    There is one point of difference between the two parties in NJ — taxes: the NJ GOP (unlike NJ Dems) will cut state income taxes and borrow (through bonds) the difference, increasing debt and debt service. Which sounds nice to most of you at GP, I’m sure, until you understand that THE tax issue in NJ is property taxes (which are out of sight, roughly $25-30,000 a year on a home of say $1m in value, which is fairly common in that wealthiest of states — yes, NJ had a higher median HHI than CT last time I checked), and cutting state income taxes only increases the fiscal pressure (less state-local sharing of revenue) on local govts., which respond with even higher property taxes. The Democrat, Jon Corzine, supports the only way out of that property tax trajectory — a State Constitutional Convention to consider issues such as aggregation of some of the plethora of local governments. NJ is famous for the sheer number of local govts. — all requiring their own expensive municipal govts. (yes, each has its own Fire, Police, Sanitation, Public Works, School Superintendent, etc. — each commanding a high salary). None of these locals want to aggregate together (or be combined) and lose their local identities, so they continue to exist as separate govts (sometimes just 1-square-mile towns right next to each other) and property taxes always increase. To many of us, combining some of these bureaucracies is the only way out of the property tax prison the state is currently locked in. Can you imagine paying $25-30K in property taxes each year, with prospects for continuing annual increases? That’s middle class yearly income in some states.

    Comment by Queer Patriot — November 11, 2005 @ 8:15 am - November 11, 2005

  34. The Democrat, Jon Corzine, supports the only way out of that property tax trajectory — a State Constitutional Convention to consider issues such as aggregation of some of the plethora of local governments. NJ is famous for the sheer number of local govts. — all requiring their own expensive municipal govts. (yes, each has its own Fire, Police, Sanitation, Public Works, School Superintendent, etc. — each commanding a high salary).

    Unfortunately, aggregating those would result in the loss of thousands, of state and local government jobs — jobs currently represented by unions. The main opposition to aggregation comes from these unions, not from local voters or taxpayers.

    Now, you’re telling us that a Democrat, especially a Democrat as beholden to labor unions that represent state government workers both personally and politically as is Corzine will do ANYTHING that threatens union jobs?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 11, 2005 @ 11:17 am - November 11, 2005

  35. Again, it’s hilarious to see how worked up you get when you try to purport an untenable argument. Flame on ND30!

    Or how much you sputter when you get burned. 🙂 I don’t care; as long as you’re on record saying that it’s not antigay to support constitutional amendments and legislation meant to strip gays of rights, that’s all I need.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 11, 2005 @ 11:19 am - November 11, 2005

  36. LOL….so now it IS antigay to support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights? Now people who support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights are antigay?

    Let’s see how far you can be pushed in your desperate dance, weasel.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 11, 2005 @ 3:26 pm - November 11, 2005

  37. QP,

    I agree New Jersey is an example of ‘Home-Rule’ gone amuck. In Camden County, there are two municipalities that have less than 25 voting age residents. One town, Tavistock, came into existance to bypass the blue / dry laws on neighboring Haddonfield.

    Comment by Wendy — November 11, 2005 @ 7:10 pm - November 11, 2005

  38. LOL….so now it IS antigay to support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights? Now people who support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights are antigay?

    Is it Republican virtue to want to criminalize gay sex?

    Comment by gaycowboybob — November 11, 2005 @ 7:46 pm - November 11, 2005

  39. Abolutely not. It’s hateful, wrong, and bigoted. However, it IS the right of voters to put it in place and to remove it.

    Now, back to the original questions. Now it IS antigay to support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights? Now people who support state constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights are antigay?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 12, 2005 @ 8:52 am - November 12, 2005

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.