What is in female ejaculation?

[_kimberly_]

Hi, boys! I find that men interested in how a female works refreshing. Whether from a personal standpoint or a biological question, more men need to be like Bill B. and our author! So I am of the 10% who know it's something else and I have personal experience with it. My fiance is the only man who has ever been able to make me ejaculate. Never experience it before, never knew I could and I am a lucky woman to have him as my lover for the rest of my life. When it first happened I wasn't sure what to do but Bill took care of it for me by being excited and completely turned on that I could "squirt". As I am a curious person, I did some research into and found quite a few articles. Too bad there couldn't be a research study into it to learn more and to see if more than a minority of women could experience the complete pleasure in orgasm with ejaculation. From a personal note, most of the time it is not mixed with urine. Because it does come the same place and sex puts pressure on the urethra and bladder, if your bladder is not empty, there can be a small amount of urine. But rest assured to women everywhere, most of it is a clear, sweet tasting liquid. Sometimes it's a tiny amount and others a large amount that can soak the bed. So for men out there, it's natural, a great treat to be with a woman who can and not urine. And it is completely brought on by the G-spot and clitoral orgasm. It can be one or the other or both at the same time. But I have found that all the time and numerous times, the G-spot orgasm is the one to bring it on.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak from experience.

[gamerunknown]

Euuurgh I'm going to be a horrible pedant in a thread that doesn't call for it, but I suppose it's what's in "female ejaculate".

As for why there isn't much research into the topic, I can only guess that it'd be rather embarrassing to ask for a research grant for it unless one was on really good terms with the lecturer/board one was applying to. Though I suppose there are already sexual health specialists... Maybe it's a relatively new phenomenon?

[gamerunknown]

Ooh, almost forgot:

here's the link to the article in question. Saves people from having to search for it themselves!

[Rickymouse]

I'm not touching this subject with a ten foot pole. I don't have a ten foot pole.

[samclem]

The OP is mostly opinion. If she can show links to any scholarly articles that show the "ejaculate" is less than mostly urine, she should do so. I doubt she can.

[Rickymouse]

Well, for those who may find this subject of interest, here is a site that sounds as if someone has looked into it. I have no clue of the validity of this info and the composition of this fluid would probably vary from individual to individual. http://www.holisticwisdom.com/servic...what-is-it.htm

[SiXSwordS]

Originally Posted by samclem

The OP is mostly opinion. If she can show links to any scholarly articles that show the "ejaculate" is less than mostly urine, she should do so. I doubt she can.

I'm not sure if she can, but I think I can (warning: TWO female subjects were involved in this study... yes, only two).

Biochemically, the fluid emitted during orgasm showed all the parameters found in prostate plasma in contrast to the values measured in voided urine.
(Link is to the abstract.)

[naita]

Originally Posted by Rickymouse

Well, for those who may find this subject of interest, here is a site that sounds as if someone has looked into it. I have no clue of the validity of this info and the composition of this fluid would probably vary from individual to individual. http://www.holisticwisdom.com/servic...what-is-it.htm

What happened to the ten foot pole issue? Your cite is a sex aid shop, and the author doesn't cite her references.

[SiXSwordS]

Originally Posted by naita

What happened to the ten foot pole issue? Your cite is a sex aid shop, ...

Well........

[SiXSwordS]

Originally Posted by samclem

... I doubt she can.

To me, that sounds fairly provocative. Yet, in the face of a sufficient response you have nothing to say?

Do you not consider the article linked above to be sufficiently scholarly?

[the lone cashew]

What is in female ejaculation? If you're lucky and your woman isn't pissed off, you might be getting pissed on.

[mlees]

Originally Posted by samclem

The OP is mostly opinion. If she can show links to any scholarly articles that show the "ejaculate" is less than mostly urine, she should do so. I doubt she can.

For what it's worth, some online Adult DVD vendors divide up their videos into categories like girl-on-girl, gay male, MILF, oral, etc.

On these sites, there are seperate categories for urination (in the fetish section, I think) and squirting.

If the ejaculate was "really" the same thing, why the divide? Is there a mass conspiracy to try and fool the moral majority?

[John W. Kennedy]

I believe the main difference is cinematographic.

[SiXSwordS]

Originally Posted by mlees

If the ejaculate was "really" the same thing, why the divide? Is there a mass conspiracy to try and fool the moral majority?

I think at least part of the answer lies in fetishism.

Sexual fetishism, or erotic fetishism, is the sexual arousal a person receives from a physical object, or from a specific situation.

link

So—while I am in the "IT'S NOT PISS!" club—even if it were piss, the specific situation (urination -v orgasmically induced stress incontinence) determines how the movies or clips are arranged rather than the content of the fluids in question.

Take the male orgasm as an example. Pornographic movies or clips might be divided into facials and cum-shots. Physiologically, there is no difference in the ejaculation, but psychologically there is a difference between how it is depicted and who is involved in the scenario.

[mlees]

Originally Posted by SiXSwordS

I think at least part of the answer lies in fetishism.

link

So—while I am in the "IT'S NOT PISS!" club—even if it were piss, the specific situation (urination -v orgasmically induced stress incontinence) determines how the movies or clips are arranged rather than the content of the fluids in question.

Take the male orgasm as an example. Pornographic movies or clips might be divided into facials and cum-shots. Physiologically, there is no difference in the ejaculation, but psychologically there is a difference between how it is depicted and who is involved in the scenario.

I hadn't considered it that way. Dammit.

*Here's a picture of a sailing ship. Here's a picture of a sailing ship becalmed at sea. Here's a picture of me with the wind taken out of my sails...*

[jibal]

Originally Posted by samclem

The OP is mostly opinion.

That's an opinion ... an erroneous one.

If she can show links to any scholarly articles that show the "ejaculate" is less than mostly urine, she should do so.

That's an opinion ... a biased one, as it assumes, baselessly, that in the absence of scholarly articles, the ejaculate (not "ejaculate") should be believed (for no reason whatsoever) to be mostly urine. I would say, rather, that if you have doubts about her claims, you should investigate them yourself.

I doubt she can.

That's an opinion ... a baseless, biased, and erroneous one.

[greenaum]

This is a controversial subject, particularly in New Zealand where "squirting" movies have recently been banned under their anti-pissing-porn laws. Spoilsports.

But research is being done, one possibly cause is thought to be fluid from a swollen G-spot, or thereabouts, which contains erectile tissue. It's thought that it gets squeezed during orgasm, and out it shoots.

There are many women who claim this. I can think of two obvious tests to distinguish it from urine. One, urine is normally yellow, Two, urine doesn't usually taste "sweet". The experiences reported here are much alike those reported elsewhere. We're in the midst of a new discovery, what a time to be alive!

But just because you haven't seen something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's thought that either only a few women can do it, or that perhaps all women could learn to do it.

As a fetish in porn it came out a few years ago. Since then, it's proliferated. It wouldn't be surprising to think that, since this is a rare gift, that like most things in porn it's probably faked a lot. There are probably some female squirters in porn movies, but I'd imagine most of them just drink a lot of water and practice peeing at the right time.

[gamerunknown]

There are other possibilities (based purely on theoretical, scholarly research, I'll have you know): simple camera trickery, internal balloons and hoses are all possibilities. I hear there's a practice of injecting a saline solution into the testes in order to produce voluminous high contrast semen, but perhaps that's an urban legend.

In those that demonstrate the natural propensity, it could simply be an over-secretion of the lubricative fluid from "Bartholin's gland" or the other similar vaginal glands (there's wikipedia links on several of them, but further research would cause me to fall maddeningly in love...) Apparently there is urea in the lubricative fluid and it might not be palatable, but it has an entirely different makeup than urine. In some individuals, either expulsion or production may not be controlled at the point of orgasm.

Anyway, while I've recently been swayed by Chomsky (most porn is demeaning to women, best not to provide companies that produce degrading material with ad money), I think that just banning "piss porn" won't solve the deeper rooted issues of respect for women. Perhaps if sexuality could be discussed in an adult manner (without reference to sin and hell) it wouldn't be treated as such a fetishised and dirty topic? Though, I guess it's the only industry in which consuming urine would be a job hazard... from a worker's rights perspective, it makes sense.

[greenaum]

Originally Posted by gamerunknown

There are other possibilities (based purely on theoretical, scholarly research, I'll have you know): simple camera trickery, internal balloons and hoses are all possibilities.

No, that wouldn't work. The "ejaculate" comes out the other hole. The urethra. Which goes past the G-spot internally, I think, in the wonderfully complicated world of feminine plumbing. But since there's already an internal balloon and hose fitted to most urethras, it wouldn't be necessary.

I hear there's a practice of injecting a saline solution into the testes in order to produce voluminous high contrast semen, but perhaps that's an urban legend.

It must be, since the liquid part of semen is produced by the prostate and stored in the vesicle. The testes themselves just make the little tadpoles. Plus how many needles would YOU take to the nuts for a job, however good the benefits?

It is apparently true, and wonderfully irrelevant, that some athletes, before drug tests, have been caught doing urine transfusions. A bag full of someone's steroid-free pee, a catheter, and maybe a bit of patience, and an athlete can pee kool-aid if they want to.

In those that demonstrate the natural propensity, it could simply be an over-secretion of the lubricative fluid from "Bartholin's gland" or the other similar vaginal glands

Nah, cos it comes out the urethra. To be able to get any sort of squirting pressure from the vagina, you'd surely be talking gallons a minute! Tho often women do produce more fluid with orgasm.

(there's wikipedia links on several of them, but further research would cause me to fall maddeningly in love...) Apparently there is urea in the lubricative fluid and it might not be palatable,

Long as she keeps things clean down there, many men find it yummy. But again that's not the stuff that "ejaculate" is supposed to be made of.

Anyway, while I've recently been swayed by Chomsky (most porn is demeaning to women, best not to provide companies that produce degrading material with ad money), I think that just banning "piss porn" won't solve the deeper rooted issues of respect for women.

I think that's a deeper, and sadder matter, of respect for other humans generally. Max Hardcore makes stuff that abuses women horribly, but I imagine most of his audience are mental cases. Just shagging on camera itself needn't be degrading to anyone. Amateur stuff is generally born of love, with real couples in it. As the porn industry's grown into megabuck$$, it's become more mechanical, more businesslike in lots of ways, and business really isn't sexy. Cynical, it is.

Perhaps if sexuality could be discussed in an adult manner (without reference to sin and hell) it wouldn't be treated as such a fetishised and dirty topic? Though, I guess it's the only industry in which consuming urine would be a job hazard...

Less of a hazard than the usual stuff they consume, from a disease point of view. Some women in porn are degraded, used, and manipulated. But so are people who work in supermarkets and factories. Capitalism isn't very nice, society as it is now, isn't very nice. Art reflects life.

[SiXSwordS]

I think it is a little wrong-headed to look at this issue through the lens of the porn industry; the critical concern being money. There's is a practically limitless supply of money for porn, while there is relatively little money for research and--aside from curiosity--not a lot to be gained from researching so-called squirting.

Further complicating the issue is the fact that the term "squirting" (a porn industry term from what I can see) is sometimes used to describe porn that involves urination.

I'll spare everyone any examples and hope that it suffices to point out that "squirting" is far from a technical term and even in the threads on this board that I have seen, it doesn't seem to solely refer to female ejaculation.

Originally Posted by greenaum

...urine doesn't usually taste "sweet". The experiences reported here are much alike those reported elsewhere.

Originally Posted by greenaum

Long as she keeps things clean down there, many men find it yummy.

I'm not sure that is a uniform experience, and it was not my experience. I found the taste to be unpleasant, though I might compare it to taking a shot of liquor... you endure the slight unpleasantness for the overall experience.

Cecil seems to agree on this point:

...unlike the vaginal fluid produced during arousal, the ejaculate is watery and somewhat acrid to the taste.

[Powers]

Originally Posted by greenaum

No, that wouldn't work. The "ejaculate" comes out the other hole. The urethra.

As I understand it, female ejaculate actually comes from the Skene's glands. Though since we're talking about porn production, I hasten to point out that a balloon or hose positioned within the vagina would not look appreciably different to a layman, absent an extreme close-up view (a view that would be immediately obscured by the liquid upon the camera lens).


Powers &8^]

[gamerunknown]

I'd recommend Slavoj Zizek on the matter too, he's somewhat of the opinion that pornography has to be an idealised (explicitly unrealistic at any rate) fantasy matter in order for the whole affair to occur. I'm not sure what the mechanism behind that function would be, but I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary (involved, emotional, perhaps flawed intercourse). Unless one counts pornographic novels, though Zizek argues that males tend towards voyeurism and women more towards narrative.

Chomsky also comments that consent, even informed consent, can be given in quite shady circumstances in other instances: he compared it to working in a sweatshop.

[Peeta Mellark]

In at least some women studied, it isn't urine. It's very clearly chemically different. That doesn't preclude the idea that some other women do have urinary stress incontinence at orgasm.

Science seems to take a very stupid approach to female sexual function, however. Rather than being able to grasp that there seems to be some natural variation (some women can't orgasm, some only with difficulty, some are multiorgasmic, some report erotic sensation in their vaginas, some are only able to find sexual pleasure in intense clitoral stimulation, some orgasm from nipple stimulation), the approach tends towards "Well, the women in this small group are like this, so all women must be like this."