I can’t believe anyone didn’t jump on Notthemama’s comment about clitoral v. vaginal orgasms. Unless the medical journals have reversed themselves in the past few years, it’s my recollection that vaginal orgasms have been determined to be a myth. 'Course, unfortunately, I haven’t had much opportunity to experiment myself these past few months.
My opinion (and I think the current medical opinion) is that “vaginal” orgasms are actually caused by clitoral stimulation. However, these orgasms are definitely different from the regular clitoral orgasm.
Subjectively, it seems to me that the difference isn’t caused by vaginal stimulation, but by muscular resistance. (if anyone here knows more about resistance training and stuff than I do you can tell us if this makes sense) When I have a regular clitoral orgasm, it feels like the muscles contract out of control and quickly becomes painful. However, when there’s something there to prevent the muscles from being able to fully contract, they have to push against that. This is less painful and allows the orgasm to last longer and reach greater intensity, and as far as I can tell, the duration is only limited by how much you feel your muscles can take.
Welcome, biopsycho! You make a lot of god point, and I won’t try to address them all at once. maybe in some later post.
I long ago decided that the only meaningful method of tabulating orgasms was subjective. Unfortunately that means that it’s difficult to compare orgasms between different partners over time.
When I said ‘four types’, I was referring to reports by the lady herself – i.e. two women have reported four distinct ‘feelings’, in my experience. For example, both agreed that an orgasm brought on solely by breast stimulation felt different than genital stimulation. I have my theories, but I try to keep the data separate from the interpretation.
Other women have reported one or two types, but the 'distinct types may have been as undescriptive as “regular” vs. “really big” etc. If they say the two differ in more than just magnitude, I believe them.
I consider ‘clitoral’ vs. ‘vaginal’ orgasms to be descriptive terms rather than strict scientific definitions, but I can see why others might choose to categorize them differently.
Incidentally, I strongly recommend Kegel exercises for any woman who is interested in better orgasms. They are usually recommended for women with prolapses, post-natal laxity, etc. but I knew young women (when I was younger myself) who said it really improved sex for them (including masturbation). They are simple enough, with no harmful effects, and can improve sex for your partner as well.
As regards antidepressants, clomipramine is a tricyclic anti-depressant and is one of the drugs associated with spontaneous orgasms. Most antidepressants have anti-cholinergic effects (dry mouth, and even extrapyramidal side effects) which obviously affect the S/PS systems. However, I’d never lump them all together – MAO inhibitors, for example, can have potent prosympathetic effects (especially if a patient is foolish enough to drink beer or eat aged cheese, etc.)
I am, however, glad to hear that there’s another guy like me out there; my private joke abouth being a sexual sadist “of the good kind” is easily misunderstood in text discussions. I agree with your assessment: he probably derives great satisfaction from your orgasms. I don’t know why many women find this to be odd – I know many women derive great enjoyment from giving their men oral gratification, simply because it is so fun when your partner enjoys themselves.
Regrettably, I know exactly the weary tone you must’ve had when you say wrote “most women would call me lucky”. I’ve heard it a million times. But give the guy a break: you are at least a little lucky, aren’t you?
I’ve been told many times that orgasms are not necessary for satiation, as you report. Have you ever read The Hite Report (the original - I understand there was an update, but I prefer the 70’s version). Though I agree that there are flaws in the methodology (like self-selection of reportees, and soliciting reports from women’s shelters) but I think it should be mandatory reading for all youths considering sex, especially boys. I was blessed to have read it before I was sexually active, and women often find it a fascinating overview, as well
re: the vagus - check the link at the top of the thread (I have other refs too) and any material you have on quadriplegic sex (if any). The unsuspected role of the vagus hasn’t made it into any standard texts that I know of.
Yes, I know I am very lucky, but it can be exhausting sometimes. He keeps threatening to handcuff me to the bed on our wedding night so I can’t stop him and he can keep me going all night. I guess I better start working out 
Well, I guess this thread is dead. Sayonara. My thanks to all who participated
Just curious, though (for future reference): would it have been more interesting if I had reviewed the high points of what is already known about orgasm physiology in my original post? I didn’t do it for several reasons (but I’m questioning my choice):
-
it would have been long
-
it would have been inappropriate (this is Cecil’s turf)
-
most people prefer a descriptive approach (Masters & Johnson, Shere Hite) or an encyclopedia approach (Joy of sex, The Love-Life Letters) to a physiological view, and I personally was interested in hearing about new findings in physiology – which is simply not reported in any one place
(The medical journals on sexuality seem to repeat the same information in differing detail, focusing on the medical concensus, while the interesting stuff probably scattered in original research from other medical disciplines. I think 75%-90% of the readers of The Journal of Human Sexuality mostly read the “Psychodynamics of Sexual Humor” column.)
Too late for the original column, but perhaps something Cecil might want to include when the column appears in book form, Rico, in R-R-R-R! Power Tools and the Big O", reports:
I read that thread, and my impression wasn’t that cadolphin wasn’t just looking, if you get my drift. I could be wrong.
wasn’t that was or was that wasn’t, one but not both.