Talk:Orgasm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is not a forum for general discussion of how many (multiple) orgasms you have had, how you can reach orgasm alone or in company, how to bring men to orgasm, how to bring women to orgasm, or how to bring jellyfish to orgasm.
Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Orgasm article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Sexology and sexuality
Sexuality Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Archive
Archives
Archive 1: 2001-2007

Contents

[edit] Male Anal Orgasm

More attention needs to be paid to anal orgasm in males, particularly through stimulation of the man's anus via a penis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.105.92 (talk) 10:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thats disgusting. 71.188.176.59 (talk) 23:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yea...that is.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.129.80.89 (talk) 07:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what's disgusting about it, but fyi: there is a section and an article covering the topic. - Face 17:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Generalization from outliers

"A woman may come to orgasm without stimulating the anus, by stimulation of the buttocks and anal cleft with the tongue."

This, and similar sentences, would be better re-written, 'Some women may. . . '

Breast orgasm, non-ejaculatory orgasm, multiple orgasm in post-pubescent males, prostate orgasms. . .

These are unusual to exceedingly rare occurrences! One can't argue, based on the experience of exceptional subjects, that "a man/woman" -- implicitly any man/woman -- can achieve these things.


Well, women probably shouldn't be included in the part about prostate stimulation-induced orgasms, since biological females do not have prostates. Epiphanie (talk) 00:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orgasm and transsexuals

, that would be great, since without it the work doesn’t look complete.

There should be two more subsections 1) Orgasm in transsexual men: 2) Orgasm in transsexual women: (Alex Leykin (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC))

[edit] About the "purpose" of female orgasm

Forgive me if I'm betraying my ignorance here, but every discussion of the "purpose" of female orgasm I've seen has not touched upon what appears to me a perfectly obvious explanation: If a female has no immediate *incentive* to have sex, isn't that a huge disadvantage, evolutionary speaking? In other words, doesn't an individual who likes to have sex have a reproductive advantage? Or is the idea that females don't generally have a say in the matter accepted?

Sexual motivation is present even without awareness of orgasmic climax. Evolutionarily, females only needed to copulate once a year to maintain maximum reproduction, so increased sexual motivation on the part of females doesn't necessarily increase reproductive success.--Nectarflowed T 04:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Er, no. The pregnancy rate for one-time sexual intercourse without any form of contraception is estimated at 5%. Therefore, if women had sex only once a year, they would on average give birth to one child every 20 years (it's a Poisson statistic). Even with zero infant mortality and all women remaining fertile until the age of 40, it would take forty years to reach an average of two children, which is the level needed to keep the population static. With historical infant and adult mortality rates, the human race would have died out rather quickly with annual sex.
"Maximum reproduction" consists of keeping women more or less continuously pregnant, a condition which was not uncommon in the ancient world, with many women producing a child every year or two during their entire fertile period (or until they died, which was also a common consequence of pregnancy in those times), Whilst most women no longer wish to put up with this, thanks to contraceptiom, some people -- let's call them "breeding enthusiasts" -- still have families of fifteen or more. Let's try some very rough calculations: assume that they take three months between pregnancies, and that for the first month after childbirth are unable to have sex. Then they have roughly 60 days to become pregnant for the next child. To have a 90% chance of getting pregnant at 5% a time, you need to have sex roughly 45 times (0.95^45 < 0.1). So, the rate of intercourse required for "maximum reproduction" is around 5 times a week. -- The Anome 07:46, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
I'm very sorry; I guess that's what happens when one writes fast and assumes 100% fertility and constant ovulation ;) Thanks for the needed correction. --Nectarflowed T 08:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
Since most women can only have orgasms through oral or manual stimulation of the clitoris (which they could do all day, every day without ever reproducing), how does the female orgasm give them incentive to copulate?
216.23.105.23 00:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Does it even need to have a purpose? It is not an evolutionary disadvantage, however the compact expression of the genome is an evolutionary advantage. The clitoris is the same organ as the penis, essentially: in males, it is virilized into a penis during the first trimester. It can be argued that orgasm has a biological purpose in males by serving as an a motive for frequent copulation. In females, there is no apparent biological purpose, and it would seem to be a simple case of there being no reason for this mechanism to be absent from females while there is a reason for it to be present in males. The advantages of females in this regard can probably be attributed to such things as prolactin insensitivity due to higher baseline prolactin levels and no evolutionary reason for the development of a homeostatic feedback system. Zuiram 18:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

There's certainly no scientific consensus about the purpose of female orgasm but both common sense and evolutionary biology can come up with a variety of possible purposes, including (a) orgasm exercises muscles, including those used in childbirth; the mechanisms of orgasm also relate to mechanisms used in childbirth, and orgasm may play a role of pain suppression during childbirth (b) pleasure/release of stress has both bonding functions as well as reducing stress which has positive health effects; this is a serious enough purpose to have evolutionary benefit! (c) people have proposed that female orgasm may play a role in sperm competition and also in mate selection. Do a google scholar search and you'll find some articles discussing many of these issues. I think (a) and (b) are a bit more widely accepted than (c), which is disputed. The people claiming female orgasm is vestigial may publish a lot of articles, but in my opinion that is just leftover from our extremely sexist society. Personally, I think the idea that female orgasm is vestigial is outright ridiculous. Cazort (talk) 01:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Still tagged as {{unreferenced}}?

I'm surprised that the article is still tagged as {{unreferenced}}. Back in August, this may have had some basis, but looking now, there are no less that 25 citations in the references section, and at least one that hasn't been formatted that way. Most of the main points and assertions seem to be backed by a reference. How many more references do we want? I propose removing the tag. Any objections? --Nigelj 22:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's been over a month and no-one has made any case for why it should be so tagged, so I just removed the tag. --Nigelj 18:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
One of the problems is that although some sections are well-referenced, the material is still full of bold, unreferenced assertions, some of which are probably false. Cazort (talk) 01:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orgasm and impregnation

What is the role of the orgasm in impregnation? Is it possible for women to become pregnant without reaching an orgasm? Do orgasm's help the onset of dropping an egg into the filopean tubes? Or does impregnation have nothing to do with pregnancy? I just have to know.Rfwoolf 12:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll look into it further. My opinion is that female orgasm has no role in releasing the egg, or anything like that. (During successful fertilization, the egg has often already been released when intercourse occurs) Some think that it may have a role in helping the semen into the uterus. Many feel that Orgasm acts as a positive response to the coitus behavior, encouraging repetition, and so increases the chances of reproduction. Atom 13:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... interesting. If you'll pardon my ignorance up till now -- it just seems that the male has to orgasm to ejaculate and subsequently release the sperm, one could have assumed that the female may have needed to orgasm too for a variety of reasons (even though I'm well aware that couples rarely climax at the same time -- nonetheless many out there may assume this is necessary for pregnancy). It also brings into question the purpose of female ejaculation, of which there seems to be none. Rfwoolf 16:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

During Orgasm the muscles in the side of the vagina contract in a manner that helps to force the sperm out of the penis and up into the uterus.

(removed line which was breaking wiki markup The Wednesday Island (talk) 03:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC))

Like so.

Other theories have been proposed based on the idea that the female orgasm might increase fertility. The 30% reduction in size of the vagina could, for example, help clench onto the penis (much like, or perhaps caused by the pubococcygeus muscles), which would make it more stimulating for the male (thus ensuring faster or more voluminous ejaculation). The British biologists Baker and Bellis have also suggested that the female orgasm may have an "upsuck" action (similar to the esophagus' ability to swallow when upside down), resulting in the retaining of favorable sperm and making conception more likely.[15] They posited a role of female orgasm in sperm competition.

Madking 19:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Porn page or encyclopedia

Who put the files with girls that are supposed to be experiencing an orgasm into this article? What's the point? Let 13yr old kids hear women moaning? I dont think this is the kind of content an encyclopedia needs.
There also are a lot of sections in this article that sound more like an advertisement than anything else. Like people wishing the stuff they saw in some porn movie is actually being put into practise by "real" couples.
So could somebody please take care of this article and let it sound more professional. --85.176.225.84 01:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I found this article extremely informative. Only a Christian would conflate information with pornography, so, you and your 13-year-old kid have my pity. Audio recordings of female orgasm are slightly questionable, but only because video would be much better. Even in modern society, many men still have no idea as to what a genuine female orgasm is, and how to tell if their partner is having one. Furthermore, orgasm is a topic that is still difficult to talk to other people about, so again the information in this article is very useful, especially as regards statistics and observed pratices. So please, STFU. No one is forcing you to read articles about sexuality in the first place, and if the prospect of your children reading such is worrisome, restricting their internet browsing is your responsibility and not ours. Thanks, and good luck kicking those antiquated delusions. 24.95.48.112 00:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Let me put my two cents in. I'm Christian and I stand very strongly against censorship and also against sexual repression. Please refrain from personal attacks and even more importantly please refrain from generalizations on the basis of religion or any other category. Let's keep the discussion limited to the material. Thank you. Personally, I have no objection to including a sound clip of someone orgasming on this page, although it perhaps could come across as a bit silly. Cazort (talk) 01:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Not very civil, but anyway... Whether people are able to tell whether a female orgasm is genuine or not doesn't matter. If solid, verifiable sources give good information about this, representative of the widely variable female population, then we can use that. Otherwise, there is nothing WP can or should say about it. Either way, being able to tell benefits no-one; if you suspect you're doing a poor job, communicate better, otherwise treat it as real. Anything else just puts unneccessary pressure on the girl, preventing her from having real ones (most girls fake it occasionally, at the very least). Also, males can fake them too, and I know of a few who do this for various reasons. Zuiram 22:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for insulting me and displaying Christians as idiots. BTW, I'm not Christian and I dont have a son either. Only thing I agree on is the fact that many men have never seen a real orgasm and that sex is being talked about too little in society. I dont get what u mean by antiquated delusions, but u dont seem to be putting any emphasis on discussing the topic anyway, instead you're just making up a story of a conservative Christian daddy and go on crying about it. Good job, way to sound stupid. Still think the article needs major corrections. --85.179.51.207 23:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The three sound files are of such a poor quality, of questionable origin, they sound like they were covertly recorded, they do not have any release details of those recorded and serve no real purpose. There's no attribution that describes the "normal" female vocalisation and presenting these as an example of such is misrepresenting the range of such. --Monotonehell 12:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I concur there seems to be no objective purpose to having the sound files on this page. There is no actual information being provided by the sound bytes. --Neome21 11:20, 13 March 2007

I would like the user who responded to the first post to take a look at Racism
Umm... A religion has nothing to do with a race! The user who responded to the first post was almost certainly guilty of religious intolerance, but not racism! -- JediLofty User | Talk 16:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why no pictures?

Theres not a single picture in the whole articule! Other languages have pics, but english dos'nt. I'm sure theres plenty of pics out there.

Why the heck do you want pictures any ways?

Erik the Red 2 16:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Erik the Red 2


Any important encyclopedia article (and don't tell me this is'nt important) practically has to have pictures in order to be complete.

Descriptions are enough to make a mental picture of orgasms. I know you're all old enough to discuss this so you'll have an idea as you read it. Akira Tomosuke 12:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

If descriptions are enough to give the reader a mental picture, then explain why the following articles contain images, videos, and/or audio clips: Ejaculation, Semen, List of sex positions, Erection, Penis, Vagina, Mammary intercourse, Thong, Pornography. I agree with the original poster of this discussion. Why is there not a single image in this suspiciously long article? 70.121.162.197 12:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
You may switch own your camera during intercourse & add it as well as self-made stuff. --Harjk talk 10:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] So do men have a G-Spot or not?

In the "Vaginal" section:

Many scientists believe that only certain women possess a G-spot.... The same is true for men, who are believed to have a male G-spot, through stimulation of the prostatic structure, which in men is the prostate.

Neither have any citation or references. I can live with there being disagreement, but can anyone more knowledgeable than I provide reliable source citations for either side, or both? 74.134.100.173 (talk) 03:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I meant to source that sentence about the male G-spot as soon as I saw this question pop up on my watchlist. I didn't do it then, but I have now, with a reference taken from the Prostate article about it. As for that other sentence, it's now separated from the sentence about the male G-spot, but I still have not sourced that one yet. I might do that later, though. Flyer22 (talk) 13:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Other known Categories of Orgasm" section

I think the very title of this section, and the way some of the material is introduced, is POV...there is hardly a consensus in the literature that categorization of orgasms is useful or appropriate, and the consensus actually seems to be the other way around. Cazort (talk) 13:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] prolactine, ~depressed mood, ~irritation

In the preface you can read following: "Prolactin is a typical neuroendocrine response in depressed mood and irritation." This is wrong sentence, prolactine indeed has some inhibitory effects on sexual drive, but it is not associated with depressed mood. Drugs such as SSRI which cause higher prolactine release do not bring about depression! Moreover, mild depression seems to increase sexual drive. It seems like only severe depression can cause impotence, but that is not the specific effect in depreesion, it seems rather that all nervous system functions deteriorate in depression. I would also be very careful with the word "irritation" as irritation is rather psychological fenomenon, an emotional thing that occurs as a part of cognitive processes. Article needs correction!!

[edit] euphoria

higher brain functions (also character of potentials in cortex) fall silent during orgasm, as it can be observed in EEG, so the word: "euphoria" seems to be incorrect. The term euphoria is an old, fuzzy concept, and it is not homogenous as it have different meanings. Article needs to strikethrough the word "euphoria", and use more detailed description instead.

[edit] needs pictures

this article needs a picture or two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.85.197.151 (talk) 03:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Not sure how that would work. Also, does anyone know how long it typically takes a man/woman to orgasm and if so, is it needed here? 68.196.242.88 (talk) 22:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)