Journal Club: "Non-genital Orgasms"

[erotica_n_s]

.....

 

[Lavender10]

It really took a team of researchers to figure out something that's always been known by every female on the planet who has ever had a wet dream? Money well spent I guess.

 

[Fubai]

I had an ex who orgasmed through foot rubs. No sexual component, literally just a foot massage. The first time it happened she was shocked. She claims no one else did or has been able to do it for her. Of course this could just be protecting my ego? A google search will return a lot of hits saying it's possible.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I had an ex who orgasmed through foot rubs. No sexual component, literally just a foot massage. The first time it happened she was shocked. She claims no one else did or has been able to do it for her. Of course this could just be protecting my ego? A google search will return a lot of hits saying it's possible.

Ear/neck nibbling will do it for some people

 

[Athalia]

It really took a team of researchers to figure out something that's always been known by every female on the planet who has ever had a wet dream? Money well spent I guess.

Money well spent, indeed, if now men actually know it, too. It reminds me of that scene in "The Little Prince" where people didn't believe a scientist lecturing when he was clothed in the robes of the Mid-east, but finally started paying attention when he gave the same lecture while dressed in a business suit.

For a parallel, thread, see "Can Men Cum without Touching?" I started that thread out of curiosity, and learned a lot I didn't know.

 

[lovecraft68]

Money well spent, indeed, if now men actually know it, too. It reminds me of that scene in "The Little Prince" where people didn't believe a scientist lecturing when he was clothed in the robes of the Mid-east, but finally started paying attention when he gave the same lecture while dressed in a business suit.

For a parallel, thread, see "Can Men Cum without Touching?" I started that thread out of curiosity, and learned a lot I didn't know.

I don't know if men knowing it means anything....

A lot of men barely tried to make their women come at all, now if they think they can get away with less work

Unless maybe you mean by them knowing it they might realize they are close to completely useless?

And I used to be able to cum without touching, it takes a lot of work on certain muscles and I don't know that I could do it now...not the most satisfying orgasm however, which was the point as I used to have to do it for a female top.

 

[Athalia]

I don't know if men knowing it means anything....

A lot of men barely tried to make their women come at all, now if they think they can get away with less work

Unless maybe you mean by them knowing it they might realize they are close to completely useless?

Oh, I wouldn't say "useless." Just not "indispensable."

But I do appreciate it when a man tries to take the trouble to get me off. That's the kind of fella that gets a second date.

 

[erotica_n_s]

.

It might seem "obvious" to a lot of people, but it certainly isn't obvious to me.

For a long time, I was under the impression that women needed stimulation of the *clitoris* to reach orgasm, and that being touched anywhere else could not be remotely close to that kind of "pleasurable-ness".

This led me to think, when writing sex scenes, that it would be "absurd" to depict a woman reaching orgasm from anything other than receiving cunnilingus.

But writing cunnilingus scenes gets boring pretty quickly. Besides, some men fantasise about other things. Like caressing a woman's waist, for example. But I wasn't sure if it would make sense to readers if I wrote a scene where a woman becomes quickly aroused because a guy caressed her waist.

I thought if we constructed a "scale" to quantify erogeneity or "pleasurable-ness", then the clitoris would be "100 out of 100" points (or even an "infinitely" large score), and other places on a woman's body would score maybe single digits at best (no pun intended there, I assure you).

I think one of the articles I read mentioned something about an endeavour to construct an "erogeneity matrix", but I haven't actually seen the finished thing...

But yes, that's why Komisaruk's publications have been useful... but it seems the controversy goes on... ​

.

 

[silverwhisper]

some years back there was a thread in HT proper re: no-contact orgasms.

ed

 

[midwestyankee]

The mind is far more important and sensitive than the clitoris. When in synch, some couples can give each other orgasms over the phone with no touch happening whatsoever on either side of the conversation.

 

[GrrlFriday]

It might seem "obvious" to a lot of people, but it certainly isn't obvious to me.

For a long time, I was under the impression that women needed stimulation of the *clitoris* to reach orgasm, and that being touched anywhere else could not be remotely close to that kind of "pleasurable-ness".

This led me to think, when writing sex scenes, that it would be "absurd" to depict a woman reaching orgasm from anything other than receiving cunnilingus.

My understanding is that it helps to include stimulation of the clitoris for most women. Also, the 'iceberg' nature of the clitoris ( http://www.scarleteen.com/article/bodies/anatomy_pink_parts_female_sexual_anatomy ) might lead to the vestibular bulbs getting stimulated from penis-in-vagina intercourse.

But writing cunnilingus scenes gets boring pretty quickly. Besides, some men fantasise about other things. Like caressing a woman's waist, for example. But I wasn't sure if it would make sense to readers if I wrote a scene where a woman becomes quickly aroused because a guy caressed her waist.

Yes. Particularly with a bit of a firm, (possessive?) squeeze.