News-Letter

In response to Mr. Frank Talker's post, I must say I find myself somewhat stunned at some of his comments. The first was:

"The G-spot is simply a male invention for those who don't understand (nor really like) women."

The second was

"(How convenient to claim that a hard-to-find G-spot exists; making a man's failure to find it somehow scientifically acceptable in order to allow him to compensate for his failure in bed.)"

Now, it's almost 4 am as I write this, and I have been known to space out while reading things when I am tired, and I miss things because of that, but it seems to me that he is saying that there is no such thing as a G-spot.

Mr. Talker, the G-spot is a very real thing. I, as a man who feels it is important to please one's lover, have never failed to find my partner's G-spot within mere seconds of trying. In most cases, it is difficult to locate only if you are not looking in the right place, and/or the woman is insufficiently aroused, but once you are familiar with it, the spot can be located even then. Never have I encountered a woman who did not have a G-spot, and only once did I encounter a woman in whom it did not aid in her achieving orgasm.

Locating the G-spot is not difficult. If you have the woman rest on her back with her legs comfortably splayed, and then insert a finger or two into her vagina with your palm facing up, you will discover that her G-spot can be found usually near the top of the of the pubic bone. If she is aroused, it usually presents itself as a nickel-sized knot of muscle on the vaginal wall. It tends to accentuate the ruggae (folds in the vaginal wall) if they are present. If you press on it, the pubic bone will offer resistance from the other side, which allows effective stimulation. It is not difficult in the least to locate.

It sounds to me as if you are of strong opinion not based entirely in experience or fact. If you know where to look, and how to proceed, the G-spot can make for not only a different kind of orgasm for the woman, but more orgasms than she might have otherwise had. Well worth knowing for the considerate lover.

Shannon Matteson, College Student
United States
catlord17@yahoo.com

Why's it necessary for women to have two types of orgasm from two different bodily locations? This is no more than Freud's nonsense about vaginal orgasms because he couldn't figure out what the clitoris was for. The G-spot is simply a male invention for those who don't understand (nor really like) women.

Why were patriarchal societies 'determined to keep female sexuality under wraps' when this adversely effected the men as much as it adversely effected the women. It's really male sexuality that such societies are suppressing since unrestricted sexuality could lead to too many mouths to feed. Yet, it would be perfectly possible to allow people to have as much sex as they liked by the simple expedient of having anal (& not vaginal) sex - since this can't lead to pregnancy. This suggests that such suppression is unlikely to have taken place.

Or, is it that arrogant (& ignorant) present-day sexologists like to think the past wasn't as enlightened as we'd like to believe we are today about sex - even though these same sexologists claim not to know the true function of the clitoris (& its attendant orgasm/s) and are thus little more enlightened than those they look down their noses at. This is like stating that the human appendix has no function when, in fact, its function is unknown.

Each generation loves to think it discovered sex and that ones parents never did it, say, standing up against a wall in a thunderstorm. But, this is to underestimate our parents' capacity for fun simply because we don't see them doing it now. There's not much evidence that people in the past weren't doing it until they dropped and that any enforced morality was actually effective. Male sexologists are too busy imposing their own sexual hang-ups on the past to see beyond their intellectual blinkers about female sexuality, because what they're really doing is trying to work through their own sex-negative upbringings through their work.

Confusion about the true function of the clitoris is really gynophobia masquerading as a scientific mystery in many insecure modern males' inability to both discover the location of the clitoris never mind actually sexually-satisfying women themselves. (How convenient to claim that a hard-to-find G-spot exists; making a man's failure to find it somehow scientifically acceptable in order to allow him to compensate for his failure in bed.) Isn't this male-sexologist bias perhaps borne of closet homosexuality and/or a horror of performing the man's job, which is to make sense of the woman's body like an explorer in darkest Africa?

It's funny how people who talk openly about their sexual ignorance claim that a) we're all similarly ignorant; and, b) in the past, humans weren't free to enjoy sex as much as we think we are today. Do they do this to make themselves feel better about their own shortcomings?

The explanation as to the function of the clitoris and the female orgasm is simple. The pleasure involved makes mating enjoyable and, therefore, desirable - so that the act is more likely to be engaged in. A man who's able to pleasure a woman to the highest degree is going to be an alpha male whose genes and character traits (especially self-confidence) are going to be more sought after by the alpha females he impregnates. Inevitably, he'll mate with often because the women he satisfies are more likely to wish to repeat the pleasurable experience. The more he mates with particular females, the more likely is conception, since the odds are against reproduction on a first try, in humans. This all serves to make the continuation of the human species – of the best, alpha, quality - all the more likely. Isn't this why the mentally and the physically weakened tend not to reproduce to the highest eugenic standards? And isn't the fear of such apparently Nazi statements behind the unwillingness of sexologists to make such eugenic (yet obvious) points?

Frank TALKER, Copywriter
UK
frank.talk@virgin.net

i fucked this chick the one time and she blew her wet stuff all upon my fuzzy naval any suggestions as to what to do next time to prevent that shit from happenin again

Jerks. Plenty of women know the evolutionary purpose of female orgasms. And trust me, it doesn't have a heck of a lot to do with men.

Duh, I am a guy and I know why a woman can come;
Not to make them pregnant,(at least directly)
To make them want sex, to want to orgasm.
Why the heck else would a woman put up with me.

Sannata,

Rather than peeing, your wife was likely experiencing the beginnings of female ejaculation. It's perfectly normal, and nothing to be ashamed of, so encourage her to just let go and enjoy herself. If she's concerned about the wetness, have a towel handy.

Here is a link to more information about the subject: http://www.themarriagebed.com/pages/biology/female/fe.shtml

in what u say about orgasms it is still to be proved . i have questioned my female friends & what they say is quite horrifying & intresting

Am I the only one who's gotten completely sick of seeing articles like this? It doesn't surprise me at all that there are still women out there- friends of mine, even-- who have never experienced an orgasm and it's not due to some physical problem. Usually, it's because some pompous d*ckbag writing an article decided to say that there's still such a thing as a vaginal orgasm.

What you're referring to is the PC muscle which is closer to the opening of the vagina. You start banging on the cervix and you tend to make (MOST) women dislike you a whole freaking lot. Most women I've met who claim to get off on *just intercourse* (re: so-called 'g-spot orgasm') tend to come back and admit that they were lying, that they need clitoral stimulation in order to get anywhere with it. And you know what? 99.99999999% of the time, this is completely true.

That a woman wrote this article makes me want to laugh, cry, vomit, and punch someone in the face.

This is a much-needed addendum here:

Science continues to speculate about the female orgasm, calling it vestigial and 'useless' in evolutionary terms, and then suddenly people are wondering WHY there are so many women who either a) feel themselves to be incapable of orgasm or b) don't seem to be that interested in sex in the first place. Whether or not men want to admit to it, they can place TREMENDOUS pressure on a female partner to 'perform,' just as surely as there's sociological pressure placed on him to do the same. There's a compulsion to say that someone is 'coming FOR you' when in reality, that line of thinking is a very easy way to make sure your partner doesn't get off no matter how many neat tricks you can pull off with rosie palmer and her five sisters.

What this means is that science can shut the hell up until we can find our asses with both hands on a sociological level-- suggesting that there's no inherent purpose for the female orgasm is not going to help that.

How about mentioning what orgasms do FOR women instead of nattering on about bullcrap like this? How about mentioning all the health benefits you get from having a healthy sex life and a healthy view of sexuality? How about mentioning that men tend to be REALLY HAPPY when he helps his girl to orgasm and knows without question that she's not faking it? How about looking at it in neurological terms, what neurotransmitters are fired off during orgasm for the partner who climaxed as well as what's fired off for the partner who helped make it happen?

Even if there's some merit to what's been said, it's been said over and over-- and inaccurately, at that. Inaccuracies that seem small and innocuous that invariably give women the false impression that they SHOULD be able to come from just penetration.

I PROPOSE THAT ORGASM IN BOTH SEXES IS EVOLUTION DRIVEN. IF SEX WAS NOT PLEASURABLE THERE WOULD BE NO INCENTIVE FOR HUMANS TO HAVE SEX, SO IT IS A WAY TO PROPAGATE THE SPECIES. WHAT TURNS A MAN OR WOMAN ON SEXUALLY IS CULTURALLY DRIVEN.

megaupload search
No over rapidshare crawlers can be compared with Megauploadfiles.com. megauploadfiles.comis a best megaupload search engine.

Wow. Reading this makes me feel a bit better about being rejected from JHU....

David bow man writes:
I PROPOSE THAT ORGASM IN BOTH SEXES IS EVOLUTION DRIVEN. IF SEX WAS NOT PLEASURABLE THERE WOULD BE NO INCENTIVE FOR HUMANS TO HAVE SEX, SO IT IS A WAY TO PROPAGATE THE SPECIES



100% correct without the intense pleasure associated with intercourse and orgasm human interest in sexual relations would become boring uninteresting and mechanical. Hence the same reason we get pleasure from eating or any other desires that are necessary for the survival of the species.