You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
DISCUSSION: All discussants agreed that Dr. Bell's paper presents some intriguing new concepts. Dr. Mary O'Neil Hawkins felt that testicular movement might be less important than the reflex contraction of the cremasteric muscle and the consequent shriveling of the scrotal sac, which is more easily seen. There is probably also a libidinization of anxiety because of the cremasteric reflex which can become erotized. She suggested that some cases of abdominal pain in the boy may be referred from testicular injury. She cited a patient who, alarmed by his masturbating, felt consciously responsible and guilty even when his testicles moved upward when stimulated by temperature (cold). Dr. Abram Blau felt that the material applied only when special attention is brought to the infant's testicles, as in cryptorchidism. Dr. David Rubinfine thought that the paper offered a valuable contribution to our understanding of the transitional phases of development. He suggested that the motility of the testicles and their capacity to disappear and reappear might also be pleasurable and help overcome anxiety, as well as promote it. Dr. Maurice Friend also emphasized that these movements may have an exciting and mysterious quality for the child, rather than a frightening one. He was cautious as to the impact the first glimpse of the testicles could have on the infant and felt that, unlike the penis, they do not come into full play until prepuberty. From the evolutionary point of view the return of the testicles to the abdomen is protective, and may therefore be anxiety-relieving rather than anxiety-producing. Dr. Harry Joseph pointed out that the penis is a more important organ than the testicles because of its much greater capacity for pleasurable sensation. Dr. Samuel Atkin described a case which emphasized highly repressed and suppressed material relating to the testicles.