Analisi Dibattito

A #6 Men, Masculinities, and Reproduction: Seminal Undertaking: Testicular Cancer, Sperm Banking, and Fatherhood

Olivia Weiss settembre 2026

Sperm banking and reproduction are important considerations in the history of testicular cancer. With improvements in treatments, life expectancy, and quality of life, the number of testicular cancer patients reporting issues with sexual function has increased. Why the seemingly imbalanced relationship between improvement and issues? When the overall outcome is more likely to be positive, the smaller problems become larger. Testicular cancer outcomes have improved considerably over the past decades, but problems with identity, self-esteem, sexual function, and emotional stability remain.

Testicular Cancer and Sperm Banking

Testicular cancer is typically treated with an inguinal orchiectomy: the testicle and spermatic cord are removed via an incision low on the abdomen. Additional treatment depends on the specific type of tumour, and can include chemotherapy, radiation, additional surgery to remove lymph nodes, and active surveillance.

The timeline of sperm banking in the context of testicular cancer depends on a patient’s individual diagnosis and treatment plan. Sperm banking can take place prior to surgery, or after surgery but before chemotherapy or radiation treatment. Testicular cancer can impair sperm production, so there can be an advantage to waiting until after surgery – even though the patient will be short a testicle. (1) Semen analysis prior to sperm banking shows the reproductive capability of a patient’s sperm. Chemotherapy and radiation can decimate sperm counts for years after treatment, so banking and potentially reproducing with slightly subpar sperm is better than having nothing to work with.

To clarify: sperm banking is not a therapeutic intervention, as it does not treat the cancer. Medical professionals can forget or neglect to offer the option of sperm banking to testicular cancer patients. In the United States-based patient narratives I examine, patients and caregivers report having to bring up the topic themselves at medical appointments. (2) The consideration of sperm banking can depend on age and reproductive desires or abilities. Young testicular cancer patients may not be thinking about having children. Older patients who have already had children may still be encouraged to bank sperm in case they want to have more in the future.

Sperm Banks: When and Why?

The article “Urge Human Sperm Banks” from The Science News-Letter on September 9, 1961 stressed human sperm banks would be critically important given the consequences of radiation as a volatile entity, and emphasized that using cryogenically frozen sperm would be a significant advancement beyond simple artificial human insemination, which at the time was done with fresh donor sperm. (3)

The first sperm banks were established in 1964, initially in the United States and in Japan. Men working in industries that might jeopardize their reproductive potential, such as exposure to radiation or toxic chemicals, were encouraged to bank sperm in order to support their masculine identity. Researchers found that a man’s loss of the ability to father children, to perpetuate his family name, often resulted in a crisis of identity. (4) 

The ability to procreate, as a specific aspect of masculine identity, can generate ideas of grandeur and power. Physical and mental attributes are deeply intertwined, as the penis and the sperm support the procreative aspect of masculine identity along with outside (and less controllable) elements such as sexual partner, timing, age, etc. In a survey inquiring if having children altered their perspective on their genitals and their identity as men, respondents often referenced their virility, potency, and pride. (5) 

The mid-twentieth century was a time of scientific and technological innovation but also of anxieties about the encroachment of modernity and the rapidly changing future, especially in the context of the ongoing Cold War, the exploration of space, and the growth of feminist movements. (6) Sperm banking developed as a way to meet and use innovations in technology, to pause time and hold possibilities in stasis, and to support reproduction as a pillar of masculinity.

Scientific Perspectives

Scientifically and socially, halting the powerful sperm in its tracks while retaining its reproductive capacity was a heady thing in the 1960s, and this attitude persisted through the end of the century. A 1972 article in Science detailed the simplicity of a sperm bank “deposit,” and noted the cost to process and freeze was $80 USD. The article also referenced the anxieties of men about possible fatherhood, saying “a sperm bank can supply just another way to parlay anxiety into money.” (7) The 1978 article “Cell on Ice” from Science News stated “more than three thousand infants have already been born of once-frozen sperm,” showing how banked sperm not only held nascent possibility, but how possibility could become reality. (8) The 2003 article “Sperm You Can Bank On” from the British Medical Journal said that “irrespective of what decisions they may or may not make about fathering,” simply “knowing that their sperm is somewhere safe is a psychological benefit to men.” (9) 

Across the social sciences and the humanities, scholars have developed theories about the power attributed to sperm. As the “masculine” building block of reproduction, sperm is often positioned as powerful and aggressive. Sperm is also sometimes perceived as a stand-in or embodiment for an entire person because of its reproductive possibility. (10) The historical examples cited above show how sperm has been thought of as capital, and akin to money, currency, and power. Sperm as a physical object, and as a reproductive entity, is something to be kept safe in a bank vault – if the human body isn't a safe enough place. 

Patient Perspectives: Memoirs

The patient sources I use throughout my dissertation range from notable testicular cancer patients writing memoirs to anonymous patients and caregivers writing in primarily US-based online support forums. Two particularly notable testicular cancer patients – both renowned athletes – are Scott Hamilton, figure skater, and Lance Armstrong, cyclist.

In their respective memoirs, both Hamilton and Armstrong wrote about the process of banking sperm after surgery and before additional treatment. Hamilton stated that he “spent part of Thursday at the fertility center, banking what would ensure future generations of Hamiltons.” When discussing chemotherapy and sperm count with his entire medical team, he said that he “felt embarrassed with all these people in the room.” (11) Despite this awkward moment, Hamilton’s sense of his masculinity and reproductive abilities did not seem to be compromised by this atypical approach to fatherhood, and he instead focused on his potential future descendants to whom he would pass down his name.

Armstrong, as he was going to bank sperm, thought to himself, “I was depressed and falling apart emotionally from the shock of the diagnosis, and now I was supposed to summon an erection?” The physical and mental challenges of testicular cancer were compounded by the time pressure, as Armstrong had only a few days in which to bank sperm before his chemotherapy started. He found the experience demoralizing on multiple levels, from the “sad, solitary, desperate” nature of the procedure to his sperm count being “only about a third of what it should have been.” (12) As a competitive athlete, Armstrong was used to pushing his body to the limit and to quantifying his abilities. The low sperm count showed, to him, a biological inability to measure up. A perceived lack of masculinity and virility cast a pall over Armstrong’s thoughts of potentially being a father and demonstrates the psychological effects of testicular cancer on mind and body. 

Both Hamilton and Armstrong had children post-testicular cancer experience: Hamilton had biological children and also adopted, while Armstrong had children with the banked sperm and then a decade later, sired children naturally. Here, sperm banking led to a result – fatherhood. The frozen potential held by the sperm they banked was no longer a reassuring theoretical concept, but was born into reality.

Patient Perspectives: Forum Posts

In online testicular cancer support forums, patients and caregivers share emotions and information in a communal space with both camaraderie and anonymity. Forum member Davepet said, in a conversation about sperm banking and parenting, “How important is it to him that he can father his own kids…”. (13) He does not phrase this as an imperative statement, but as a question to consider. Davepet’s point also raises questions about fathering as an act, not fathering as a continual process. Is he truly asking how important is it to a testicular cancer patient to become a father, or to be a father? 

Several caregivers whose sons had testicular cancer posted on the forums about taking their sons to bank sperm during the treatment process. Parents being concerned about their kids’ ability to have kids demonstrates generational anxiety at work and complicates notions of parenthood on another level. Forum member AustinsMom wrote about the process of her 16-year-old son going to a sperm banking appointment. She said upon first hearing about sperm banking, her son “Austin wasn’t too thrilled with it…and seemed rather nervous, justifiably so. His first reaction was that he was NOT donating any of his sperm!!” AustinsMom had been told by a nurse that “the young men who come in usually have better luck if their Mom is NOT sitting out in the lobby,” so she did not accompany her son to the appointment – his father did. 

Returning to the financial considerations of sperm, AustinsMom noted “it’s $245.00 per ‘donation’ mind you,” and that just before her husband and son returned home, the nurse called to say “Austin had accidentally dropped the cup and spilled it !!!” (14) Thinking back to the 1972 article, and thinking about the young patient in this case, sperm banking worked more to “parlay anxiety into money” for the medical and storage facilities rather than to alleviate anxieties about masculine reproductive potential. 

One final patient story: in a 1990 article in the British Medical Journal, a young doctor recounted his experience of banking sperm amidst testicular cancer treatment. He said, “I was advised to bank some semen before the treatment started. I was not even engaged to be married. Having children had always been something for the distant future. I felt cheated that this could be my contribution to their conception. I would be deprived of the pillow talk and closeness which normally surrounds this event.” (15) Though a medical professional himself, he felt his reproductive contribution being reduced to an isolated medical experience undercut the importance and significance of fatherhood.

Conclusion

Thinking about Davepet’s words: how important is it to any testicular cancer patient that he can father his own kids? Every testicular cancer patient must try to answer for themselves. Banking sperm during the testicular cancer experience does not answer the question but does postpone having to answer. Banked sperm, held in stasis, represents possibility. The patient could possibly be a father, could possibly be a father again, could possibly have more children. Banked sperm is only one part of the deceptively complex equation of reproduction. Sperm banking removes spontaneity from the reproductive process: any children resulting from the banked sperm would be planned.

Once again, the various financial considerations raise their head. The money to continue to store sperm in a facility – one forum member cited an annual expense of $700 USD (16) – as well as the money to have kids later with additional medical interventions, the money to exchange for peace of mind now, the money to continue to put off making a decision. All of these add up, leading to a stratified, pay-to-play approach to fathering a child.

Finally, as sperm bank facilities themselves acknowledge, sperm banking does not guarantee successful conception, a healthy pregnancy, or a healthy child. Sperm banking, as part of the testicular cancer process, lets patients decide on indecision. Despite the emotional, financial, and medical drawbacks, having sperm in the bank can be comforting and reassuring to a testicular cancer patient overwhelmed with their rapidly changing body, identity, and reality.

References:

Date di pubblicazione:

06 settembre 2026

Soggetto:

Analisi Dibattito

Temi:

Studi di Genere

Discipline:

Scienze umane, Scienze sociali

Autrice/autore:

Olivia Weiss