Orgasm help please

**ItsASecret** · 10-17-2011 02:39 PM

This sounds like locker room talk, but perhaps by now I've gained enough trust with people here to say that I've been with women that swore their whole lives that they never thought that vaginal orgasm was possible until me. Am I spectacular? Hear me here PLEASE hear me: No. I listen, and respond moment to moment second by second adapting to the needs of the woman.

Do not worry this has been said before with the same "no I am not saying I am special" tone. Despite any push against the vagina with the pubic bone (many people have seen that as the end all be all move) while she gasps it does not equate a definitive orgasm simply because a handful of women have responded that way. If a woman orgasms via clitoral stimulation then she orgasms via clitoral stimulation. If she has had her partner try the plethora of move your hips, dip your hips, swing your hips, and "please babe think of something hot so I can give you a vaginal orgasm" and it still does not cause an orgasm then there is a good chance she needs the clitoral no matter how honest the intention is or how many gasps or body arches she made during the penetration alone. If she does have a vaginal orgasm without any form of clitoral stimulation then great, pat on the back, there is a woman outside the norm and not outside in a bad way. The norm meaning statistics, yes statistics. The average range of women cannot orgasm via penetration alone, that is not a bad thing, it does not mean it must be wrong, it simply means they could have tried their best with their deepest love of their lives and still nada. Same applies to women who cannot orgasm via oral. Many men can pump their chests saying they are the best out there and made all their women scream in ecstasy and then stumble across the woman who can have oral for an hour and not have one single tingle because it simply does not do it for her. Some can orgasm with a barely touching tip of the tongue, some you can go an hour and nothing comes of it. Exact same scenario with penetration, some can with just the tip in because they are so aroused or they are still aroused beyond belief and no orgasm with an hour of love making. All women are different, some do not want lovey dovey "lets entangle our spirits and have sex", some you can pinch their nipple lightly and they will orgasm but get no orgasm from oral or penetration. It takes understanding of that particular woman, not necessarily other women.

**GoodGuy** · 10-17-2011 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

Do not worry this has been said before with the same "no I am not saying I am special" tone.

Christ, I hope so.

Despite any push against the vagina with the pubic bone (many people have seen that as the end all be all move) while she gasps it does not equate a definitive orgasm simply because a handful of women have responded that way. If a woman orgasms via clitoral stimulation then she orgasms via clitoral stimulation. If she has had her partner try the plethora of move your hips, dip your hips, swing your hips, and "please babe think of something hot so I can give you a vaginal orgasm" and it still does not cause an orgasm then there is a good chance she needs the clitoral no matter how honest the intention is or how many gasps or body arches she made during the penetration alone.

Please explain: Gasps and body arches. I'm talking about genuine orgasm as described by the woman, not something that --I-- perceived them to enjoy. You sound as if there is a observation among men that an orgasm is always easily identified as this or that. Maybe so, but I'm not one of them to simplify things that way.

If she does have a vaginal orgasm without any form of clitoral stimulation then great, pat on the back, there is a woman outside the norm

If the 70% number you quote is true, it is not that far outside that norm.

and not outside in a bad way. The norm meaning statistics, yes statistics. The average range of women cannot orgasm via penetration alone, that is not a bad thing, it does not mean it must be wrong, it simply means they could have tried their best with their deepest love of their lives and still nada.

No, that's precisely where your perception of what I said has taken the wrong off ramp. (And I understand why I think.) But no one is contesting that it isn't a bad thing. No one is saying that it must be wrong. Certainly not me. The concern I have is that it is discussed in a fashion that concretely shuts the door for many women, when in fact it may be a question of the right partner, the right frame of mind, etc., etc.

[...lots...]

It takes understanding of that particular woman, not necessarily other women.

Of course, and the more a man is willing to tailor himself to her needs, the more likely those things that you are so sure are statistically inevitable may give way.

Here, maybe this makes better sense as to why those statistics you mention might be as muddy as I think they are:

Consider: Is that 70% that "can't" indicative of the physiology of women.....or of the understanding and adaptability of most men? Where do you draw the line when what happens within the *mind* is so critical. Think of how turned on you may have been when something was "wild" in your mind. Or unusual. Or in a new place. What constitutes that line of 70. Is it that 70% can't achieve orgasm this way or that, or that 70% don't have partners that empathically adapt, or a mix?

That "statistics yes statistics" that is run to is an accounting that only *seems* to be self evident, when its true meaning may have less to do with the the woman's physiology. I see it as a door close to regard that as a static notion, and not one potentially far more fluid and based on so many other variables. Stats are wonderful things only when they aren't allowed to stand on their own as if that says something....they take proper interpretation, and I think maybe we need to question more of what we hear.

**GoodGuy** · 10-17-2011 08:44 PM

Originally Posted by babiigurll249

Thanks guys i really appreciate i am definitely going to talk to my boyfriend about the vibrator and im gunna have to try that position it seems very intense i just hope he enjoys it as much as i will.... and thanks GOODGUY i understand what your saying ill have to try that too and see if it works thanks again everyone any more advice is appreciated

Babbigurll, I hope you're still following this thread---how have you been doing in the last week or so?

**ItsASecret** · 10-17-2011 10:40 PM

Please explain: Gasps and body arches. I'm talking about genuine orgasm as described by the woman, not something that --I-- perceived them to enjoy. You sound as if there is a observation among men that an orgasm is always easily identified as this or that. Maybe so, but I'm not one of them to simplify things that way.

When the men that say they are paying attention to their SO during sex they use things like body arches and gasping as their cues that they are doing a good job. That is how things should go however just because a woman arches does not automatically mean that she will have an orgasm if that man continues to push that "sex move" he was performing to elicit her responses. It can simply mean she was enjoying it, not that she is necessarily about to orgasm. A woman's orgasm response could be totally different from her general enojyment of sex response. Maybe she arches her back, moans, and keeps her eyes open while enjoying sex but right when she orgasms she quiets up, closes her eyes and does not move a muscle...it is always different for different women. But I think some guys think there is a set pattern that equates an orgasm, and get confused when a different woman reacts differently than what they expected.

If the 70% number you quote is true, it is not that far outside that norm.

The 70% equates those who do not orgasm via penetration alone. Those who can are 'abnormal' (again that does not mean weird abnormal) because they are not amongst the majority of those who cannot, instead they get the joy of having that penetration-only orgasm. The number of women who can orgasm purely from penetration is very low compared to those who like penetration very much but still need that additional clitoral stimulation.

The concern I have is that it is discussed in a fashion that concretely shuts the door for many women, when in fact it may be a question of the right partner, the right frame of mind, etc., etc.

Oh I understand your thoughts on it, and I understand how you think it can shut the door for some women. But it does not change the fact that there are women who are deeply in love with their SO, have great sex and love every minute of it, but still no matter how hard they try cannot orgasm via penetration alone. It is just how some women are.

Is that 70% that "can't" indicative of the physiology of women.....or of the understanding and adaptability of most men?

Well back to absolute basics of physiology and anatomy, there are fewer sensory nerve cells within the vagina compared to that of the clitoris. Evolution has created this for the purpose of child bearing. If we had the capacity to feel in the way our clitoris' "feel' we would dread the day that child is born due to sheer insurmountable pain that would occur. So anatomically speaking we are not supposed to "feel" as much inside. That 70% could absolutely happen due that tidbit alone. A woman can be as turned on as ever but still not achieve penetrative orgasm because anatomy and physiology have made it so that the clitoris is more responsive. However if a woman has had penetrative orgasms prior and her new partner is a total selfish gong show then it can fall back on the understanding of that man and that man could be the issue per-se in her not achieving vaginal orgasm. As with many things like behavior, or response, in life we can find that it falls back to a nature vs. nurture concept, and anyone who knows about that concept will agree that it is almost always going to be a combination of the two factors no matter what the subject is.

**GoodGuy** · 10-18-2011 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

Originally Posted by GoodGuy

Please explain: Gasps and body arches. I'm talking about genuine orgasm as described by the woman, not something that --I-- perceived them to enjoy. You sound as if there is a observation among men that an orgasm is always easily identified as this or that. Maybe so, but I'm not one of them to simplify things that way.

When the men that say they are paying attention to their SO during sex they use things like body arches and gasping as their cues that they are doing a good job.

No, if that's what they are doing, then that's NOT paying attention to their girl. Paying attention to their girl involves discussing afterward what works and how. It involves SO much more than body arches and moans. Women can sometimes take a while to read....there are very subtle things that can be tuned along the way. EVEN WHEN they are the type of girl that screams and pounds her fist the man IS NOT DONE PAYING ATTENTION. Those girls also need to be adapted to every second to bring them even further.

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

That is how things should go however just because a woman arches does not automatically mean that she will have an orgasm if that man continues to push that "sex move" he was performing to elicit her responses. It can simply mean she was enjoying it, not that she is necessarily about to orgasm.

Yes, and that's the difference between ignoring a woman and paying attention

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

A woman's orgasm response could be totally different from her general enojyment of sex response. Maybe she arches her back, moans, and keeps her eyes open while enjoying sex but right when she orgasms she quiets up, closes her eyes and does not move a muscle...it is always different for different women. But I think some guys think there is a set pattern that equates an orgasm, and get confused when a different woman reacts differently than what they expected.

Again, this is to the side of the issue. You're talking about a man who is not paying attention to his girl.

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

The 70% equates those who do not orgasm via penetration alone.

BINGO. Phrased perfectly. "Do not", NOT "CANNOT".

Originally Posted by ItsASecret

Oh I understand your thoughts on it, and I understand how you think it can shut the door for some women. But it does not change the fact that there are women who are deeply in love with their SO, have great sex and love every minute of it, but still no matter how hard they try cannot

Ok, STOP right here. You don't understand the importance of the phrasing. I have an idea. Let's look at a very simplified simile about what this is like using a different context entirely. Imagine:

Let's say that 95% of all new businesses fail. And that a large percentage (not all) of them fail simply because the person does not have the *ability* to start and maintain a business. Let's say (for metaphor) that it is an absolute ability that this sub percentage physiologically lack (mental focus, etc., etc.)

When someone comes to a person and asks for help in that regard, what is the least damaging:

"Well, 95% of business attempts do fail"

or

"Well, you might be one of the 95% of people who don't have what it takes to ever run a business."

One is a statement. The other is a *door closing*. That 95% doesn't conclude that 95% could never start a company. No one would ever say something like that to someone.

It's about the damaging nature of reading stats as if they are self evident.

**jns** · 10-24-2011 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by GoodGuy

Let's say that 95% of all new businesses fail. And that a large percentage (not all) of them fail simply because the person does not have the *ability* to start and maintain a business. Let's say (for metaphor) that it is an absolute ability that this sub percentage physiologically lack (mental focus, etc., etc.)

When someone comes to a person and asks for help in that regard, what is the least damaging:

"Well, 95% of business attempts do fail"

or

"Well, you might be one of the 95% of people who don't have what it takes to ever run a business."

One is a statement. The other is a *door closing*. That 95% doesn't conclude that 95% could never start a company. No one would ever say something like that to someone.

It's about the damaging nature of reading stats as if they are self evident.

In your statements, the second one is just plain untrue and is not supported by your initial statements. Many people fail at their first business and may fail at subsequent ones but persevere until they get one going. Others it is one and done or maybe several and done. You could have a situation that on average a person that succeeds starts 18 businesses that fail and finally gets the 19th one to succeed. Then the one that doesn't succeed starts one that fails and does not ever start another one. If such people were in equal numbers, you could say 95% of business fail. You could also say 50% of those who start businesses eventually succeed.

Your point about "do not" vs "can not" is very valid. To prove the second one you would have to have an exhaustive study done with all variables, such as being in love, the various skills the man could possess, the level of excitement and from what sources, etc. all being controlled, or a definitive proof of biochemistry that would prove that such a thing is impossible. Do not simply implies a survey that tells of current conditions to the accuracy that people would report.

I would think that almost 100% of women could orgasm with the right circumstances and the right frame of mind. Some may need extensive psychological reprogramming for this to happen. There would be some that would be difficult to get there due to organic issues. Possibly they could get there by mental stimulation alone, again with the right psychological programming.