O-PRIC Inuagural AGM: The Pitfalls of Asking About Chastity and Prostate Health on the Internet


The inaugural (and like, first ever) AGM of the ORGANIZATION FOR PROSTATE RISKS IN CHASTITY was held recently, round at my house. Being the only member present, I skipped the tedious formalities and moved straight on to the biscuits and the business at hand: the keystone subject of prostate cancer as a possible risk of my particular lifestyle. What do we know? How do we know it?

This is going to be the subject of numerous O-PRIC posts, but I’ll start by listing some resources on message-boards and the like. I have chosen these to throw some light on one important thing: this is a very loaded subject and there are few neutral and impartial sources around. Therefore, asking people on the internet is a pretty dubious strategy, and one I have decided not to pursue. I’ll explain why.

Firstly, people tend to ask about chastity either because they want it to be safe, or because they want to discredit femdom practices by suggesting that it is not safe.

Secondly, people’s answers are equally motivated by their position towards this lifestyle.

Thirdly, the medical community is behaving in the opposite fashion. Doctors often don’t have enough hard evidence to say for sure if it is or isn’t harmful, and I suspect many would fall back on the Hippocratic principle of “doing no harm”, which might mean erring on the side of caution as they don’t know one way or the other.

The upshot: a lot of people with firm agendas are getting answered by a lot of other people with no hard evidence, while Doctors do the best they can to give clear answers without saying anything that is wrong, or giving the green light to something they don’t know for sure is OK.

I haven’t done a whole stack of research here, just enough to suggest this. Here’s some examples:

Elise Sutton: Play Safe: Questions about FemDom and Health Issues

Our dear friend Elise Sutton is answering a question from a male  – who wants to discredit the practice of chastity – and who claims to have read articles suggesting the following:

  • a man that had 100 orgasms per year is 36% less likely to die of a heart attack or stroke than a man who did not.
  • an average man at age 50 should have 2.5 orgasms per week to maintain a healthy prostate.

I’m not a big fan of Sutton, but her response here was kinda reasonable: “can I read those articles, please? ” For the record, I’d like to read them, too.

Sutton goes on to make some claims based mostly on personal opinion, saying that the major cause of heart attack and stroke is actually stress and that subspace is as good as stress reliever as orgasms. On the subject of cancer she is more specific. She claims to have spoken to several Doctors who claim that there is no hard medical evidence linking prostate health to the frequency of male orgasms. In fact, one Doctor told her of a study that stated that men who did not masturbate and had limited orgasms were healthier and more productive than men who did.

Hmmm. Well, I’d like to see those sources, too.

Questions on chastity from Lubyanka to Dr Goldtstein on AllExperts…

Irish Domme Lady Lubyanka, who enjoys locking up her husband’s cock etc, and is concerned for his long-term health, asks a retired urologist a range of well-informed questions, namely:

  • What are the effects on a healthy prostate if it is not evacuated regularly (aside from related issues of prostatic congestion)?
  • Are any of those effects permanent?
  • Are congestion and related issues the only reasons why regularly evacuating the prostate is beneficial to male reproductive health?

Dr Goldstein is a bit cagey. He talks at length about exactly what congestive prostatitis (CP) is, and how to cure it, but on the subject of long-term damage, he simply says that “congestive or other types of prostatitis are generally not permanent and can be treated easily.” There is no mention of cancer as a side-effect of prostatic congestion, and the whole issue of cancer as a result of inactivity / atrophy is not addressed, let alone PSA buildup.

Info on Lubyanka’s own site

Lubyanka also asked quite a few other Doctors the same questions and scouted around for supporting documents. The results of her research are laid out plainly:

Most health professionals seem to agree that that evacuating the prostate at least once every three weeks is beneficial for maintaining prostate health and function. Most of them also seem to agree that gentle (not vigorous!) prostate massage can be beneficial, but only in the absence of some prostatic disorders (such as acute prostatitis, or prostate cancer).

But no-one ever seems to say why

‘Bill’ asks Dr Goldstein the same questions

‘Bill’, apparently a member of Lady Julia’s Male Chastity Group, asks Dr Goldstein the same sort of questions and gets the same sort of answers from the resident urologist. Dr Goldstein simply won’t go near the question about cancer and sticks to what he knows, which is explaining the physiology, and says that “from a strictly medical standpoint, it is healthy to periodically empty the prostate gland.” Again it is not really clear why this must be done.

Is is simply to avoid CP, or to avoid cancer caused by long-term CP, or cancer caused by atrophy, or by PSA buildup??

Those four different things never really get teased out. We just get told it’s probably a good idea to empty it once in a while. I suspect this is a counsel of responsible caution rather than hard knowledge.

Message Board Responses

There’s other examples around on message-boards. I’ve lately read a guy asking on a forum about this subject, who got the reply that long-term chastity  is very bad for you, which cited “Doctors’ horror stories” but didn’t actually link anything up, and also cited the dark and moralized issue of  Church celibacy into the bargain. Emotive arguing, not scientific stuff.

I’ve also read other stuff – and I’m not going to link it up, it’s too gross – where a guy advocated chastity on a pretty vanilla board, only to be assured that he would surely die of prostate cancer, with no evidence cited whatsoever.  This was accompanied by derision at his choice of lifestyle. It was almost as though people saw the potential risk of cancer as a punishment for his “perversity”.

My point here was not to argue one way or the other about the safety of chastity. I’m just arguing that message-boards and other amateur forums are probably not the best places to ask for information on this topic; its too emotive an issue to get a reasonable response, and anecdotal evidence on this topic is unreliable. Stuff written by people who advocate  femdom as a lifestyle is probably even less reliable, especially if they have a business interest in chaste men.

And if you seek proper medical advice online, as Lubyanka did, it would appear that many Doctors have  little direct evidence to go on and give an estimate of health risks based on the assumption that continual prostatic congestion probably isn’t too good for you. Therefore, Lubyanka’s “Most health professionals seem to agree…” is the best possible outcome of this process.

To find out more, I’m going to need to look at research reports.  And not what people who have read those reports say they say.  What they actually say. I’m going to have to read them. Sigh.

Right now, I’m not really looking forward to reading some technical guff written by geeks at Charles Hopkins, but Michelle is ramping up the chastity, so I’ve told myself I’m going to read all that stuff by the end of the year.

If I can find out, I want to know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s