Why do men need to thrust and stroke to achieve ejaculation?

Factual Questions
21

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.

22

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!)

23

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)…

24

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…

25

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.

26

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.

27

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?”

28

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.

29

IOW: think about the woman’s gratification too, and we’ll all be happier. :smiley:

30

This is from a transcript of a presentation by Dr. Robin Baker, author of Sperm Wars:

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.

31

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.

32

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.

33

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.

34

Woohoo!
I already live with Guy A. :smiley:

35

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.

36

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?

37

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!’.

38

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!’.

39

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.

40

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