Talk:Irrumatio

Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. 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.

I never heard the word "sexing" anywhere. So if you say "known by the slang terms...", you should really call things by their name and say "fucking".

Like it or not, Irrumatio is "face-fucking". Is it honestly conceivable that the author who wrote that there is no English-language equivalent was unaware of this, or simply too puritanical to write it??

76.22.119.109 (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)MartinReply

If a man who performed irrumatio on a woman was an irrumator, what was the name for a woman on the receiving end of irrumatio? 90.209.80.216 (talk) 22:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Following English word construction rules... perhaps irrumatee, or "one who is irrumated", which just sounds weird. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:22, 3 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

In Latin sexual literature, women are only rarely, if ever, cast as the recipients of irrumatio, which was almost always an act directed aggressively at another man in order to silence or humiliate him. It often appears in the context of revenge fantasy. See Sexuality in ancient Rome#Os impurum for Roman attitudes and behaviors regarding oral sex. I've tried to distinguish Latin irrumatio from the broad English definition of "irrumation" given here. Cynwolfe (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I looked up "skull fucking" (don't ask why) and I was redirected here. Skull fucking, from what I've always been told, is when a penis penetrates an eye socket. Irrumatio is not synonymous with skull-fucking, and it doesn't seem appropriate to have skull-fucking redirect here, as it's a specific sexual act. Note this humorous video from the Onion involving skull fucking. The actor in that video refers to it as "ocular penetration," which, in all seriousness, actually sounds like it would be the correct non-vernacular term for this sexual activity. To me, it seems like skull fucking should have its own article, or have a disambiguation page, or redirect to a subordinate part of another applicable article which explains the act of skull fucking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samcashion (talk • contribs) 04:10, March 8, 2012‎ (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Irrumatio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081220094859/http://www.focusarticle.com:80/children/article349.htm to http://www.focusarticle.com/children/article349.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Since this article argues that there are two distinct terms in Roman Latin, irrumatio = to force receptive male oral sex, and fellatio = to perform oral sex on a male, I would suggest that the term "forced fellatio" should be used wisely in the article as it mixing up the antique and modern concepts. Maikel (talk) 16:42, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Quote: "There is some conjecture among linguists, as yet unresolved, that this noun may be derived from and an abbreviation of irruminatio and irruminare (Latin, rumen, ruminis, the mouth, throat and gullet, whence 'ruminate', to chew), therefore meaning 'the insertion into, to insert into the mouth or throat'."

I couldn't find the Latin noun "rumen" so some source or reference would be appreciated. Maikel (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Lewis -- ISBN 0-19-910205-8 -- has the following;

• ruminatio -- a chewing of the cud, rumination, thinking over
• rumino -- (from rumen (gullet)) to chew the cud, ruminate
• (rumen is not listed separately)

• irr- -- see inr-

which leads us to;

• inrumatio -- beastly obscenity (sic), Catullus
• inrumo -- (from in + ruma (breast)), to give suck, abuse obscenely, Catullus

Consider also:

• inrumpo -- to break in, press in, force a way in

MPS1992 (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Maikel, I considered saying this yesterday, but today will do: Regarding your changes to the lead, I think it makes more sense to have the different definitions in the first sentence, like it was before. Why do you think the oral sex definition should come first?

By the way, since this page is on my watchlist, there is no need to WP:Ping me to it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:45, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for asking.

The original lead sentence was: Irrumatio is the intercrural sex act of thrusting of the penis into the mouth of a partner, between the thighs, or between the abdomens of two men.

This is misleading (false) as the oral sex act or the variant involving abdomens is not intercural.

Also the etymology of irrumatio makes it primarily an oral sex act.

Also various dictionaries see irrumatio as primarily an act of oral sex. Maikel (talk) 10:03, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Maikel, thanks for explaining. It would still make more sense to have the other definitions in the first paragraph since irrumatio also refers to intercrural sex. The first sentence also could have been reworded to cover the other definitions. I'll get around to looking at scholarly sources to see how the term is most commonly defined. I think you have a valid point about the oral sex aspect being the primary listing, but I've seen the intercrural sex aspect in a number of sources too. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Essentially I found that I had more success finding "related" terms in Latin rather than finding things based on the English meaning or absolutely unrelated stuff when I used the 'latin-language text' words from the 'Latin obscenity' page rather than anything related to Irrumatio or Fellatio on this page. It basically just made me feel like there may be use in including more "proper" 'latin-language text' versions for the latin words mentioned on the page, or mention more related words altogether somewhere - from what I could tell 'irrŭmātio' at least didn't seem correct, but again I don't know practically anything about the word structuring.

In the process of looking around things I also managed to convince myself that I had found a major error related to the definition of Irrumatio (or fellatio), specifically the roman one and had been writting an extremely convincing argument which was almost finished, but instead it helped me realize I probably only thought so because of something - which I was technically correct about - only really mattered based on what I knew starting out my writing. I was almost finished by the point where I had everything so neatly lined up that there was no room for making similar mistakes again that I realized that what I had been looking to change couldn't be correct if you made sure to look at all the variations and variables possible for the things I was talking about.. or to simplify, I didn't finalize the process of actually writing it down in a convincing (and easily readable) way until I was near the end and had finished most of the thought process about how to write it up :P

In total I spent more than 4 hours writing, and probably half an hour confirming once I started checking around when I realized something was off. At least it was somewhat interesting, since most of the time spent was trying to write it in a as comprehensive, convincing but still extremely easily understood way as possible - it ended up being somewhat of a light psychological thought experiment or something. Anyway, I'll see myself out for now, just in case there was *something* relevant in what I wrote up I saved it to have a look at it later, but I think I just ended up running in circles due to overthinking too much before I had it all laid out. What I mentioned at the top of the post is still potentially relevant, and what I planned to mention here before I dug myself into a hole.

During the ten years I was more or less absent from Wikipedia, sourced content pertaining to the Roman cultural concept of irrumatio has been removed. For more on this, see Sexuality in ancient Rome#irrumatio. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

sex ~2026-44561-04 (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply