Page 2 of 2

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:27 am
by GordonGG (imported)
Cseriess (imported) wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 am Well after 15 days of taking a daily 50mg androcur tablet my free testosterone via a saliva test is 20 pg/ml. The previous tests in the period between taking androcur have been in the 170 pg/ml range. Before ever trying androcur the levels were in the 200+ range, but they have never recovered to that since being recorded at 29 pg/ml in August 2018 after my first try of androcur in June

2018.

So am I officially a eunuch at the moment with 20 pg/ml? I am always a little unsure because I use saliva tests with pg/ml results rather than blood with ng/dl

I don't believe that being a eunuch has anything to do with how much T you have in your system. In olden days there were no tests for it. But there were eunuchs. I say that if you're on something to knock out your T or had your testicles removed, then you are a eunuch.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:29 am
by experiment (imported)
Probably and congratulation! Generally many take 100 mg of Androcur until the desired Testosterone level is reached and then reduce the dosage to 50 mg daily. After another week or two I would expect your testosterone to drop further.

May I ask what other side effects toy have noticed as of today?

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:09 am
by JesusA
Chesleyt (imported) wrote: Thu May 28, 2020 10:27 am Doctors don't offer surgical castration for prostate cancer patients now the preferred method is chemical castration. I know this because a personal friend has had his prostate removed and the cancer is back the doctor started him on chemical castration and it's working, when my friend asked to be surgically castrated the physician flayed him for asking and said that they don't do that anymore. The friend is being treated at the main campus of Cleveland Clinic, Ohio USA

Sorry to be so long in getting back to this, but some prostate cancer patients still receive orchiectomies, rather than chemical castration. While they are rare in North America, they are much more common in Europe. A study of the health consequences of surgical vs. chemical castration based on the entire set of Danish PCa patients showed that, of those castrated, about one-quarter were surgical and three-quarters were chemical. One of the findings was that chemical castration was correlated with a much higher rate of heart attacks and strokes and surgical was not.

A major web site for prostate cancer patients in North America that I sometimes check frequently talks about castration (using exactly that term) and there have been debates about chemical vs. surgical. I have yet to see the word "eunuch" used, however. One counselor whom I know well has commented that those PCa patients who have surgical castration tend to be happier in the long run than those on chemical. It's a one time procedure, not something that reminds them of their cancer at regular intervals when they need another injection.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:42 am
by JesusA
GordonGG (imported) wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:27 am I don't believe that being a eunuch has anything to do with how much T you have in your system. In olden days there were no tests for it. But there were eunuchs. I say that if you're on something to knock out your T or had your testicles removed, then you are a eunuch.

That is the definition of a "eunuch." Some
JesusA wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 5:50 am one who was born with testicles, whose testicles have been removed
or made non-functional in place. Hormone replacement, whether T or E,
JesusA wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 5:50 am is not part of the definition.

Too many, though, think of the word "eunuch" as pejorative. We just had an article rejected by an academic journal over use of the term. We used data gathered from the "Eunuch Archive" and two of the three reviewers recommended rejection because of use of the word.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 5:00 am
by cutnbulls2ox (imported)
JesusA wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:42 am That is the definition of a "eunuch." Some
JesusA wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 5:50 am one who was born with testicles,
JesusA wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:42 am whose testicles have been removed
or made non-functional in p
lace. Hormone replacement, whe
JesusA wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:42 am ther T or E,
JesusA wrote: Sat May 23, 2020 5:50 am is not part of the definition.

Too many, though, think of the word "eunuch" as pejorative. We just had an article rejected by an academic journal over use of the term. We used data gathered from the "Eunuch Arc
hive" and two of the three reviewers recommended rejection because of use of the word.

Proof that so many people wrongly attribute negative meanings to words that they don t even understand.

What do those reviewers prefer to call men with no testicles or non functioning testicles ? In terms that most people would immediately recognise and understand ? Using unused, not understood, and unrecognised words hampers communication.

As with livestock and animals, the males were easy to intentionally castrate long ago with little medical technology. Females anatomically were extremely difficult to neuter by removing their internal ovaries. Past cultures had many names for castrated males and very few for neutered females. An empty male scrotum is easy to see and verify. Past civilizations had no way to see or confirm missing ovaries.

The word eunuch has a long history for men only and simply because our testicles hang so vulnerably outside our bodies. Making accidental castrations far more common in men than in females, whose internal ovaries are rarely being damaged or removed by accidents and injuries. Intentional castrations were carried out very simply and easily on men because of the easy access to remove or destroy our obvious testicles. Removing ovaries was far beyond past culture s technology without being fatal for the females.

It is not sexism, its simple human anatomy and access to both sexes gonads based on technology. As soon as hysterectomies became easily available, females joined males in getting their gonads removed more often than in any past cultures. The same is true for intentional sterilization surgery for males and females. No one has bothered to invent a new word for females without gonads. And females naturally experience menopause and infertility at much younger ages than most males equivalent loss of gonad functions due to aging.

Eunuch seems to be exclusively reserved for human males only. Not for animals or females. It just has a longer history of use and public understanding than newer medical terms for castrated males. There should be nothing negative about using the word eunuch. No more than using terms such as steer, gelding, ox, and other commonly used terms for castrated male animals.

Its too bad those reviewers did not understand history and how the term eunuch developed and was actually used.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 10:31 am
by Losethem (imported)
cutnbulls2ox (imported) wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 5:00 am
JesusA wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:42 am Too many, though, think of the word "eunuch" as pejorative. We just had an article rejected by an academic journal over use of the term. We used data gathered from the "Eunuch Archive" and two of the three reviewers recommended rejec
tion because of use of the word.

Are they so into wanting to make a name for themselves they can't understand the terms we use for ourselves? Or are they just that bull-headed and feel they can come up with something they can coin and make a name for themselves with?

They thinks it's a perjorative, we think they're misguided and wrong. Perhaps before rejecting a term, they should spend time looking at the forums where the people seeking this help are, and see what they call themselves.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:34 pm
by JockItch (imported)
JockItch (imported) wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:42 am I also wonder how they feel -- seems like they would feel squishy and soft if hollowed out like that. I guess there are some men out there that would prefer to see something in there ballsac even though they are castrated with no testosterone.

Also, in thinking about this, I don't think this can even work the way Dr.s say it will. Even on chemical castration the testicles become small and shriveled. If they are hollowed out and there is no testosterone, eventually they will shrink up into raisins anyway. Wonder if the patients are told that they will not remain the same size and will eventually become much smaller.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2020 3:06 am
by Bachirsun (imported)
Working balls make the man.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2020 4:17 am
by cutnbulls2ox (imported)
JockItch (imported) wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:42 am I also wonder how they feel -- seems like they would feel squishy and soft if hollowed out like that. I guess there are some men out there that would prefer to see something in there ballsac even tho
JockItch (imported) wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:34 pm ugh they are castrated with no testosterone.

Also, in thinking about this, I don't think this can even work the way Dr.s say it will. Even on chemical castration the testicles become small and shriveled. If they are hollowed out and there is no testosterone, eventually they will shrink up into raisins anyway. Wonder if the patients are told that they will not remai
n the same size and will eventually become much smaller.

What you are saying makes sense. It seems like artifical testicle implants would be much more effective and simple to do ? But maybe to some men being able to keep even hollow and shrinking shells of their real balls gives them some satisfaction or comfort. They might see it as their best choice of what is offered to them.

By the time their hollowed out shells collapse or shrink they might be better adjusted to being castrated. And the slow change in their balls and scrotum might be easier for them to accept than healthy, full balls that are here and full one hour, and an empty sack an hour later. Especially since most testicles removed
JockItch (imported) wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:42 am for prostate cancer treatment
are fully operating and healthy balls with no pain or problems. Removing perfectly healthy balls to stop their testosterone production from fueling and encouraging cancer would be much tougher for men to agree to than removing painful, damaged, or non working balls.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2020 4:22 am
by cutnbulls2ox (imported)
Working balls make the man.

Very true from a biological function standpoint.

But even castrated men have experienced all of their past puberty and all of the masculinization of a life influenced by testosterone and fully functioning sex organs, his male brain, and past inputs that keep him a man after castration. Plus his genetics do not change from castration.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2020 7:50 am
by thoughtful1998 (imported)
Well it's a matter of what parts you keep between your legs, i think... ;)

For example: a boy who has his sex drive chemically calmed is simply... calm.

A boy who has lost some important part of his boy-parts (testicles, precisely) is castrated.

But perhaps i see it too materially. ;)

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 6:15 am
by 0.fj.randi (imported)
Hey Jesus

Thanks for all the information. I've been a eunuch for a long time and I've never even heard of a small part of what you've told us about. There has been about a year since you last posted on this subject, have you uncovered any more info? Also, I would be interested in doing some digging of my own, can you point me to the right areas?

Again thanks

I'm a eunuch and use Unix

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 9:46 am
by Alleycat (imported)
thoughtful1998 (imported) wrote: Fri Jun 05, 2020 7:50 am Well it's a matter of what parts you keep between your legs, i think... ;)

For example: a boy who has his sex drive chemically calmed is simply... calm.

A boy who has lost some important part of his boy-parts (testicles, precisely) is castrated.

But perhaps i see it too materially. ;)

I don't think so. You just see it straight forward and simple. I also kind of agree with you.

As A chemically castrated or calm boy as you said can go back and stop taking the chemicals. Where as a castrated boy, can't go back. Ever.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 3:52 pm
by Circumcised (imported)
CircItaly (imported) wrote: Mon May 25, 2020 2:13 am In China they used to take dicks too. Always wondered why

Because Inside the home of emperor, there is only one man with full set of organ, he have many wives and workers. This can sure that all child give birth by the wives are his offspring. One of The emperor male offspring can inherit his position.

If there are another man with ball, this cannot be guaranteed. Also, Chinese is very serious to virginity, even the man without ball but with dick, he can penetrate emperor's wife, which is not allowed in their sense.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2021 10:59 pm
by TopManFL (imported)
Matthew 19:12 (NIV) "For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

In a red-letter Bible, this would be in red because these are Jesus' words.

This is a passage that would have been written in ancient Greek which contained far fewer words than does modern English. The word Eunuch had several meanings. Therefore, this passage is open to some interpretation by the reader.

Re: Classification of a Eunuch

Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2021 5:47 am
by JesusA
The oldest extant version of The Gospel According to St. Matthew is in Greek. Some have claimed that it was originally written in Aramaic, although there doesn't seem to be any strong evidence that it was. Matthew 19:12 in the original reads:

εἰσὶν γὰρ εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες ἐκ κοιλίας μητρὸς ἐγεννήθησαν οὕτως, καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνουχίσθησαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. ὁ δυνάμενος χωρεῖν χωρείτω.

The word translated as 'eunuch' is εὐνοῦχοι [eu̓nou͂khoi in the Roman alphabet]. Its sole meaning in the Greek of the period is a human male whose testicles have been removed or are non-existent. There is no metaphorical meaning, such as some contemporary religious types would like us to believe. There was little use of metaphor in Greek of the period. Words meant their denotative meaning. A 'eunuch' was not someone who was celibate. It was not a word that could mean a 'high government official.' It meant someone without testicles. "Born from their mother's womb" would indicate those who were anorchic. They were born 'male,' but did not have testicles and did not go through male puberty. (About one in 20,000 males are anorchic.)

While most early Christians, especially those in the Eastern Mediterranean, interpreted it literally, there was great reluctance among those of Roman background. Eunuchs were much more common in the East and were often in high positions. In the West they were rare and mostly lowly slaves (although a number of eunuchs are well attested in the early Western church). The Council of Nicaea (325 CE) was dominated by Western representatives who were terrified of castration. The first canon that they adopted was a prohibition of self-castration by the clergy.

Attitudes toward castration and eunuchs continued to vary between west and east for centuries afterwards. Many prominent Christians in the east were eunuchs, including three Patriarchs of the Orthodox Church. Theophylaktos, Bishop of Ohrid (the major city in modern Bulgaria at the time), wrote in the early 12th century that, while self-castration was anathema, the castration of a young boy by his parents to maintain his celibacy was a devout Christian act. Theophylaktos' brother was a eunuch and a cleric at Hagia Sophia. Many clerics in the eastern church were eunuchs, as were many government officials. They were frequently castrated by parents when they were young to enhance their future prospects.

Within the western church, clear mentions of eunuchs have gradually been written out and replaced by ambiguous terms for high officials. Ask your local minister whether or not Daniel was a eunuch. Unless he's Eastern Orthodox, he's likely to deny the possibility. There are even theological articles in various journals stating that he was not. That he was a eunuch (if he existed) was not denied until relatively recently. See my recent post:

The Book of Daniel

http://forums.eunuch.org/showthread.php ... -of-Daniel

Other than the εὐνοῦχοι found in the Greek original of Matthew, there were other words referring to castration and eunuchs. Here's a quotation from one of my recent reads:

"Even the vocabulary associated with eunuchs varies in both Greek and Latin. While one can find at least twenty different verbs for castration in Latin, Greek has at least seven terms related to these figures besides eunouchos, including: spadōn (tear, tear off, or remove), tomias (cut, castrate, or geld, that is, often of a nonhuman animal), ektomias (cut out, cut away, or sever), thlibias (squeeze, crush, press, or bruise), thladias (or thlasias, crush or bruise), ithris (eunuch), and apokopos (cut off)."

__________

Marchal, Joseph A. 2020. Appalling Bodies: Queer Figures Before and After Paul's Letters. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 80.