Originally published at: New scientific paper examines the aesthetic appeal of the scrotum | Boing Boing
…
Sigh, anyone has a right to bodily autonomy, 100%. But seriously?
Well, yes.
I mean, “aesthethic appeal,” in a ball sack?
One must wonder what would look worse? Wrinkled as a shar-pei or smooth as a ripe tomato?
And don’t forget scrotal reduction.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/19/health/tlc-man-132-pound-scrotum/index.html
You can pass it! You can smash it! You can whack it!
You can punch it! You can crunch it! You can kick it!
It’s perverse and grotesque that the plastic surgery industry is looking for new body parts to make people feel insecure about to drive business, but it’s hilarious they’re settling on the scrotum - the thing that men and women have consistently agreed is ugly and ridiculous, universally. There is no beauty standard for scrotums because they’re all absurd, and I don’t think the plastic surgeons are going to change that.
In order: 1, 4, 2, wait, WTF is that at position 3!?!
I forget the comedian… maybe Eddie Izzard? - who had a bit about god making the scrotum with left over elbow skin.
Also, it’s appearance can dramatically change based on how hot it is, does that have an effect on the aesthetic appeal?
With so much research being done in the world, I guess all the low-hanging fruit has been taken!
I’ve always heard his name as “Honor the Ballsack”.
That is all.
On the plus side I just found the perfect Screensaver for my phone!
Why is it “scrotums” and not “scrota”?
Nah, an old groove. Revisited, minus the phallus.
Do we have to debate plurals of things based in Greek or Latin again?