SLS wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 7:53 pm
I think you are conflating orgasm complexity with orgasm rate. It is true that in general a woman's path to orgasm is more complicated than a man's but that isn't really an explanation as to why there is such a large gap in achieving orgasm
This response jives with what I've said about people that haven't had to fight the way many of us here have had to for our "OD" (orgasm difficulties subgroup based on the link to the study you provided) wives. During her Luteal Phase, Zelda
may well take over an hour of direct stimulation with her favorite vibe on its highest setting in order to achieve O...and that's after a day where I treat her like a queen, we've connected non-sexually, and we've have 30+ minutes of non-physical foreplay. We've gone 2 hr in the past. This longer time to reach O starts to play into the gap eventually.
To use an analogy I had students who could finish a 2 hour test in 30 minutes and get a good score. That is just how their brains and personalities worked. I had other students who took the whole 2 hours but also got good scores. In other words the students that took the whole time period had a more complicated path but they achieved the same result.
This example is a great example of what I'm talking about above. What if a student would require 3 hr? 8 hr? 36 hr? (Note that these numbers are actually reasonable on a relative scale--I've seen a wife on XY Code say it normally takes 90 sec for her to O after warming up...that's 80× faster than a 2-hr session for Zelda, and that wife was using her fingers whereas Zelda
was using a powerful vibe. The difference between 30 min and 36 hr is only 72×). At some point, the length of time to achieve O starts to play significantly into the orgasm gap.
Most "OD" women fully understand this and much prefer to have quick "for him" sex that they find quite enjoyable, but they don't get aroused enough from it to be left "hanging". They enjoy this type of sex and would prefer it over having an orgasm on that night. Honestly, those kinds of sessions are not at all uncommon, and I really think they need to be subtracted from the denominator of the orgasm-gap equation...otherwise, you're telling the woman they are supposed to have an O that they don't want.
A woman may need significantly more stimulation to achieve orgasm but there is nothing inherent in general biology that would prevent her from orgasming.
Orgasm at all
? Maybe. However, this research
would actually disagree. In it, only 93% of OD women (25% of whom had never had an O) were able to achieve O with the Magic Wand. That leaves 7% that still couldn't despite therapy in the study plus an insanely popular/powerful/successful vibrator. As I recall, you haven't tried the wand--we recently got one, and Zelda
was readily able to O on setting 2 of 4, so she's not even that far out on the "OD" tail. (Side note--she still likes her Touch better, but we're using the Wand as backup and have also used it for several massages--it's great for that!
Orgasm within the time reasonably available for sex
? Definitely not. Regarding the "reasonable time", we've done 80 min on her favorite vibe until it ran out of batteries, 15 min on an air-based clitoral stimulator while the vibe recharged, then another 25 min with the charge on the vibe again before she gave up. All that on top of 30+ min of non-physical foreplay. At that point, its 1 am or later, and she's just ready to go to bed. Trying to eliminate the gap by having me not O in those sessions or continuing on into the night to try to force one out of her is unhelpful. The people pushing these ideas in these blogs seem to be much more readily orgasmic and don't deal with this directly, at least not on a regular basis. It's a good thing that I don't accept what they're saying at face value, otherwise my wife would still be anorgasmic, as they oppose the use of vibrators because it "lessens intimacy" (note that the opposite has been true in my marriage).
SLS wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:07 pm
...Of course on average women take more time and effort to reach orgasm. The point is are men being encouraged to understand that and provide the extra stimulation required or is the underlying presupposition that a woman is broken if a husband can't bring her to O after a few minutes of pounding in intercourse?
You know very well from my previous posting that I don't think "a few minutes of pounding in intercourse" will do it. Honestly, I can only think of one guy in my time at TMB who thinks anything like like. You almost certainly know that too, so I find this comment pretty disingenuous. From my reading here, Christian blog comments, and secular sources like Reddit, I do see that there is a small percentage of men (and women for that matter) that think that, but from my experience, this percentage is similar between secular and Christian men. Please note, we have done up to 2 hr of OS (combined with internal MS) without reaching O for her. It's not for lack of trying, and it was Zelda
that cut off OS so she wouldn't feel broken by the lack of O. Oh, and for the record, it's not a "few minutes" of intercourse--I can, and have, done over an hour of doggy style with her using her favorite vibe the whole time--her choice of vibe, position, and thrusting angle/force...still no O for that session even though that combination is the most arousing thing we know for her.
You misunderstand. The whole point of the book is not to treat men and women as if they are the same biologically. It is to call attention to those very differences and for men and women to be taught what best satisfies the other.
You use the word "satisfies" here, but I think it's clear that a not-insignificant portion of wives sometimes prefer not to O during a sexual session. That's what gives them the most satisfaction, for whatever reason(s). Maybe the book should have paid attention to this difference between men and women too.
The figures I mentioned earlier in the thread strongly support that, as they show weak correlation between O gap and sexual satisfaction. Until one can provide an unbiased denominator-adjusted study where the women not wanting O's in their O-free sessions are subtracted out, I think O-gap data is a poor proxy for sexual satisfaction. In my opinion, the study in question is heavily biased, and to my knowledge it's objectively true that it's not denominator adjusted.
The book is specifically written to Christians so one should expect that "cultural Christian" ideas about sex would be referenced. I agree that this a worldwide issue but that shouldn't stop us from looking at our own issues.
Overall, in my experience, the problem with the teaching from the church isn't so much that it's "incorrect sexual education", especially when compared to secular "sexual education". Instead, the problem is the "absent
sexual education" from the church, at least for many of us. That really makes "our own issues" the same as the world's. Again, just go to a place like Reddit (which is highly agnostic/atheistic/anti-theistic), and you'll see all of these same issues (bad ones) except for ones trying to directly invoke scripture.
Thus, in my opinion, "looking at our own issues" is pretty much equivalent to looking at the nationwide view. As an analogy, to help someone who is horrible with money, I'd much rather focus on their three expensive car loans and exorbitant eat-out budget than focus on the $5/month they waste by leaving their bathroom light on all day. Yes, the bathroom light contributes to the problem, but it's only a tiny fraction of the issue, and much more headway can be made working on the other stuff. And, yes, I do realize there are a few churches/denominations that do have "incorrect sexual education", but again, my experience has been its absence
rather than incorrectness
. The next time I hear something like "It's easy, you'll figure it out on your own..." I may have a hernia!