Talk:Human anus: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 03:07, 2 June 2005 edit70.177.90.39 (talk) →Shall we remove all reference to sexuality?: no.← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:30, 21 October 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,709 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Human anus/Archive 3) (bot
(910 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Censor}}
	==Shall we include multiple photos?==
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 75K
			\|counter = 3
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\|algo = old(60d)
			\|archive = Talk:Human anus/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=C\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Anatomy \|importance=high \|field=gross}}
			{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality\|importance=mid}}
			}}
			{{archives}}

			==Leave the images of the anuses==
	I have to say, an anus image would be totally appropriate. As things stand now,
	there isn't even a real picture of an anus.
	Not that I would enjoy seeing one of course (gross), but it would be appropriate.
	In fact, the anus should be shown in all its variety: male anus (very hairy), female anus (not too hairy), and the goatse image (yuck... in the section on "sexual" stuff of course) ] 08:57, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

			As said, don't remove them, they do serve a proper purpose and aren't harming anything. Besides, this typical giggly jitter some have of seeing a butthole is a little old. ] 00:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Judicious use of a few more photos would indeed be appropriate, since this is supposed to be an encyclopedic entry. The Goatse anus, however, is sufficiently outside the mainstream that including a photo here would be more inflammatory than informative. ] 20:23, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			As I said earlier, children and minors do use this site. Using real life pictures does not serve a real benefit. A chart is at the header and if fine. You dont see penis pics at the penis article. I dont want my kid coming to look at this page for a school project or something, and seeing such images. Use some tact people. ] 00:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	==Shall we delete current photo?==

			:What kind of school project is your kid doing if it involves the Misplaced Pages page for the human anus? Do I want to know? Is it possible that you are just offended because it gets you attention? ] (]) 02:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
	I don't think we need a real picture of a human anus, do we? Some people might not like seeing that, and a diagram of human anatomy is sufficient. --] 19:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

			What?? There are no penis pictures in the penis article??? We must fix that immediately!!!
	:Agreed, the anatomical diagram is sufficent. Everyone has one, and there's really no need to include an image cropped from a porn photo. Kinda childish IMO. ] 01:49, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

			**And as I'll state again, adults also use this site. I'm willing to bet your kid has more common sense than yourself in realizing what he's looking at. Leave the images. You revert, I'll put them back. Besides, the real life benefit is an outside view of a bodily orifice. If you're worried about corrupting your kid, don't worry, he/she will find out eventually. ] 00:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	::Disagreed. It's ludicrous to say 'some people might not like seeing that.' Only a stark raving hypocrite would SEARCH for an anus, and then claim offense at FINDING one. 'Childish' is when one censors Misplaced Pages based on prudishness. Do I have to go check to see if the photos in ] and ] are still there? I am reverting. ] 03:32, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			:YES!!! ADD THEM!!! ] (]) 19:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
	:::It's not an issue of offense, it's an issue of whether it adds anything to the article. It doesn't. You're basically saying that we need a picture of the corresponding body part on every article, including mouth, navel, pubic hair, calf, thigh, etc. Is it necessary to have a picture of some porn model's thigh on ]? No. Is it necessary to have a porno-cropped anus on this page? No. I'm reverting, and the page should be protected. ] 06:02, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			I was merely asking. No reason for you to be rude. As I have noticed I havent removed what you put up -_-] 00:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	::::Havermayer brought up offense, so earlier it most certainly WAS an issue of offense, but i'm glad to see we're abandoning that silly argument. Now you justify your edit by saying that the picture is simply not 'necessary.' Well, ], ] and ] all have photos. Will you now remove those illustrations because they are also not 'necessary'? Of course you won't, because your argument is disingenuous. Incidentally, ] and ] are stubs. And yes, I believe photos of the corresponding body parts 'adds' to the article. Maybe you just have a problem with porn stars. Reverting. ] 07:52, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			*point taken and I'm sorry. ] 00:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::::No, no problem with porn stars or anything else. I just don't believe the image is worth including in the article. It adds nothing and is tacky. I'm not advocating censorship, but I imagine a similar attempt to include a picture of someone defecating in the ] article would meet with resistance. Rather than continue this debate, I'm going to revert again, and ask that you hold off on putting the image back in until we can have a referendum involving other editors. Thanks. By the way, your hostile attitude is not appreciated (referring especially to your "edit summaries". ] 08:08, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			:I personally think Misplaced Pages is not Censored is fine, but in this article the images add nothing, absoloutely nothing. The disagramas are far more informative and the images are most likely took by people wanting to get their jollies off by uploading their asses to Misplaced Pages ] 01:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	::::::I think we are getting to the real issue now - you want the image removed because you think it's 'tacky'. Let's drop your 'necessary' argument, because if it was intellectually honest, you would be stripping photos from the other anatomy pages you carelessly brought up. If those remain, this one should remain. So I revert, and I welcome a referendum. ] 08:57, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			:User is making a joke about Ann Coulter, and probably shouldn't be taken seriously. ] '']'' 04:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::I am definitely ''not'' going to "drop" the point about the picture being unnecessary. The policy on wikipedia is to include pictures because they are useful, not to throw in whatever picture anyone wants to and allow it to remain because it's "not unnecessary" (sorry for the double negative, but I'm trying to convey the idea that the image policy is more conservative/restrictive than you seem to think it is). There was a discussion on the ] about poetic license in article images: , but more to the point here is this discussion on adding a graphic scene of rape to the ] article: . Consensus was not to add it. So, please list a few reasons why this anus picture should be here. How does it contribute to the informative purpose of the article? ] 10:48, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

			They are two perfectly normal images of human anatomy. A look through the archives of the page will give an insight into the vast debates that lead to these being settled on as a compromised. Their inclusion has been uncontroversial for some time and I see no basis for their removal. Misplaced Pages is not censored and the images are of good quality. <span style="font-family: Verdana">]]</span> 22:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::Photos of ] and ] are patently offensive. The Misplaced Pages consensus to omit photos of these actions was based on this. Jeeves, when you delete the anus photo, citing those arguments, the truth is revealed - you find an anus offensive. Why aren't you deleting the ] image, and raving about vomiting and biting? Why aren't you deleting the ] image, talking about peeing and rape? Because your 'usefulness' argument is ]. I don't think you are conscious of this, but as a self-proclaimed ], you should sense something's off with your argument. When you attack this photo on 'usefulness' grounds, but you leave all those other anatomy pictures up, you are suggesting that all those other photos have illustrative value that this one doesn't. Face it: you brought rape, porn, and poop into the discussion because you think anuses are disgusting. That is why you want the picture to go. As to it's 'usefulness', consensus was reached on the talk pages for ], ], and ]: Photographs illustrate, illustrations inform, and anatomy is not offensive. ] 12:31, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
			*The photographs should stay, and consensus is clearly against ]; if he insists on having his way, he should be blocked from editing the page. There is nothing wrong with the human body, whether children see it or not. And Misplaced Pages is not censored for minors. --] 04:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

			:I agree that there is no consensus but your reasoning is flawed. No one is arguing that, what I am arguing at least is that the images do not add anything to the article. The diagrams are informative. The images are not informative in the slightest. ] 04:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::::Actually, I would appreciate it if you addressed the real issue instead of insisting that I'm arguing something I'm not. To repeat what I said earlier and that you seem to have missed: 1) A picture is to be included in any article if and only if it contributes positively to that article 2) I maintain that this picture does not contribute positively to this article 3) You have not given any useful arguments as to why the picture should stay 4) Per the image use policy, in a case like this the burden is on you (and others who want the image included) to give reasons why the image should be here. Instead of actually discussing the issue though, you keep trying to obscure the process by claiming I want to censor the page. That's not the case. If the image is truly useful to have here then I'm sure you can convince us of that fact. How exactly does this illustration inform? What will a user of the encyclopedia find out by it? ] 23:29, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
			::That's your opinion, and people disagree with you more than they agree. Photographic representation that shows the surface area of the anus is very pertinent and appropriate. They add a lot. --] 05:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
			I agree that the pictures don't really add anything to the article, but they don't really take away either. People have their hearts set on having photographs, so just let them. The debating about it has gone on long enough. ] 05:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

			DavidShankBone, the concensus isnt against me. Its two people that want the pics of real anus's up. There are more than two people who agree that they detract from the article. I have removed them. They will stay off until we can come to an agreement. Fair enough? (And btw, block me from editing? Really, I am not doing any harm. But as I said I removed the pics and they should remain off until we can as a collective come to some sort of decision. Its not a dictatorship -_-) ] 19:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::::I did address your intellectually dishonest argument, and I repeat my answer: Photographs illustrate, illustrations inform, and anatomy is not offensive. In this case, a reader will find out what an anus looks like. I won't go further in this argument because (a) Wikipedians have already settled the photo question in the clitoris, penis, and vagina articles, and (b) because you are arguing dishonestly. If photographic usefulness was your real issue, you would be applying it to photos of other body parts. Following your line of reasoning, there is even less merit in using photos of the ], the ], and the ], body parts that are a thousand times more visible. As long as you insist that 'usefulness' is really at issue, you are deceiving yourself. I'm sure it's unconscious, but the rest of us see through your hypocrisy; five others have restored your deletions since you started them. I am confident in the strength of my argument, so I will no longer revert your edits. I will watch as others do. Are you confident enough in your own position that you can show the same kind of restraint? ] 00:30, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
			: ], period. We don't need to seek further consensus to establish that. Yes, you will indeed be blocked if you continue removing the images. <b>] ]</b> 19:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

			Are you devolpmentaly challenged? I have already said I know its not censored but the picture (Especially the one with part of a vagina and anus) are not needed when there are charts in the verry begining of the article that do a perfectly fine job. It detracts from the article is what I am saying. Censorship? not so much. I am tired of this kind of treatment. remove the second pic or crop it. No reason for you to be a douche about it.!] 19:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
	:::::::::::Your insults aside, you haven't addressed any issues at all. You just keep trying to attack me as a censor. To rephrase again: 1) The position and function of the anus in terms of the digestive system is what is significant to this article, not its position on the body. 2) All living creatures with a tubular gut have an anus of some type. Your desire to include an image of a young woman's ass culled from pornography smacks of prurience and not information. 3) Ears and mouths do not appeal to the prurient interest. 4) You seem to be more interested in winning some kind of technical victory than in actually improving the article. 5) Finally, since this image is under debate, the policy is that it stays out until a consensus emerges. It has not. I'll post this link on ] and see if we can get more input that way. ] 23:32, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
			: One more personal attack and you will be blocked. <b>] ]</b> 19:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

			So you are allowed to abuse your power and I cant say anything about it? Whatever. Its things like this that make wikipedia so laughable. I am not attacking anyone. My previous comment was a bit much but I stand by it. Again I am asking for the second picture to be cropped. Is that an attack? Come on.] 19:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
	::::::::::::I'm sorry I didn't go into more detail when I said 'photos illustrate, and illustrations inform', so here is more: The photo shows part of a normal human body. Examination and comparison is useful to someone concerned about their own health or the health of a loved one. It can help answer the question 'am I ]' or 'do I have an ]'. In case you missed it, I just told you why the photo is useful. Let me anticipate your next protest: the photo is not representative of all people. I agree, no photo ever could be. But the way to remedy this is by adding more information, not taking it away. For example, a caption explaining variety would be useful, or the judicious use of more photos. Now, you say 'to rephrase again', and you opportunistically bring up some brand new arguments. I'll address each one in the order presented. 1) The position of the anus on the human body is of course significant. (I like mine where it is.) 'Importance of location' is not good criteria to use when including a picture. If it were, then photos of ] and ], which can be anywhere on the body, would be the first ones to go. In reference to that qualifier you added, 'in terms of the digestive system', it is inappropriate to ignore the important role of the anus in human sexuality. 2) You say I'm being human-centric. Yes, I am. I refer you to the articles on the ], ], ], ], and ]. The photos in each are human. Why are you only complaining about biodiversity when it comes to this specific orifice? If you have any ] or ] anus pictures, you are welcome to add them. 3) Misplaced Pages should not be purged of photos for fear they may arouse; if we did, we would lose valuable contributions. There are illustrations far more likely to inspire sexual thoughts on the pages for the ], ], ], even ]. If you think these photos are okay, then why do you believe that erotic interest should only be extinguished in the perineum? 4) Number four is an ] attack, not an argument. Or if you were really interested in talking about my interests, they include rock climbing, industrial design and Japanese horror. 5) I'm not reverting your deletions. I don't need to, other people are doing it. You can't demand that people respect your position when all your arguments collapse under scrutiny. 0) Much earlier, you cited the discussion on ] as a reason to exclude a photo. I reviewed the entry, and it has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to this discussion. Over there, a Wikipedian was considering the difficulty in selecting photos to illustrate ] mathematical concepts. There is nothing abstract about an anus, and there is no question that the photo selected illustrates one. And, the consensus over there was that it was okay to include a photo, so why did you bring it up? I'm happy to address any new arguments you bring up next, or go into greater detail on those we've covered, but so far all your arguments fail because they have been dishonest. No, I'm not calling you a liar, this is not an ] attack. I just don't think you're conscious of your real motivation. A review of your past edits on this article suggests that your problem is not just the photo. On April 15, you added, 'In general, the anus is simply the exit point for matter passing through the digestive tract.' This is a terse summation of a complex part of the human body and it completely ignores sexuality. Also that day, the current paragraph on sex was vandalized, but rather than revert, you grudgingly composed what you characterized in the summary as the 'bare minimum of sexuality info'. An ] entry is supposed to be in-depth and should explore the greater context. 'Bare minimum' is not the goal. The sum of your edits exposes your 'bottom line' - you are trying to suppress anal eroticism, which you earlier spontaneously associated with rapes, pornography, and pictures of people taking a dump. ] 05:48, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

			:Stop this crap, you can not just use Misplaced Pages is not Censored for every single thing. Trying to dismiss concerns of editors by just saying that over and over is irritating, inappropriate and missing the message. It's not that I am for censorship, the fact is that the images do not add anything to the article. The diagram does a fine job explaining things. Having photos of some persons ass is hardly going to inform about the topic. ] 01:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
	=== Referendum on current photo ===
			:: How are the photos here any different from the photos at ], ], or ] for that matter? They are photographic illustrations of the subject. You still haven't cited a reason why this particular human anatomy article should not have photos. <b>] ]</b> 01:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

			I think the real issue here is that there are wikipedia users who are taking pictures of their own assholes just to have in this article. That's disgusting. ] 19:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
	====Pro-photo ====
			:LOL--Oh, is that the "real issue" - well, then you'll be relieved to know there is no issue - the anus photograph I took is not my own. Nice User page, by the way, Jtrainor - if you hate Misplaced Pages so much, why do you edit on it?--] 20:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
			::WP:CIVIL. ] 00:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
			:::Completely civil response, and reasonable. Have you considered your page is not civil? "Misplaced Pages's community is a joke." "Misplaced Pages is useless crap" The tone of your User page is pretty uncivil, and begs the question I asked. --] 03:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
			::::My user page is irrelevant to this talk page. ] 03:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
			Remove the disgusting and 'harmful' picture!! This is not a page about porn!! Think about other people, including the children!! ] 19:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

			Pornography: Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal. Unless you are aroused or the pictures are meant to arouse they are not porn. Are you going to blame a porn site if a kid types 'porn'? If your kid wants to look up 'anus' then he should expect graphic material. Misplaced Pages is not censored (meaning we do have naked pictures of genitals and organs). Please look up 'nudity'. Everyone wants all the naked pictures removed because of the children. But if wikipedis is not censored and your kid looks up anus she/he should expect a picture--] (]) 04:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC).
	:] 09:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
	:Boothy443
	:Asbestos
	:Xezbeth
	:Inter
	:] 13:11, 30 May 2005 (UTC) (This does not mean that a gallery of anuses can be added. The copyright status also needs to be confirmed)
	:Karada
	:Noisy

			(]) The problem with this notion is that in the United States, it is the subjective intent of the photographer, not the use-case that is the determinate of whether or not a given photo is pornography. If a photo was taken for the purpose of appealing to the prurient interests, it is pornography, regardless of how it might be used. There is also the technical legal issue of whether or not a model release is required to be on file for these kinds of photos. ] (]) 17:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
	====Anti-photo ====

			===New Anus===
	:Jeeves
			I replaced the old low-res, low-quality male anus with one I shot of a professional model, the same model who now illustrates many of the body part articles. I think we should differentiate the two anuses by gender, and the female anus clearly needs some rotating. --] 21:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Nightlark
			:I know that might sound odd, but some males are not aware of whether the female vagina is vertical or horizontal. The human female anus image in the article should be rotated CCW 90 degrees to that the male and female images are aligned the same way and so as not to propagate this confusion. -- <span style="font-family:Kristen ITC;">''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup></span> 22:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Fieari
			:: I know this might sound odd too, but some males are also unaware that females ACTUALLY naturally have pubic hair. I personally feel that it'd be a good idea to have a...you know, natural anus as an example of a "female" anus, or at least add a note stating that the anus/vagina shown has been shaven/waxed. ] 05:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
	:] 01:30, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			:::I have gone to the Penis site, and I have found pictures of a real penis there..] (]) 19:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
	==Shall we use a different photo?==

			:::: You probably go to the Penis site all the time.
	As far as anus pictures so, that one isn't too bad. Anything bigger, dirtier, hairier, or more dilated would really be pushing things too far, but that one is just about tolerable, and illustrates the anus well. My one concern is that it is probably a copyvio. — ] 23:44, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

			''"As I said earlier, children and minors do use this site."''
	:Hello, Is anyone in favour of replacing this photo with one taken from an anatomy/medical website? I suspect people aren't offended by the anus itself but by the sourcing of the photo from a pornographic image. I support the inclusion of a photo but would prefer that the photo was one taken for eduational purposes with the consent of the individual providing the anus. Appearance (eg. hair etc.) shouldn't matter as long as the relevant anatomy is visible and the image is a fair representation of what anatomists/medical professionals consider 'normal'.--] 20:25, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
			And, last I was aware, children and minors have anuses just like the rest of us. Perhaps they want to see what one looks like since it is not particularly easy to examine one's own? I'd think you'd prefer them to have a picture to study rather than asking their friends if they can take a peek. Children are curious about the body and there is nothing obscene about a simple photograph of a body part. Splease don't be so Puritanical about it.
			] (]) 21:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

			:I agree. Banning children from seeing pictures of anus and penis is completely meaningless, and there is no justification for this censorship. If a child searches for "penis" or "anus", he certainly doesn't want to see the opposite. Just puritanism, complete disrespect for ]. ] (]) 11:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
	::Well, let's first see the proposed alternative and then decide. — ] 21:18, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

			Ok, so we could try to contact whoever submitted the pics for the female genitalia, and request to post a cropped version of the image here? Meantime, having them at the top of the page is kind of a "shock factor". Heh. Personally, I'd put the Grey's Anatomy diagrams above, and have the pictures at the bottom(essentially, switch the picture and diagram positions. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:::The current photo shows a completely normal anus and it is without copyright issues. Substituting a different image is unlikely to placate those who have been deleting it. ] 18:17, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

	::::The purpose of substituting a different photo wouldn't be to placate anyone. Any anatomy textbook or other reference work/encyclopedia wouldn't feature the current photo. Anatomists generally follow an international standardised system of representing parts of the body for ease of comparison etc. All other educational media also follow this method. The perineum is usually shown from below with the thighs abducted; deviations from this are reserved for highlighting 'abnormalities'. Although the article covers more than just anatomy I see no reason why Misplaced Pages should use different criteria. Secondly, an educational photo of any part of the body should probably not be sourced from pornography and certainly not without the consent of the individual.--] 00:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			No one cares about "what you feel" we are trying to make an inormative article. Keep the images.--] (]) 04:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
	:::::There is no 'international standard' for anatomy photography. If there were, none of the articles in Misplaced Pages would conform. Nor should they. Misplaced Pages is not an anatomy textbook and should not strive to be. In addition, there is no evidence that the photo was sourced improperly. ] 02:47, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			Has nothing to do with feel, but this is probably Obscene under Miller Doctrine. If you don't know what a butthole looks like, then you would have to be seriously sheltered. The intent of including these photos is to shock the senses and appeal to the prurient interest, in my opinion, which makes it obscene under the proper standards. ] (]) 17:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
	==Shall we remove all reference to sexuality?==

			== Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2021 ==
	Newcomer to this dispute... I believe the photo issue is secondary to the fact that 90% to 100% of this article should be deleted. This article is superfluous and also ridiculously skewed toward the human species. Most animals have some form of anus. Few other species possess anuses resembling the human anus, and in the absence of humans, virtually none of their anuses serve in an erotic capacity. The anus in all its glory is sufficiently described elsewhere on Misplaced Pages (how many anal erotica articles do we have, again?) Quite frankly, this article should be stripped down to pointers to Freud, anal erotica, and the digestive system, or even deleted altogether. Otherwise, article should be renamed to "Butthole" to accurately reflect the assembled prurient interests driving it. ] 10:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			{{edit semi-protected\|Human anus\|answered=yes}}
	:The biodiversity argument was earlier exposed as a dishonest one, because those who bring it up here only complain about biodiversity when it comes to this specific orifice. Even if honestly offered, the biodiversity argument fails. The anus is remarkably similar across species. ] are different, ]s are different...but the wrinkly little anus is almost ubiquitous. And your complaint that anuses don't play a role in animal sexuality, is demonstrably false. In any case, the way to resolve a biodiversity problem is to add information, not to delete it. ] 17:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
			Remove pornographic image of anal sex (e.g. "File:Penile-anal intercourse sex.jpg\|thumb\|Man performing anal sex on a woman"). This does not belong on a page about human anatomy that most would reference for non-prurient reasons. ] (]) 18:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
			:] '''Already done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 19:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
			But it does belong on the talk page? ] (]) 18:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			:Have removed it from the talk page ] (]) 00:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
	::First, kindly do not assert dishonesty; unless you can prove intent, it is merely error. And you have not successfully proven error nor dishonesty. First, anuses are not remarkably similar across species, unless you suffer from a strong bias toward the mammal phylum. The anuses of the reptile, fish, insect, crustacean, amphibian, mollusk do not resemble the human anus in appearance (I could go on and on). Humans and mammals are greatly in the minority in the animal kingdom, if you weren't aware. Also, you offered a photo of same-sex animal mounting as proof of anal eroticism in animals, but this link mentioned nothing about anal penetration. That borders on dishonesty. Mounting is about mounting. You are making assumptions on animal sexuality based on your knowledge of human sexuality, and generally there is no penetration involved. Third, I affirm that most organ articles here violate the concept of "Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary". If I were to turn the selectivity argument around on you, I'd have to ask why you (or someone like you) aren't going around adding a sexual function clause to every such article. ] 22:47, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			== Semi-protected edit request on 01 Oct 2023 ==
	:::An argument can suffer from ] without ], and to dismiss such an argument as 'mere error' would be a mistake. 1) The the way to resolve a biodiversity problem is to add information, not to delete it. 2) The pictures of dogs humping were just too funny. 3) There is nothing inconsistent about my position. I'm not involved in other anatomy debates because the issue of sexuality is only under attack in this one. ] 03:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

			{{Edit semi-protected\|Human anus\|answered=yes}}
	== Disclaimer on gallery link ==
			Under the "Microanatomy" section at the very end the apocrine glands are mentioned. I don't have enough permissions to edit this page but that phrase could be linked to the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/Apocrine_sweat_gland <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Xsign -->

			In the Hygiene section it's mentioned that there are cultural differences. This section should point to the main article/page https://en.wikipedia.org/Anal_hygiene which covers this topic in depth, including some of the cultural differences. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:15, 1 October 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Xsign -->
	We don't need a disclaimer here. The links are on a page about the anus, it's a given that some of them are going to be anatomically explicit. The disclaimer that's been added a couple of times was poorly worded, and the link in question is to images from a sigmoidoscope -- hardly offensive unless one is highly squeamish about innards. ] 02:17, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
			:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> ]]<sup>]</sup> 22:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

			== Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2024 ==
	==No connection with ]==
	I removed this contribution from ]: ''"ANUS is an anagram of the ] "'' Another US high-school graduate who doesn't know his ] from his elbow, as the saying goes. Consequently, one wonders at the understanding of nihilism in this case: there is no connection with ], for a start. ANUS also stands for '''A'''nother '''N'''itwit '''U'''ser '''S'''urfaces... --] 06:55, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

			{{edit semi-protected\|Human anus\|answered=yes}}
	:They're a band of ]s; an older version of the ]. Today marks their infiltration of Misplaced Pages, it seems: Check out the contributions of the users listed (with the exception of Phthoggos, of course). I've already caught one them vandalising (see ). They've been trying to add their anus.com links to as many articles as possible. It's sad, really. -- ] 06:59, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
			] (]) 19:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

			:] '''Not done''': it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 20:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
	* I disagree: First of all, the "Another Nitwit User Surfaces" shows that Wetman cannot be considered an unbiased source, so what he say has to be disgarded in the name of objectivity. Second of all, a user searching for the Nihilist group may type "anus" but not know how to find the group's page: so I believe a disambiguation page should be created. It happens with bands all the time: see ] and look at the top where it has alternate pages linking to it. I've never claimed that it has links to Nihilism, but it has links to an organization that shares it's name. Now, if the Nihilist organization cannot be linked from ANUS, then all pages such as the ones on ] must be deleted as well. --] 19:40, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Primary Function ==

	I noticed someone changed "primary function" to "one of the functions" and noted the anus' role in sex. While anal sex exists, I think it is safe to say that its ''primary'' function is still excretory, without which we could not function at all. So I'm changing it back, although I'll leave the sexual comment in place as it is a valid statement. --] 06:24, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
	:On second thought, I see the sexual connotation is already listed separately, so I removed the redundancy. --] 06:27, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

	==Sexuality info added==

	While the primary role of the anus is undoubtedly waste excretion, the fact that it has a role in sexuality cannot be ignored, nor can Freud's claptrap be swept entirely under the rug. I added what I hope is a succinct mention of both. I do however agree with the previous edit that mentioned that this is not the place for extensive info on sexual practices. ] 12:07, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

	==NPOV tag==

	Why has an NPOV dispute tag been added to this article? Whoever added it should know that if you add such a tag to an article, you ''must'' explain why you did so on the talk page. ] 17:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

	* It was added again by 63.202.172.90 with no explanation. Treating as vandalism and reverting. ] 05:19, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:30, 21 October 2024

Misplaced Pages is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

This

level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anatomy: Gross High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Leave the images of the anuses

As said, don't remove them, they do serve a proper purpose and aren't harming anything. Besides, this typical giggly jitter some have of seeing a butthole is a little old. Shadowrun 00:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

As I said earlier, children and minors do use this site. Using real life pictures does not serve a real benefit. A chart is at the header and if fine. You dont see penis pics at the penis article. I dont want my kid coming to look at this page for a school project or something, and seeing such images. Use some tact people. Nimrauko 00:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

What kind of school project is your kid doing if it involves the Misplaced Pages page for the human anus? Do I want to know? Is it possible that you are just offended because it gets you attention? 205.118.123.65 (talk) 02:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

What?? There are no penis pictures in the penis article??? We must fix that immediately!!!

- And as I'll state again, adults also use this site. I'm willing to bet your kid has more common sense than yourself in realizing what he's looking at. Leave the images. You revert, I'll put them back. Besides, the real life benefit is an outside view of a bodily orifice. If you're worried about corrupting your kid, don't worry, he/she will find out eventually. Shadowrun 00:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

YES!!! ADD THEM!!! 0dividedby0*LMAO (talk) 19:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I was merely asking. No reason for you to be rude. As I have noticed I havent removed what you put up -_-Nimrauko 00:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

point taken and I'm sorry. Shadowrun 00:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I personally think Misplaced Pages is not Censored is fine, but in this article the images add nothing, absoloutely nothing. The disagramas are far more informative and the images are most likely took by people wanting to get their jollies off by uploading their asses to Misplaced Pages - Mike Beckham 01:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

User is making a joke about Ann Coulter, and probably shouldn't be taken seriously. Cool Hand Luke 04:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

They are two perfectly normal images of human anatomy. A look through the archives of the page will give an insight into the vast debates that lead to these being settled on as a compromised. Their inclusion has been uncontroversial for some time and I see no basis for their removal. Misplaced Pages is not censored and the images are of good quality. WjBscribe 22:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The photographs should stay, and consensus is clearly against User:Nimrauko; if he insists on having his way, he should be blocked from editing the page. There is nothing wrong with the human body, whether children see it or not. And Misplaced Pages is not censored for minors. --David Shankbone 04:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that there is no consensus but your reasoning is flawed. No one is arguing that, what I am arguing at least is that the images do not add anything to the article. The diagrams are informative. The images are not informative in the slightest. - Mike Beckham 04:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

That's your opinion, and people disagree with you more than they agree. Photographic representation that shows the surface area of the anus is very pertinent and appropriate. They add a lot. --David Shankbone 05:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the pictures don't really add anything to the article, but they don't really take away either. People have their hearts set on having photographs, so just let them. The debating about it has gone on long enough. CerealBabyMilk 05:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

DavidShankBone, the concensus isnt against me. Its two people that want the pics of real anus's up. There are more than two people who agree that they detract from the article. I have removed them. They will stay off until we can come to an agreement. Fair enough? (And btw, block me from editing? Really, I am not doing any harm. But as I said I removed the pics and they should remain off until we can as a collective come to some sort of decision. Its not a dictatorship -_-) Nimrauko 19:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not censored, period. We don't need to seek further consensus to establish that. Yes, you will indeed be blocked if you continue removing the images. OhNoitsJamie 19:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you devolpmentaly challenged? I have already said I know its not censored but the picture (Especially the one with part of a vagina and anus) are not needed when there are charts in the verry begining of the article that do a perfectly fine job. It detracts from the article is what I am saying. Censorship? not so much. I am tired of this kind of treatment. remove the second pic or crop it. No reason for you to be a douche about it.!Nimrauko 19:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

One more personal attack and you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie 19:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

So you are allowed to abuse your power and I cant say anything about it? Whatever. Its things like this that make wikipedia so laughable. I am not attacking anyone. My previous comment was a bit much but I stand by it. Again I am asking for the second picture to be cropped. Is that an attack? Come on.Nimrauko 19:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Stop this crap, you can not just use Misplaced Pages is not Censored for every single thing. Trying to dismiss concerns of editors by just saying that over and over is irritating, inappropriate and missing the message. It's not that I am for censorship, the fact is that the images do not add anything to the article. The diagram does a fine job explaining things. Having photos of some persons ass is hardly going to inform about the topic. - Mike Beckham 01:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

How are the photos here any different from the photos at Penis, Vulva, or Spleen for that matter? They are photographic illustrations of the subject. You still haven't cited a reason why this particular human anatomy article should not have photos. OhNoitsJamie 01:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the real issue here is that there are wikipedia users who are taking pictures of their own assholes just to have in this article. That's disgusting. Jtrainor 19:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL--Oh, is that the "real issue" - well, then you'll be relieved to know there is no issue - the anus photograph I took is not my own. Nice User page, by the way, Jtrainor - if you hate Misplaced Pages so much, why do you edit on it?--David Shankbone 20:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL. Jtrainor 00:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Completely civil response, and reasonable. Have you considered your page is not civil? "Misplaced Pages's community is a joke." "Misplaced Pages is useless crap" The tone of your User page is pretty uncivil, and begs the question I asked. --David Shankbone 03:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

My user page is irrelevant to this talk page. Jtrainor 03:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Remove the disgusting and 'harmful' picture!! This is not a page about porn!! Think about other people, including the children!! XU-engineer 19:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Pornography: Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal. Unless you are aroused or the pictures are meant to arouse they are not porn. Are you going to blame a porn site if a kid types 'porn'? If your kid wants to look up 'anus' then he should expect graphic material. Misplaced Pages is not censored (meaning we do have naked pictures of genitals and organs). Please look up 'nudity'. Everyone wants all the naked pictures removed because of the children. But if wikipedis is not censored and your kid looks up anus she/he should expect a picture--207.68.235.128 (talk) 04:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC).

(talk) The problem with this notion is that in the United States, it is the subjective intent of the photographer, not the use-case that is the determinate of whether or not a given photo is pornography. If a photo was taken for the purpose of appealing to the prurient interests, it is pornography, regardless of how it might be used. There is also the technical legal issue of whether or not a model release is required to be on file for these kinds of photos. 98.178.179.240 (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

New Anus

I replaced the old low-res, low-quality male anus with one I shot of a professional model, the same model who now illustrates many of the body part articles. I think we should differentiate the two anuses by gender, and the female anus clearly needs some rotating. --David Shankbone 21:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I know that might sound odd, but some males are not aware of whether the female vagina is vertical or horizontal. The human female anus image in the article should be rotated CCW 90 degrees to that the male and female images are aligned the same way and so as not to propagate this confusion. -- Jreferee 22:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I know this might sound odd too, but some males are also unaware that females ACTUALLY naturally have pubic hair. I personally feel that it'd be a good idea to have a...you know, natural anus as an example of a "female" anus, or at least add a note stating that the anus/vagina shown has been shaven/waxed. 124.177.42.150 05:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I have gone to the Penis site, and I have found pictures of a real penis there..TheLightElf (talk) 19:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You probably go to the Penis site all the time.

"As I said earlier, children and minors do use this site." And, last I was aware, children and minors have anuses just like the rest of us. Perhaps they want to see what one looks like since it is not particularly easy to examine one's own? I'd think you'd prefer them to have a picture to study rather than asking their friends if they can take a peek. Children are curious about the body and there is nothing obscene about a simple photograph of a body part. Splease don't be so Puritanical about it. Kmpintj (talk) 21:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Banning children from seeing pictures of anus and penis is completely meaningless, and there is no justification for this censorship. If a child searches for "penis" or "anus", he certainly doesn't want to see the opposite. Just puritanism, complete disrespect for children's freedom. Sot2018 (talk) 11:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok, so we could try to contact whoever submitted the pics for the female genitalia, and request to post a cropped version of the image here? Meantime, having them at the top of the page is kind of a "shock factor". Heh. Personally, I'd put the Grey's Anatomy diagrams above, and have the pictures at the bottom(essentially, switch the picture and diagram positions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.182.197.207 (talk) 02:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No one cares about "what you feel" we are trying to make an inormative article. Keep the images.--207.68.235.128 (talk) 04:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Has nothing to do with feel, but this is probably Obscene under Miller Doctrine. If you don't know what a butthole looks like, then you would have to be seriously sheltered. The intent of including these photos is to shock the senses and appeal to the prurient interest, in my opinion, which makes it obscene under the proper standards. 98.178.179.240 (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove pornographic image of anal sex (e.g. "File:Penile-anal intercourse sex.jpg|thumb|Man performing anal sex on a woman"). This does not belong on a page about human anatomy that most would reference for non-prurient reasons. 24.61.45.247 (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Already done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

But it does belong on the talk page? Tildey McTildeface (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C6:6581:BC01:8FAB:64EE:7EF1:138C (talk)

Have removed it from the talk page XxLuckyCxX (talk) 00:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 01 Oct 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under the "Microanatomy" section at the very end the apocrine glands are mentioned. I don't have enough permissions to edit this page but that phrase could be linked to the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/Apocrine_sweat_gland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekitsuu (talk • contribs) 21:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

In the Hygiene section it's mentioned that there are cultural differences. This section should point to the main article/page https://en.wikipedia.org/Anal_hygiene which covers this topic in depth, including some of the cultural differences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekitsuu (talk • contribs) 21:15, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Done House Blaster 22:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

0dividedby0*LMAO (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: