Why the difference?

[bailadora]

Currently on the HT board are two threads in which the OPs seem to have a similar problem: a SO who won't give oral. In the first, the SO is male. In the second, female. And I can't help but notice what seems to be (at least to me) a difference in tone with regard to the responses to the OPs.

In the first, opinions seem to be very condemning of the boyfriend. There is a definite party of line of: WTF? The selfish bastard. Oral sex is standard and any model that doesn't do it should be kicked to the curb.

In the second, the tone seems to be far more understanding and supportive of the wife: you need to talk to her, but make sure you express no judgment or exert any pressure, it's been ingrained in women that "good girls" don't, she needs to be made very comfortable with the idea.

So - why the difference in tone? Is it a gender thing? Are Litsters more inclined to cut women some slack? Or is it something else at work? To be fair, in the second thread - the OP also mentioned that his wife didn't like to receive oral. In light of that, maybe she's viewed as less selfish, since she'll do neither? Also to be fair, no one knows the reason behind the wife's reluctance to either give or receive oral (including the OP). Could it be that since the board hasn't had a chance to judge for themselves the validity behind her reasons, they're willing to give her the benefit of the doubt?

Please note: it's not my intention to start a flame war here. These are things that for some reason, seem to pop out at me. And I'm curious if I'm the only one who noticed or thought anything of it. Thanks!

 

[Eilan]

People (particularly n00bs--fresh meat!) with female-sounding usernames are generally better treated around here.

I didn't post in the guy's thread because I'm a hypocrite on this issue, and I'm absolutely okay with that. *shrug*

 

[qrayze]

yeah, I noticed it too

 

[NippleMuncher]

I'll admit that I've not read the guys thread.

Because there is marriage involved, I would be less inclined to show the offender to the curb, but everything else I've said in the young woman's thread still applies.

You do not "bait and switch", with seeming to enjoy oral then get married or into an LTR and decide that oral isn't for you AND THEN give no valid reasoning behind the change of heart.

Open and honest communication is the required from both sides if the issue is to be resolved. Without it, tensions and pressure on the relationship rises and will eventually end it, usually quit ugly.

 

[IrisAlthea]

I noticed it too.
I don´t know why, but it seems like men are more likely to get answers like "You can´t change someones mind, if they aren't into it.".

 

[CWatson]

I don´t know why, but it seems like men are more likely to get answers like "You can´t change someones mind, if they aren't into it.".

I think that might stem out of the stereotypes of the sort of sexual socialization (wow: how's that for alliteration?) that go on in American society. Let's face it: it's considered normal for guys to want sex, but not normal (or, at least, not as normal) for girls to want it. So we try to provide a moderating, stabilizing influence. When a guy is like, "Hey, how come my girlfriend won't do something for me," we tell him to hold back; when a girl says, "Hey, my boyfriend wants me to try something," we encourage her to go for it. In theory, this moves everybody closer to a norm; dampen the guy's sex drive, raise the girl's, and the two of them are more equalized.

I think it's also the basic physiology, the fact that women need more stimulation for orgasm. A statistic will say anything if you torture it enough, but I read somewhere that the average man can masturbate to orgasm in 2 minutes; the average woman takes 8. More pertinently, a guy is almost guaranteed to cum through intercourse, whereas (according to yet another thread) only one in four women can do this. From this has arisen the idea that, if a man isn't willing to take some time and provide for his woman, he's being selfish and/or insensitive. In other words: a woman has more right to ask for additional attentiveness / stimulation / whatever, because she needs more of it to begin with.

That's my read on it, anyhow.

 

[Vixandra]

I think that might stem out of the stereotypes of the sort of sexual socialization (wow: how's that for alliteration?) that go on in American society. Let's face it: it's considered normal for guys to want sex, but not normal (or, at least, not as normal) for girls to want it. So we try to provide a moderating, stabilizing influence. When a guy is like, "Hey, how come my girlfriend won't do something for me," we tell him to hold back; when a girl says, "Hey, my boyfriend wants me to try something," we encourage her to go for it. In theory, this moves everybody closer to a norm; dampen the guy's sex drive, raise the girl's, and the two of them are more equalized.

I think it's also the basic physiology, the fact that women need more stimulation for orgasm. A statistic will say anything if you torture it enough, but I read somewhere that the average man can masturbate to orgasm in 2 minutes; the average woman takes 8. More pertinently, a guy is almost guaranteed to cum through intercourse, whereas (according to yet another thread) only one in four women can do this. From this has arisen the idea that, if a man isn't willing to take some time and provide for his woman, he's being selfish and/or insensitive. In other words: a woman has more right to ask for additional attentiveness / stimulation / whatever, because she needs more of it to begin with.

That's my read on it, anyhow.

I'd like to second this. It's very well written and CWatson raised the points I would have.

 

[NippleMuncher]

From this has arisen the idea that, if a man isn't willing to take some time and provide for his woman, he's being selfish and/or insensitive. In other words: a woman has more right to ask for additional attentiveness / stimulation / whatever, because she needs more of it to begin with.

Well said, and I agree completely, except for ...

 

[infinity706]

I read somewhere that the average man can masturbate to orgasm in 2 minutes; the average woman takes 8.

I'd like to know where you found that because I've never seen anything saying women have any more trouble or take any longer finishing when they play with themselves. I think those numbers are probably for vaginal intercourse for women that can orgasm without direct clit stimulation.

 

[Miles Long]

I think it's probably a manifestation of sexual double standards, whether we do it consciously or not.

I would also like to add that I was one of the people who said oral comes standard on all models, but maybe a further clarification is in order.

I agree that no one should ever have to do anything sexual that they don't want to do. We all have the right to choose what sexual activities we partake in, and if giving or receiving oral is not for you, then I will defend your right to make that choice.

But while I support the right to make that choice, I also reserve the right to think that in 99% of the cases out there it is a ridiculous choice. Maybe for some out there, there is some next level shit going on. Could be abuse, trauma, who knows what, but something that makes performing oral fraught with potentially catastrophic consequences. That's another situation entirely. I sympathize with those people and wish them well in getting the help that would make what is a fairly typical sex act more palatable. But I call shenanigans on any man or woman who refuses to perform oral because it is "gross."

I stand by my comment that performing oral sex is a very low bar to clear to be with someone. In the world of relationships, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect oral on a regular basis from your partner, male or female. It's true that there will be some people out there who just can't stand the idea of giving head, and they have the right to perform it as rarely as they can. I think these people should go find partners who don't have an interest in receiving oral. It's a matter of people finding partners with whom they can find lots of overlap in sexual interests, and oral is a pretty basic one.

 

[bailadora]

From this has arisen the idea that, if a man isn't willing to take some time and provide for his woman, he's being selfish and/or insensitive. In other words: a woman has more right to ask for additional attentiveness / stimulation / whatever, because she needs more of it to begin with.

That's my read on it, anyhow.

Or rephrased another way: it's justifiable for a woman to put the wants/desires of her partner second to her own on the basis that she doesn't orgasm as easily or quickly as he does? Does this strike anyone else as sexist, in reverse? Or is it just me? (I'm not saying you are sexist, CWatson. I find the premise sexist.) Whatever happened to gender equality? Or is that the ideal only when women are the beneficiaries? Does. Not. Compute.

I stand by my comment that performing oral sex is a very low bar to clear to be with someone. In the world of relationships, I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect oral on a regular basis from your partner, male or female. .

While oral sex is very common place in a majority of relationships today, I don't agree that by virtue of it's very commonality it follows everyone is going to want to perform it. We're not lemmings after all, blindly following one another off a cliff. Or at least I would hope not. Or rephrased another way: just cause everyone else does, doesn't mean you have to.

It's true that there will be some people out there who just can't stand the idea of giving head, and they have the right to perform it as rarely as they can. I think these people should go find partners who don't have an interest in receiving oral. It's a matter of people finding partners with whom they can find lots of overlap in sexual interests.

On this, I agree. If more people paid attention to sexual compatibility, I think there'd be a lot more overall satisfaction within relationships.

I think it's probably a manifestation of sexual double standards, whether we do it consciously or not.

*nods* That's how it came across to me. These two threads aren't the only time I've noticed it, but the concurrency of them happened to remind me of it. Honestly? It makes me wonder why a man would ever seek advice here, if the bias is stacked against him to begin with.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

I think the other comments in this thread are valid, but the OPs also have clear differences in terms of tone and, especially, content.

With the male OP, because the woman doesn't want oral, there is no drastic difference in terms of reciprocation; with the female OP, there is. I realize that in the latter case she likes giving oral, but the difference still exists. The female OP's man seems greedy; the male OP's woman doesn't.

The female OP expresses that they've talked about this, and it's clear that she's reflected on their difference and his past; I don't get the sense that the male OP has. She realizes that she has a sexual want and that he has a hangup; the male OP just notes that she's gone down on him when drunk.

The female OP has never received oral; the male OP has. This might be minor, but to me, there's probably a collective, "I can't imagine never receiving oral in my life; something must be done about this, ASAP."

The female OP asks if she's being realistic, and goes on to outline how she might help him get over his issues; the male OP doesn't seem to have done as much reflection on how he can help his partner with her issues.

In other words, it's a "do this for me" (male OP) versus a "I've never experienced this, it's always been a fantasy, we can start slow, if you need me to take some steps beforehand I will, etc" (female OP). I'm not saying that the OPs are like this in real life, and this is a simplification, but that's the impression I got from their posts. I don't think I'm alone in noting this, and this could be part of the reason for the difference in responses.

 

[ecclectic]

I think the other comments in this thread are valid, but the OPs also have clear differences in terms of tone and, especially, content.

With the male OP, because the woman doesn't want oral, there is no drastic difference in terms of reciprocation; with the female OP, there is. I realize that in the latter case she likes giving oral, but the difference still exists. The female OP's man seems greedy; the male OP's woman doesn't.

The female OP expresses that they've talked about this, and it's clear that she's reflected on their difference and his past; I don't get the sense that the male OP has. She realizes that she has a sexual want and that he has a hangup; the male OP just notes that she's gone down on him when drunk.

The female OP has never received oral; the male OP has. This might be minor, but to me, there's probably a collective, "I can't imagine never receiving oral in my life; something must be done about this, ASAP."

The female OP asks if she's being realistic, and goes on to outline how she might help him get over his issues; the male OP doesn't seem to have done as much reflection on how he can help his partner with her issues.

In other words, it's a "do this for me" (male OP) versus a "I've never experienced this, it's always been a fantasy, we can start slow, if you need me to take some steps beforehand I will, etc" (female OP). I'm not saying that the OPs are like this in real life, and this is a simplification, but that's the impression I got from their posts. I don't think I'm alone in noting this, and this could be part of the reason for the difference in responses.

I would have to agree with this.

A big part of it as well, is.... guys are supposed to 'man up' either be the man and force her to do it or be the bigger man and accept her decision.

Men have feelings wants and desires, but we also have big muscles with which we can beat down, crush and subdue those feelings and desires as long as we have other avenues for our energies.

I sympathize with the guy, but at least my wife has a reasonable (if insubstantiatable) excuse that it gives her migranes (something about changing pressures, weather does it too.) he didn't seem to know why she wouldn't do it.

I support the gal, because.... really, it's something she's never experienced and it's not like she's asking if she can peg him.

Performing oral is something that should be on the table of every couple, even if it's only brought out and dusted off for a birthday or anniversary unless there is some definable legitimate reason for not.
And aside from menstruation or infection or perhaps a severely scalded tongue, I can not see any legitimate reason to shy away from cunnilingus.
It's slightly easier to defend avoiding fellatio.
The penis isn't exactly the most well designed piece of anatomy, it's awkward, oddly shaped, larger than many ladies' mouths can comfortably accommodate (though I understand that if you're trying to do that you're doing it wrong,) and men will tend to try to grab your head and force the end down your throat.

 

[CWatson]

Or rephrased another way: it's justifiable for a woman to put the wants/desires of her partner second to her own on the basis that she doesn't orgasm as easily or quickly as he does? Does this strike anyone else as sexist, in reverse? Or is it just me? (I'm not saying you are sexist, CWatson. I find the premise sexist.) Whatever happened to gender equality? Or is that the ideal only when women are the beneficiaries? Does. Not. Compute.

*wry smile* No, trust me, I'm sexist. Everyone is. That's the thing about sexism: it's inherent in any species that has sexes.

The problem with gender equality is that it's a myth, rather like that heartwarming American ideal that "all men are created equal". People are not created equal; at the very least, some have penises, an instrument conducive to rapid orgasm during intercourse, and some have clitorises, which are not. If I choose to treat them equally, I run into certain pitfalls; but if I don't, I'm being sexist or reverse-sexist. There's no way to win... but that's because there's two different games being played. Because men and women are not created equal. And you know what? Fine. That's life. If caring about my woman's pleasure makes me sexist, then I will find a way to bear the shame.

I think another reason men get different treatment on these boards (and on these topics) is because of gender socialization. In most societies, women are taught to be compliant, men to be decisive and even selfish. Men make decisions, women follow them. This supports (or even leads to) guy-oriented sex patterns and the whole "lie back and think of England" idea, which both the sexual freedom and feminist movements have been fighting against for decades. When guys show up with partner-compliance problems, we assume--whether rightly or wrongly--that he's just being selfish. (And as Tatyana pointed out, male OPs often come across as selfish, which doesn't help things.) ...Of course, we then encourage the women to go with what their partner wants and just try giving a blowjob already, so clearly we're not out of the woods as far as managing to dodge societal patterns.

I think this gets back to the fact that women are socialized to be less comfortable with their sexuality than men are. Simply put, this creates a lot of ambiguity. "Oh, my wife says she doesn't want to give blowjobs, but that just might be the prude training talking." Yeah, it might be. ...Or maybe it isn't, and she just doesn't like blowjobs, and nothing will change that. We don't know. She might not either! And getting her to the point where she can even figure it out is likely to be a tricky journey, especially since (becaue of her prude training) it's not particularly comfortable with taking it. Simply put, part of the "stabilization" we provide is not just encouraging women to be comfortable with their sexualities... but encouraging men to be comfortable with their woman's sexuality, however repressed (or not!) it might be. Is this reverse-sexist, in that so much emphasis is placed on the woman? Probably. But it's also the world we live in, whether we like it or not.

 

[fire_breeze]

Bailadora, it's official. I so have a girl crush on you .

Sorry, CW, although I often agree with your observations, in this case, I have to disagree. Reading your posts, it seems that you are equating equality with sameness. Am I the same as the male species. Thank whatever Gods you want, no. Am I equal with a possessor of a penis? Absolutely. In my mind, major difference, and one that I find is often confused. We can argue semantics until the cows come home, but my yard has been freshly mowed and I think Bailadora might make us wash her windows if we do, if she doesn't get her whip out first .

However, you do bring up some very interesting observations - and I just wonder if it's not exactly that, social conditioning in a Western context . I'd like to draw parallels to Annie's Mailbox (yes, yes, I know I know ). If a woman complains that her husband is distant sexually, then he's either gay or cheating. If a man complains that his wife has become distant sexually, then it's because she's stressed and needs him to woo her and help around with the house. It's a clear double standard.

While the two example threads are different in tone, as pointed out by LettersFromTatyana, the underlying issue brought forth by Bailadora is spot on. It could be the phrasing of the threads, I don't know. The one thing I noticed is that often, the initial replies all suggest communication, and the response from any OP is either making excuses or acknowledging and trying. It also doesn't help that female threads tend to be littered with posts from users who are looking to invest in their spank bank.

That being said, I do believe that in the West, we have a culture of rallying around a woman in need whereas telling a man in need to suck it up, Princess and get down to it. Is it fair? No. It also annoys me tremendously. Like Miles_Long, barring some instances, oral sex is a pretty low bar to cross. What we have here is a distinct lack of communication between sexual partners and an attitude that these things are not to be discussed, and like it or not, in this culture, teaching communication for men has never been considered to be a priority

What we have is a reverse discrimination. So much for feminism and being equal, eh? (Thus spake the feminist, by the way).

Waiting to be flammed.

Oh, and Infin, the article that was referred to by CW is here, here and here

 

[infinity706]

Bailadora, it's official. I so have a girl crush on you .

Sorry, CW, although I often agree with your observations, in this case, I have to disagree. Reading your posts, it seems that you are equating equality with sameness. Am I the same as the male species. Thank whatever Gods you want, no. Am I equal with a possessor of a penis? Absolutely. In my mind, major difference, and one that I find is often confused. We can argue semantics until the cows come home, but my yard has been freshly mowed and I think Bailadora might make us wash her windows if we do, if she doesn't get her whip out first .

However, you do bring up some very interesting observations - and I just wonder if it's not exactly that, social conditioning in a Western context . I'd like to draw parallels to Annie's Mailbox (yes, yes, I know I know ). If a woman complains that her husband is distant sexually, then he's either gay or cheating. If a man complains that his wife has become distant sexually, then it's because she's stressed and needs him to woo her and help around with the house. It's a clear double standard.

While the two example threads are different in tone, as pointed out by LettersFromTatyana, the underlying issue brought forth by Bailadora is spot on. It could be the phrasing of the threads, I don't know. The one thing I noticed is that often, the initial replies all suggest communication, and the response from any OP is either making excuses or acknowledging and trying. It also doesn't help that female threads tend to be littered with posts from users who are looking to invest in their spank bank.

That being said, I do believe that in the West, we have a culture of rallying around a woman in need whereas telling a man in need to suck it up, Princess and get down to it. Is it fair? No. It also annoys me tremendously. Like Miles_Long, barring some instances, oral sex is a pretty low bar to cross. What we have here is a distinct lack of communication between sexual partners and an attitude that these things are not to be discussed, and like it or not, in this culture, teaching communication for men has never been considered to be a priority

What we have is a reverse discrimination. So much for feminism and being equal, eh? (Thus spake the feminist, by the way).

Waiting to be flammed.

Oh, and Infin, the article that was referred to by CW is here, here and here

The only thing in any of those articles that even mentions masturbating to orgasm is that women take 4 minutes on average. Now, it says men tend to orgasm within 2 minutes of penetration where women take 10-20. I can say from experience, that guys tend to last longer masturbating.

 

[fire_breeze]

Bah! wrong thread.


:caning: myself.

 

[bailadora]

In other words, it's a "do this for me" (male OP) versus a "I've never experienced this, it's always been a fantasy, we can start slow, if you need me to take some steps beforehand I will, etc" (female OP). I'm not saying that the OPs are like this in real life, and this is a simplification, but that's the impression I got from their posts. I don't think I'm alone in noting this, and this could be part of the reason for the difference in responses.

Hmm, interesting. I didn't get the same impression you did, Tatyana, but after reading your comments, I can see how someone else might have.

Bailadora, it's official. I so have a girl crush on you.

Sorry, CW, although I often agree with your observations, in this case, I have to disagree. Reading your posts, it seems that you are equating equality with sameness. Am I the same as the male species. Thank whatever Gods you want, no. Am I equal with a possessor of a penis? Absolutely. In my mind, major difference, and one that I find is often confused. We can argue semantics until the cows come home, but my yard has been freshly mowed and I think Bailadora might make us wash her windows if we do, if she doesn't get her whip out first!

Aww, shucks!

Actually, I think this is a good distinction, Fire Breeze, no need to fear the whip. I may not always hit the mark, but I try to treat everyone with the same consideration I'd like to receive, regardless of gender. With few exceptions, the idea that someone should expect, accept, or be granted special privileges, rights or status by virtue of gender alone just rankles me and seems disingenuous. I can't speak for all women, but if I'm granted special treatment, I want it to be because I've inspired or earned it because of who I am - not because of what I am.

That being said, I do believe that in the West, we have a culture of rallying around a woman in need whereas telling a man in need to suck it up, Princess and get down to it. Is it fair? No. It also annoys me tremendously.

*nods in agreement* This is going slightly off topic - but this is a source of frequent conflict between my husband and I with regard to some of his responses to my son. My son can be somewhat sensitive and whenever I hear my husband admonish him to suck it up and be a man, it rankles the shit out of me. My contention is that he has a right to his emotions and to express them as needed. My husband counters with the point that if he doesn't toughen up, the other boys are going to rip him to shreds. It's a difficult line for me to walk as parent because I can see both sides.

I think another reason men get different treatment on these boards (and on these topics) is because of gender socialization. <snip> When guys show up with partner-compliance problems, we assume--whether rightly or wrongly--that he's just being selfish. (And as Tatyana pointed out, male OPs often come across as selfish, which doesn't help things.) <snip> Simply put, part of the "stabilization" we provide is not just encouraging women to be comfortable with their sexualities... but encouraging men to be comfortable with their woman's sexuality, however repressed (or not!) it might be

Given that this is a written format, phrasing is important and is definitely a problem with some of the male posters. But....my perception is that even the ones who seem to be genuinely trying to become better partners have to "prove" themselves to the board: sins of the fathers, brothers and all that. It seems to me that if the goal is to help a man become a better partner and more understanding of his lover, a more receptive, less hostile environment would be conducive to that.

Is this reverse-sexist, in that so much emphasis is placed on the woman? Probably. But it's also the world we live in, whether we like it or not.

Hmmm, seems like I said something similar not too long ago in a different thread. Damn! Hoisted by my own petard! It's true enough this is the reality we live in today, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. *stomps foot* And hopefully by raising the awareness every now and again, maybe folks will stop, think and give the guys who are honestly trying to be better partners a fairer hearing and not be so quick to dismiss their concerns/needs in the process.

My thanks to everyone who has contributed thus far. And if anyone has anything else to add, by all means - continue.

The only thing in any of those articles that even mentions masturbating to orgasm is that women take 4 minutes on average. Now, it says men tend to orgasm within 2 minutes of penetration where women take 10-20. I can say from experience, that guys tend to last longer masturbating.

I wonder how much of that might be because the guy is intentionally drawing out the experience? I wonder what the result would be if someone hit a stopwatch with the challenge to pop one off as quickly as possible (knowing men and their competitive streak)?

 

[infinity706]

What difference does it make? I'm pretty sure most of the time, sex that lasts longer than 2 or 4 minutes is preferable.

 

[bailadora]

What difference does it make? I'm pretty sure most of the time, sex that lasts longer than 2 or 4 minutes is preferable.

You were the one challenging statistics, Fin. If the question is one purely of how quickly it takes a man to masturbate to orgasm, then the purposeful delay is absolutely of significance.

 

[NippleMuncher]

You were the one challenging statistics, Fin. If the question is one purely of how quickly it takes a man to masturbate to orgasm, then the purposeful delay is absolutely of significance.

Get in, get off, get out, that's my motto! Palmela and Lefticia are on their own!

 

[infinity706]

In order to reasonably test it, you'd have to find women that were equally as competitive as the guys, as well. It's just like most other gender tests. There's huge gaps between men and women in just about every category, but those gaps nearly vanish when you select participants with relatively equal training or send them to training.

 

[silverwhisper]

infinity quoth:
those gaps nearly vanish when you select participants with relatively equal training or send them to training.

that defeats the point, infinity: training would smooth out the funny little nooks & crannies put there by the different socialization experiences men and women have. and i just know you aren't gonna dispute that the effects are different.

bail: the differences are absolutely related to gender expectations, IMHO. that's also however in part b/c of the kinds of questions posed. when posed by men in HT, they are almost exclusively phrased, "how can i force my [female partner] to...". there is very often a notion of non-consent, and since HT is populated in large part by people who won't put up with that kind of fucking bullshit, the differences skew considerably, IMHO.

ed

 

[infinity706]

Actually, I think that is the whole point. If you can train away almost every gender difference, it's hard to dispute that the differences are anything but sexist socialization. Of course, that should be pretty obvious just based on the fact that only one chromosome seperates men and women. The Y chromosome is tiny and almost completely worthless other than determining the person's sex. Other than causing a testosterone spike during the critical period of pregnancy and making the female sex organs (uterus, uterine tubes, upper 2/3 of the vagina) self destruct, it doesn't really do anything. Biologically, all the differences are created by the levels of androgens and estrogens everyone's body produces. Hell, with a little hormone therapy, you can even change a baby's sex if you do it at the right time. Sure, you make them infertile if they come out as the wrong sex, but other than needing a simple vaginaplasty, no one would ever even know. Of course, if it weren't unethical, I'd really like to see what would happen with the socialization of a nice, large group of XY females and XX males. I have a feeling, that would clear up a lot of questions in one shot.

Honestly the only huge difference is in physical strength and it's no where near as drastic as most people would have you believe. It's more one of those things that only practically matters if you're talking peak atheletic performance. If you had a woman out there pounding railroad spikes, for example, she'd end up strong enough to kick just about any guy's ass. It would just take longer and she wouldn't bulk up as well as a guy without being testosterone enhanced. Of course, if you adjust a guy up to the post pregancy level of prolactin, he'll produce milk just as well as any woman. He just won't have the flared hips or the big tits without the estrogen levels.

Now, as for sex, there's no reason similarly trained men and women wouldn't orgasm at very similar speeds, assuming you stimulated them similarly. The clitoris you can actually see is just the head, so in order to compare, you should be training guys to learn to orgasm with only stimulating the head of the penis. A "vaginal orgasm" occurs from stimulating the prostate/paraurethral gland and the internal structures of the penis/clitoris. You'd have to anally stimulate the females to a "vaginal orgasm" so that the relative sensitivity of the anal and vaginal openings wouldn't play a factor. (it shouldn't be much of a problem considering the vagina collapses on itself and is surprisingly thin)

Of course, if you just want to take a random sample of men and women and run them against each other, I have a feeling the guys probably demolish the women. I think that's kind of pointless, though, other than determining the baseline. Ideally, we want men and women to both have equal opportunity to enjoy their bodies. It's not like there's special, biological privledges when it comes to sex. I can have anal, penile, and nipple orgasms, too, and I can even have multiple orgasms when the prostate thing works. Most of the bullshit about differences between men and women is just blatent sex discrimination. You have to compare similar participants with similar training and do similar things to them for your findings to be worth the paper they're printed on.

 

[bailadora]

bail: the differences are absolutely related to gender expectations, IMHO. that's also however in part b/c of the kinds of questions posed. when posed by men in HT, they are almost exclusively phrased, "how can i force my [female partner] to...". there is very often a notion of non-consent, and since HT is populated in large part by people who won't put up with that kind of fucking bullshit, the differences skew considerably, IMHO.

ed

When phrased in terms of non-consent, Ed - I can absolutely see why the board goes ballistic. Hell - I'm probably leading the charge, if someone else hasn't beaten me to the punch. I don't think anyone should ever be forced to do anything without their consent. That said - although the initial thread title threw me a bit, after reading the entire post, I didn't get that sense from the male OP. He indicates that he wants to give as well as receive, but his wife is receptive to neither. He's unaware of the reason for her refusal and he'd like advice on how he could change her mind:

Does anyone know if there is something i can try to make her change her mind on oral sex?

The female OP has been given a reason behind her SO's refusal, although she doesn't agree with it and also would like advice on changing his mind:

Any other ways that you can recommend warming a guy up to giving oral sex?

Maybe my reading comprehension skills are slipping, but aside from one poor word choice ("make" vs "warming up"), I honestly don't see much difference between the two threads. I know we're all products of our socialization, but my perception is that we HT'ers tend to pride ourselves on being a bit more progressive and well....open-minded in our thinking. As such, the rally around the female OP vs (what appeared to me) very little support for the male OP was surprising.