The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > General Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:07 PM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Why do men need to thrust and stroke to achieve ejaculation?

Think about it. It’s not like you’re pumping something up, like a basketball, you don’t need the pressure built up somewhere, only to be released at a different time, all that stuff is handled involuntary and by specific internal muscles. But most males, and even males of different species even, need the act of stroking and/or thrusting of the penis for them to reach orgasm.

Why?

Outside of making it more exciting- for those of us doing it for fun- why would natural selection (If that’s what’s in play here) make it harder for one to reproduce (I.e. the thrusting and stroking and whatnot) rather than, say, simply sticking it in there and letting it fly?

It seems to me that the second method would be easier and less costly to the male in terms of energy output and all that. But that’s not the case for any number of males, and for any number of species- their thrusting away like mad as if it was necessary.

So, why?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:16 PM
DarrenS DarrenS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Total guess - but maybe for evolutionary reasons, it's not a good idea for the male to release his sperm too easily - it's not good for procreation if he wastes it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:17 PM
ultrafilter ultrafilter is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
The more effort that's required to ejaculate, the less likely it is to happen accidentally. Fewer sperm are wasted that way.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:36 PM
NurseCarmen NurseCarmen is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Zen Arcade
Posts: 8,268
I recall a commercial that aired in Aisa to discourage the use of Tiger testicles as an herbal "viagra". They showed the male tiger mating, and it was over in an instant. The commercial implied that if you want longevity in the sack, do you really want to get it from this two second beast? So count Tigers and men with a case of the preemies (5 minute Phil, two minute Tony, and Premature Pete) as exceptions to this phenomena.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:39 PM
bernse bernse is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
To get picky, what about wet dreams? No physical movement there.

Of course, you think you're doing the nasty...
at least, most of us are...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:52 PM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by ultrafilter
Fewer sperm are wasted that way.
If waste is an issue, than I'm a dead man. I've shot more of my DNA into thin air and tissues than has ever made it into the nether regions of a female, yet I still seem to have enough to go around come the time when I want to concieve a child.

The point is, I'm not too worried that I'm going to run out of the stuff. Because if I remember right, males pretty much have an unlimited amount of the stuff at their disposal, right? If that's the case, than why would 'waste' be an issue?

What got me, or gets me, about all this, is that it seems as if your pumping something up, or building up pressure, for the 'event' to take place, but that's not happening at all, right? There's really no need, but everyone seems to do it.


*Preview reveals Bernse's wet dream comment-

Exactly- thrusting, stroking, anything else that comes to mind, isn't really necessary for ejaculation, but it's done as if it is. That's why this fascinates me about all this- why the effort?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:58 PM
scott evil scott evil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by bernse
To get picky, what about wet dreams? No physical movement there.
I assume it's the pressure of the erection against the mattress that causes ejaculation. My first boyfriend could have an orgasm just by putting pressure on the base of his dick - no stroking or thrusting at all.

- s.e.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:58 PM
bup bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
WAG: It takes some effort, not because the male's body is trying to conserve sperm, but because females get to be more selective that way.

Sure, rape exists, but a man who has sex with a woman is much more likely to be with a willing partner, simply because it is a little bit of an involved activity.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:58 PM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
It seems that sufficient friction is the trigger that tells the brain to start your orgasm:

From the Merck Manual:

Quote:
Ejaculation occurs at the climax of sexual excitement when friction on the glans penis and other stimuli send signals to the brain and spinal cord. Nerves stimulate muscle contractions along the ducts of the epididymis and vas deferens, the seminal vesicles, and the prostate. These contractions force semen into the urethra. Contraction of the muscles around the urethra further propels the semen through and out of the penis. The neck of the bladder also constricts to keep semen from flowing backward into the bladder.
From the University of Virginia:

Quote:
Male
Friction between the vaginal walls and the penile glans and shaft stimulates nerve endings.
The muscles in the scrotum contract raising the scrotum closer to the torso.
Muscles in the epididymis and vas deferans contract moving the sperm through the vas deferans.
Secretions from the seminal vesicle and prostrate gland are mixed with the advancing sperm.
There are other links that I hesitate to provide in accordance with board rules, even though they are scholarly in nature (some have illustrations). But if you google for "friction male ejaculation", you'll find plenty of sources.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-17-2002, 03:59 PM
jhwood9 jhwood9 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
It was my understanding that thrusting was a mechanical process necessary for a species in which groups of males try to impregnate a single female. I'm no procreational expert, but I seem to recall that sex researchers have identified three different types of sperm... ones that aggressively seek out and kill sperm cells with a different DNA pattern (aggressive attack), ones that form mucus barriers ("soft plug," or passive attack), and swimmers which only try to find the egg cell. The thrusting motion is necessary to break up the "soft plug" of sperm in the cervix of a woman who had already experienced coitus, allowing the woman's current partner a better chance to impregnate her with his own sperm.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-17-2002, 04:28 PM
ultrafilter ultrafilter is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Yeah, I realized before I read jhwood9's post that the real reason is that we are a soft-plug species, and so the thrusting serves to break up the sperm. My earlier guess was simply a guess, and should've been id'd as such.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-17-2002, 04:32 PM
AndrewL AndrewL is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
I've heard the same theory as jhwood9. It's a result of the fact that humans live in mixed-sex social groups, and women have no obvious outwards signs of ovulation. So, there's no way for a guy to make sure he's the only one having sex with a woman during her fertile period.

So, in addition to developing sperm which form a soft, sticky plug over the cervix to bar entry to other men's sperm, we've developed large plunger-like penises and a prolonged sexual act which helps wash away the sperm left by another man.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-17-2002, 04:41 PM
jmpride62 jmpride62 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Also, something I've wondered wouldn't the ability to procreate increase if more men were capable of several ejaculations in rapid fashion? I would think that having a willing female, nature would want to make it possible for a man to 'flood' (for lack of a better term) the vagina to make procreation more likely.

Just a thought
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-17-2002, 04:58 PM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Is there something wrong with the Merck study and U Va cites?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-17-2002, 05:16 PM
kanicbird kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
The typical thrush that we all know is what circiumsized men must do to 'feel' enough to 'come'. Un-cir men are more 'gental' so to speak and do less thrusting and more 'moving'. or so I've heard on a Dr. radio show.

Also the time it requires to come might have something to do with inducing an orgasim in the female which might aid fertilization.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-17-2002, 05:44 PM
Lemur866 Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 16,886
We can look at the comparative anatomy of hominoids. Gorillas have small testes/amount of ejaculate, humans have medium size testes, and chimps have large testes. Gorillas live in single-male harems, so there isn't much sperm competition. There is very little likelyhood of two male gorillas mating with the same female at close to the same time. Chimps live in mixed-sex bands, and it is common for all the males in a band to mate with a female in estrous. This means that there is a great deal of sperm competition, and males who produce the most sperm are selected for. Humans are intermediate...human females often mate with only one male during their fertile period, but aren't as exclusive as gorillas.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-18-2002, 02:04 AM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Lib, dude, just because everyone doesn't jump behind your conclusion doesn't mean their thoughts are wrong... some people believe the exact opposite.
Come on lib, don’t ruin it for everyone else.

There seems to be a lot more to it, this ‘plug’ thing I don’t quite understand, but hey, it’s the deal.

Come on someone, explain it to me in a way that makes sense…
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-18-2002, 06:12 AM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
I don't mean to ruin anything, and that's not my conclusion. It's the conclusion of doctors from one of the finest medical research laboratories in the world, and from a human sexual response lecture at a major university.

If you don't consider them to be credible sources, I'd like to know why. Your question has been answered with step by step expository. Men need to thrust and stroke in order to create friction, whereupon their brains set into motion the process that leads to ejaculation.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-18-2002, 07:33 AM
Fenris Fenris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Libertarian
If you don't consider them to be credible sources, I'd like to know why. Your question has been answered with step by step expository. Men need to thrust and stroke in order to create friction, whereupon their brains set into motion the process that leads to ejaculation.
Ok, but that just takes the question back one step further: why does the brain "require" the friction trigger to ejaculate? Why not pressure (Scott Evil's boyfriend being the execption) or putting your penis somewhere warm and moist? Is there something advantatgeous evolutionarily about the thrust/friction thing?

BTW: My understanding based on an article I read somewhere * was that the friction "overstimulated" the nerves somehow which caused the ejaculation...

Fenris

* Comic-Book Guy "Worst. Cite. Ever."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-18-2002, 07:43 AM
LolaBaby LolaBaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by k2dave

Also the time it requires to come might have something to do with inducing an orgasm in the female which might aid fertilization.
I remember reading on here somewhere about that "penis-cam" that showed the cervix "dipping" into the pool of sperm if both partners reached simultaneous orgasm, thus enhancing a man's chances of keeping his gene pool alive.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-18-2002, 07:59 AM
Pablito Pablito is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Maybe it's both friction and thrusting that are important here. One can (I can) achieve ejaculation without moving--it's merely a matter of the item which produces the friction doing the moving, a woman on top, an active mouth, a busy hand. Each of these can be active enough to produce the friction necessary for ejaculation, all without the penis in question moving even a little bit.
The rub, however, is that it's really hard, as the person attached to the penis being stimulated, NOT to thrust. Maybe this is because the thrusting serves, Darwinally speaking, to help send the semen along its way, allowing it to be 'deposited' closer to the cervix.
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I find it more satisfying when ejaculation occurs at the moment of maximum thrust, rather than during the withdrawal phase of the stroking. Again, this ensures that the sperm leave the missile geographically closer to the target site.

Sorry, no cites to offer here. I am, however, willing to serve as a test subject if any female dopers are interested in initiating a case study of this issue.

Not sure how much this advances the discussion, but it was fun to write.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-18-2002, 09:35 AM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Fenris
Ok, but that just takes the question back one step further: why does the brain "require" the friction trigger to ejaculate?
This is a much better way to put it than I was able to come up with earlier this morning. I apologize for snotiness of my earlier reply.

The truth is, Fenris boiled down what I'm after and curious about: why does evolution, or whatever it is, require the stroking, thrusting, and whatnot, for us to orgasm when it's essentially a pretty frivolous and wasteful act? There must be a reason that the trait of stroking and thrusting away won over the simply sticking it in there and letting fly method, but why?

Again, I’m not trying to shut down discussion or anything, but the response, ‘Hey, I answered it already’ seemed to be saying to me ‘Case closed- answered’ when I still think there’s more to it.

**- In regards to what’s-her-name’s boyfriend who lost it by touch alone... come to think of it, I really can't laugh at what happened to him as it's happened to me.

Back in _my_ desperate days, the same kind of thing would happen to me- I'd get to the point that the big nasty was inevitable and likely, and instead of going off like the energizer bunny, the mere nakedness of a woman pretty much ended it for me. Dammit all. Now, on the other hand, in today’s situations, it seems that it takes all kinds of stimulation and stroking action for me to get to the ‘point’ (Which, in a way, is how I came up with the question- 'Jesus. Why the hell does it take me forever to get there. It's making the girl pissed, it's making me pissed, why the hell do we have to go through all this shit anyways!)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-18-2002, 10:20 AM
handy handy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Pacific Grove, Calif
Posts: 17,493
This reminds me a bit like scratching. If you just use a still hand you don't get much pleasure from
the scratching, but if you use motion, it feels nice, eh? Gets those nerves activated.

I don't agree thrusting is necessary to reach orgasm. There are people who can think themselves
to orgasm without touching themselves or having a sheet on them & it can be induced with
an electric prod on cows & elephants (Got to get those sperm samples some way).....
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-18-2002, 11:10 AM
Corrvin Corrvin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
IANAGuy, but don't most guys spend a serious amount of time learning not to do the two-thrust-and-done maneuver? Wouldn't it be a more realistic view of the "natural male abilities" to look at, say, teenaged boys and their staying power?

Just from word of mouth, it seems like your typical 15 year old boy could be searching for a tissue after a good steady 20-second stare from a naked redhead-- the 15 minutes and up type performance is something we have to get the hang of as a sexually active adult. We all probably know someone (usually a *koff* "close friend") who managed to ejaculate during first penetration-- isn't that a closer view of what we humans are actually genetically wired to do?

Either that or the "thrusting" is actually a side effect caused by simply tensing your buttocks and thighs when you orgasm. Could be.

Corr
...looking for a research partner now...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-18-2002, 12:15 PM
Revtim Revtim is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
I thought I read somewher that the thrusting had evolved from the "stick it in and spooge instantly" scenario to increase the time sex takes and to facilitate the emotional bonding between partners.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-18-2002, 12:45 PM
The Great Philosopher The Great Philosopher is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
I think Corr's onto something. Human's find sex pleasureable because it means we're more likely to have it, thus more likely to pass our DNA on more than a species which found sex boring and barely even felt a sensation during it.

However, this has the side effect that humans want to make the act last as long as possible, for more pleasure. Therefore, we train ourselves to make copulation last longer; we train ourselves not to ejaculate 'too soon', lest we disappoint our partner and lose them.

And in fact, that leads me to another point. Nowadays, if a guy inserted his pole into the promised land, ejaculated instantly, grunted, rolled over and fell asleep straight away, he's not likely to keep his partner for a long time. So those men who can last a long time are sought by women, since they can give them more pleasure.

I expect these other theories have a strong influence too - the 'plug' thing, etc. But I think the social thoery plays a big part too.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-18-2002, 12:54 PM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Corrvin
Just from word of mouth, it seems like your typical 15 year old boy could be searching for a tissue after a good steady 20-second stare from a naked redhead-- the 15 minutes and up type performance is something we have to get the hang of as a sexually active adult.
That's a good, and funny, point (Never happened to you, ehh? Wait'll it happens, it ain't fun... for both parties).

However, even if that were the case- that men really don't need to thrust and stroke (And I'm hoping someone can come up with a better description than the 'thrusting and stroking' stuff I've been using up til now, goddammit)- but that doesn't explain other species that do it, and actually seem to require it- ie. monkeys, cats (Even though someone else said they don't, every time I've seen a cat going at it the male was pounding away) dogs... all kinds of animals, for that matter, seem to thrust away. It definetely has something to do with something.

If were as simple as sticking it in there and losing it like the teenaged boy you mentioned (And me), than why is the maneuver itself, and all its different variations, so much a universal need for most, if not all, men/males?

If it took me, and all men, a simple stare at the wanker and we all lost it, that's what we'd all be doing. And in that case, I'd expect someone to say, "What brought us here, and won out all the other competing methods, that a simple stare at my wank makes me lose it, but nothing else does? Why the hell is that trait universal and such an issue?"
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-18-2002, 02:00 PM
LolaBaby LolaBaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Personally, as a woman, I'd like a guy to take as long as he can, in the chance so I can get off also. If he just plonks it in and shoots, that doesn't exactly give me incentive to want to jump on his happy stick again.

Guy A: lasts 45 minutes.
Guy B: lasts 3 minutes.

You can bet I'd rather bonk A. The more A bonks me, the more chance he gets of having offspring.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-18-2002, 02:02 PM
LolaBaby LolaBaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
IOW: think about the woman's gratification too, and we'll all be happier.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-18-2002, 04:03 PM
Just Ed Just Ed is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 1,444
Another Citation

This is from a transcript of a presentation by Dr. Robin Baker, author of Sperm Wars:
Quote:
. . . suppose you're a man who starts to have sex with a woman and she actually contains the seminal pool from another man. You are just going to ejaculate your sperm on top of somebody else's seminal pool, and very few of your sperm are going to get through to compete. But the penis has been designed and male behaviour during sex has been designed to cope with that. Because this is a very efficient suction pump, if you think about it, because it fits relatively tight in the vagina. When it pulls back it creates a negative pressure and some of the seminal pool, any seminal pool that's already there gets drawn down the vagina when the penis goes through, it's blunt shape means that it goes through the semen from another male easily, it gets behind the flanges at the back of the glans, and it pulls back out, it scrapes it out and the thrusting that goes on during sex which you thought was just for fun, and which itís very hard for a man to say, no, I'm not going to thrust. It is programmed into his behaviour. It serves a very useful function on terms of sperm competition, because it takes out anything that might already be there.
I believe this may be the research to which jhwood9 refers. Note: Sperm Wars , by the author's own admission, is a popular science book written as an interpretation of an earlier tome entitled Human Sperm Competition (also authored by Dr. Robin Baker).

So, it would appear the thrust activity evolved as a component of competition amongst males for the best chance of fertilization in an uncertain environment wherein a woman may have had more than one sexual partner.

If I recall correctly, evolutionary biology explains several of the quirks of differently-endowed species as regards the sexual act. See this page from National Geographic for a particular example.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-18-2002, 10:19 PM
blandart blandart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Odd there has been no follow-up on a crucial point IT FEELS GOOD." Old Mom Nature's primary goal is perpetuation of the species, and she pulled a fast one by rigging us to make the process too damned much fun to avoid. The thrusting, rubbing stuff maximizes the chances of procreation. The old hag rigged the game like a sideshow shill luring us with thrills, and she is always the winner.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-19-2002, 01:16 AM
Critical1 Critical1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by LolaBaby
Guy A: lasts 45 minutes.
Guy B: lasts 3 minutes.

You can bet I'd rather bonk A. The more A bonks me, the more chance he gets of having offspring.
I have an exgf who told me Very recently that she Can't say no to sex with me, her best ever with anyone else was 2 orgasms. normally its 1 or none, with me she averaged 3 and I think I got her off about 8 times one night, and 5-6 times at least once a week.

the moral of the story? LolaBaby is right on the money.


keep in mind that the human female is one of VERY VERY few females of ANY species mamal or otherwise that is capable of orgasm. at least last time I heard anything on the subject they were.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-19-2002, 05:06 AM
scm1001 scm1001 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by LolaBaby
Personally, as a woman, I'd like a guy to take as long as he can, in the chance so I can get off also. If he just plonks it in and shoots, that doesn't exactly give me incentive to want to jump on his happy stick again.

Guy A: lasts 45 minutes.
Guy B: lasts 3 minutes.

You can bet I'd rather bonk A. The more A bonks me, the more chance he gets of having offspring.
slight hijack: New Scientist recently reported that the average sex act measured for men being treated for "premature ejaculation" 2m 30s; for a control sample of normal men 2 min 50sec or thereabouts. Is PE a myth?


If you can find Guy A I would lock him up and not let him out of the house.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-19-2002, 06:24 AM
LolaBaby LolaBaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Woohoo!
I already live with Guy A.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-19-2002, 07:12 AM
istara istara is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by scm1001
slight hijack: New Scientist recently reported that the average sex act measured for men being treated for "premature ejaculation" 2m 30s; for a control sample of normal men 2 min 50sec or thereabouts. Is PE a myth?
I would define PE as thoses cases where the man can NEVER exceed 2'30, and maybe often lasts even less, as opposed to the man that 7 times out of 10 just does a "quickie" but can go the marathon if required. IMO it is more about control (or lack thereof) than actual time.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-19-2002, 04:36 PM
ralph124c ralph124c is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
I recall from reading Robert H. Rimmer's forgotten classic "THE HARRAD EXPERIMENT", that tantric practices allow a male to experience orgasm for as long as 4 hours! If this is true, the indians would be the dominat race in the world today..seriously, how to I extend my orgasm to more than my standard 15-20 minutes?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-20-2002, 04:13 PM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by scm1001
New Scientist recently reported that the average sex act measured for men being treated for "premature ejaculation" 2m 30s; for a control sample of normal men 2 min 50sec or thereabouts.
Interesting theory… and one I’ll be sure to use the next time I’m afflicted by said embarrassment. For me, I think about five minutes is about right, with allowances in either direction usually being the norm, depending upon my mood*.

In terms of the OP, however, I still don’t get it. How, if I could be so dim, would the act of thrusting and pumping act like a plug to other males who may come (Tee-hee!) later? I’d think they would have just as much of a chance to impregnate the woman as any of the other men. Most guys, at that point, aren’t still thrusting and pounding away- they’re essentially still and motionless except for the obvious. So, in terms of that theory, I’m skeptical.

But the other theory, that it’s ‘because it feels good’, I can relate to. But it does make me wonder, does ‘because it feels good’ be enough reason for it to win out with so many males and with so many species (In terms of natural selection?).

I, obviously, don’t know.

*- In terms of the responses to dating the forty-five minute stud: are you women serious? Do you really, when in the mood, want to section out forty-five minute blocks of time to doing the deed? Every _single_ time?

No way, says I. I’ve been able to last forever in certain situations and at certain levels of intoxication, and in each instance, the woman actually seemed to be getting bored by the time I finished (And a bit irritated with me, too).

Personally, I think you wish for that because it so damn rare, but when it happens, you’d be thinking to yourself, ‘Good _God_ man! Hurry the hell up!’.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-20-2002, 04:23 PM
CnoteChris CnoteChris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by scm1001
New Scientist recently reported that the average sex act measured for men being treated for "premature ejaculation" 2m 30s; for a control sample of normal men 2 min 50sec or thereabouts.
Interesting theory… and one I’ll be sure to use the next time I’m afflicted by said embarrassment. For me, I think about five minutes is about right, with allowances in either direction usually being the norm, depending upon my mood*.

In terms of the OP, however, I still don’t get it. How, if I could be so dim, would the act of thrusting and pumping act like a plug to other males who may come (Tee-hee!) later? I’d think they would have just as much of a chance to impregnate the woman as any of the other men. Most guys, at that point, it seems, aren’t still thrusting and pounding away- they’re essentially still and motionless except for the obvious. So, in terms of that theory, I’m skeptical.

But the other theory, that it’s ‘because it feels good’, I can relate to. But it does make me wonder, does ‘because it feels good’ be enough reason for it to win out with so many males and with so many species (In terms of natural selection?).

I, obviously, don’t know.

*- In terms of the responses to dating the forty-five minute stud: are you women serious? Do you really, when in the mood, want to section out forty-five minute blocks of time to doing the deed? Every _single_ time?

No way, says I. I’ve been able to last forever in certain situations and at certain levels of intoxication, and in each instance, the woman actually seemed to be getting bored by the time I finished (And a bit irritated with me, too).

Personally, I think you wish for that because it so damn rare, but when it happens, you’d be thinking to yourself, ‘Good _God_ man! Hurry the hell up!’.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-20-2002, 08:44 PM
AndrewL AndrewL is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by CnoteChris

In terms of the OP, however, I still don’t get it. How, if I could be so dim, would the act of thrusting and pumping act like a plug to other males who may come (Tee-hee!) later? I’d think they would have just as much of a chance to impregnate the woman as any of the other men.
The thrusting and pumping improves *your* chances, by helping to clear away the sperm-plug left by the last guy before you orgasm. After you orgasm, you don't want to thrust and pump anymore, as it would dislodge the plug you just deposited, which is why it stops feeling good at that point.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-21-2002, 04:11 AM
Princhester Princhester is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 11,428
I think there is an important point that various others (bup, revtim, lolababy and probably others) have made which is right on the money but is being played down or missed.

To start at the beginning, Lib's point (that thrusting is required to trigger orgasm) just begs the question: "so why have we evolved to need so much effort to trigger orgasm?"

And others have then made the point that thrusting is pleasurable, and for the species to be perpetuated, we need to want to have sex, and making sex pleasurable achieves that goal. But that just begs the question: "what about other animals which have sex lasting seconds, (or indeed no real sex act at all) and in which it is hard to imagine any or much pleasure is involved, but which nonetheless have a strong desire to mate?" In other words, it seems entirely possible for evolution to produce animals that simply have an overwhelming desire to have sex, regardless of pleasure. Even in humans, there would seem to be an element of that . For example, my desire to have sex is something that co-exists with (and is not the same as) my desire for sexual pleasure from thrusting in and out. To put it bluntly, if all I wanted was some friction, there are much easier ways to achieve that than going to all the bother of seducing a female.

And then we get on to the stuff about soft plugs, and penises acting as plungers, both with the effect of improving your sperm's chances of defeating rival sperm. I have two problems with this line of argument. Firstly, the rival sperm consideration would apply equally to any animal that has penis/vagina sex. Secondly, I think that looking at the whole spectrum of females of various species (from females that mate with every male in the area, right through to females that are totally monogamous) human females are a long way towards the monogamous end of the spectrum. In case you haven't notice, while we are not an entirely monogamous species, human males and females do tend to pair off in cosy little sexually exclusive relationships for a few weeks at least. So the "seeing off the rival sperm" argument does not explain why humans, if anything, have longer lasting pleasureable thrusting type sex.

Based on the "seeing off the rival sperm" argument, the more a species was of the "each female has sex with all available males", the more a longer and more pleasureable thrusting period would be involved. And I don't think that is correct.

So, to get to the point finally, I think that the important point is that humans have a very long childhood which requires a lot of parental input, which benefits from a stable relationship, and in particular a male parent that hangs about to assist.

That leads to several things. Firstly, strong bonding between the parents is evolutionarily advantageous. And long and pleasureable sex helps a lot in that direction.

Secondly, females who can choose who fertilises them (and choose males that they have a strong bond with, or consider to be good providers etc) are more likely to raise healthy offspring. And if the male can't just rape the female by holding you down for 10 seconds, getting his penis into you and ejaculating immediately, then the female has more chance of being able to choose who fertilises them.

What do you think?

And perhaps even more importantly, a female who it gives an evolutionary advantage
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 05-21-2002, 04:20 AM
Princhester Princhester is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 11,428
Please ignore the last sentence which is pure noise.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-21-2002, 05:22 AM
scm1001 scm1001 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by ralph124c
I recall from reading Robert H. Rimmer's forgotten classic "THE HARRAD EXPERIMENT", that tantric practices allow a male to experience orgasm for as long as 4 hours! If this is true, the indians would be the dominat race in the world today..seriously, how to I extend my orgasm to more than my standard 15-20 minutes?
If the indians were to spend 4 h each time for sex they wouldn't have time for anything else, including being the dominant race
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-21-2002, 07:09 AM
LolaBaby LolaBaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by CnoteChris



*- In terms of the responses to dating the forty-five minute stud: are you women serious? Do you really, when in the mood, want to section out forty-five minute blocks of time to doing the deed? Every _single_ time?

No way, says I. I’ve been able to last forever in certain situations and at certain levels of intoxication, and in each instance, the woman actually seemed to be getting bored by the time I finished (And a bit irritated with me, too).

Personally, I think you wish for that because it so damn rare, but when it happens, you’d be thinking to yourself, ‘Good _God_ man! Hurry the hell up!’.
Oh, of course not every single time.

But often enough. (Actually I should look like this )

If they're getting bored and irritated...maybe a little "variation" may help...hehehe. Actually, I admit there are occasions where I am thinking, "Good God, get off!" (pun intended), but, that's not very often.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-21-2002, 08:39 AM
istara istara is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
I just think it's some necessary natural stimulus requirement, like having to touch the hair of a venus fly trap twice to trigger it to shut. If it shut too often or too easily, it would waste too much energy. So instead it waits until it's sure it's got a fly in it, hence the two-twitch rule.

The only other thing I can think of is the friction action makes the vagina more moist/ready for the sperm intake. I once read that "a vagina is a very hostile environment for sperm" so perhaps this improves that a little.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.