Female Orgasm

jjhlk:

The article itself is hyperbole - there is no "War on Hormones". What I said is, unfortunatly, correct.

"Why'd you guys vote him into office!!?"

We didn't.

He lost the popular vote nationwide.
He would have lost the recount, but the Supreme Court decided in a non-partisan move that was coincidently along party lines that there shouldn't be a recount.

Of course, the supreme court wasn't politically motivated in this. :rolleyes:

" Right wing christians are WRONG for office!"

Damned right!
 
On the other hand, the Florida supreme court DID throw out the statutory deadline for finishing the SECOND round of recounts. And then threw out their own deadline, to give Gore yet another chance to win. That couldn't have had anything to do with it being run by Democrats, could it? :rolleyes:

By my reconning, Bush won two recounts, as well as the election. Just how many times did you want those ballots recounted? As many times as it took for Gore to squeek through by random chance? Seems that's what the Democratic Florida court had in mind.
 
Well, not to go off topic;

On the other hand, the Florida supreme court DID throw out the statutory deadline for finishing the SECOND round of recounts. And then threw out their own deadline, to give Gore yet another chance to win. That couldn't have had anything to do with it being run by Democrats, could it?
Click to expand...

Of course not. Judges are always impartial. ;)

By my reconning, Bush won two recounts, as well as the election. Just how many times did you want those ballots recounted? As many times as it took for Gore to squeek through by random chance? Seems that's what the Democratic Florida court had in mind.
Click to expand...

Bush would have won one of the proposed methods of recounting and lost the other three. He also lost the popular vote nationwide.

You forget that the ballots have been analyzed now - we know what would have happened. He would have won the method of recounting proposed by Gore but lost any other method.
 
No, unfortunately "the" ballots have not been analyzed. SOME of the ballots have been analyzed. The media consortium which funded the analysis decided to save money by only looking at the ballots which had been rejected by the counting machines.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html

This is significant on two counts. First, there are classes of machine errors which cause invalid ballots to register as valid votes. You won't catch this if you only look at the ballots the machines rejected.

The second and more significant point is that Florida law unambiguously requires that any recount must recount ALL ballots cast. So the media consortium did not have sufficient data to reconstruct the results of any LEGAL recount, only recounts conducted in criminal defiance of the law.

Now, I will grant you that an illegal count conducted in criminal defiance of election laws was exactly what the Florida supreme court had ordered. That's why they got shot down by the federal Supreme court! (Here, read this, it'll bring you up to speed on the legal arguments.)

Come to think of it, this also gets into the third reason the media's partial recount is meaningless; Because the Flordia supreme court was violating the election laws the legislature had enacted, and which the Supreme court had ruled were binding, the legislature was in the process of appointing a slate of delegates which would reflect the results of the earlier, legal recounts. So the partial, illegal recount ordered by the Florida supreme court wasn't going to matter in any case.

Oh, one last point from the media consortium report: Even THEIR counters were, when cross checked, shown to be reading the ballots in a partisan manner, with the Democrats seeing more votes for Gore, the Republicans seeing more votes for Bush. Machines, for all their capacity for error, at least don't care who wins...
 
Okay now let's get back to the topic, which is extrEMEly interesting and fascinating to me. :D

Okay, women in here, I have a question. Why is it that men sorta shut down when they ejaculate, and yet women can have multiple orgasms? Is there any biological purpose there?

Please, no "because us girls are superior to you nya nya" comments. I've heard it all too often.

And I read somehwere that the female orgasm is more intense than the male orgasm. I wonder about that, too.

And another thing. Guys tend to get somewhat crazed about sex (alright, let's be honest here...any guy who disagreees with me and my observations is either castrated, impotent, or nonmasculine:D)
. Girls aren't. Unless I misread the innocent and cute expressions??? Why is this??
 
Uh, Xev, I just read some of your posts.

*Xev is frightened and hides under her bed*
Click to expand...

?? Why are you scared of being a virgin? Virginity ain't so bad. PArdon me if I sound vulgar, but do you really like the idea that your spouse may have sucked and fucked with godknowswhatkindofshit? Sex is a form of commitment, though a LOT of teens forget it nowadays. Sex before marriage means you are taking that commitment for granted and you are not respecting your spouse. Also, sex has the power to create new life, that's why it is such a powerful force in society (that subconscious thought that it can do wonders...don't deny it. It affects society in biiiiig ways!!). And it shouldn't b misused.

I sound hypocritical, but I tell you that I do not plan to have sex before marriage. I choose to respect my future spouse. It's really up to you if you choose to do the same. Or maybe your choice is already made and you can't go back again. Tough luck then.
 
"Okay, women in here, I have a question. Why is it that men sorta shut down when they ejaculate, and yet women can have multiple orgasms? Is there any biological purpose there?"

You bet there is. For starters, if you could have multiple orgasms, do you think there would be many sane men around? If you could have sex, finish and be horny again within 30 seconds, do you think you'd lead a very happy life??? How much more rape do you figure there would be?

Okay, now seriously. The idea is to procreate (biologically speaking:D) , right? So the goal for the male is to spread his seed around, right? If a man can have multiple orgasms (start thinking back to caveman times here) and he finds a woman he's going to fuck her, wait the 10 required seconds or so and then fuck her again. He's not about to go looking for someone else when he has another waiting right there. And I'm betting this would end up pretty painful for the woman but I really don't know! Women, on the other hand, are designed to take the seed.


"And I read somehwere that the female orgasm is more intense than the male orgasm. I wonder about that, too."

As the sexual expert that I am (from years of, um, field study and what not, hehe) I can tell you that accordign to scientists on Discovery Channel and SexTV the female orgasm can be much more intense through the g-spot. Men, contrary to common knowledge, do have a g-spot. Um, but it's up your ass. Soooooooo, as such most heterosexual men never experience a g-spot orgasm.


"Unless I misread the innocent and cute expressions??? Why is this??"

Different peaks. Males aged 16-25 (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) reach their sexual peak. As in, this the age we're horniest and most sexually desiring (and, often, desirable!). Women, on the other hand, reach this peak around 36-40 (if there is a god, I fully believe this is his little cosmic joke). Also, women don't need to be as 'sex crazed' as men. In the animal kingdom it's rare that the woman is the one initiating sex. Humans initially were designed so thta a man finds a woman he wishes to make whopee with and does so. The woman's desire was irrelevant, really. Finally, women aren't as uninterested in sex as you may think. During most of the time, women are some-what interested. During a certain time (and I'm guessing most women here will back me up here) they are very, very interested in sex. Social pressure, of course, does hold them back from showing this too much.


"Why are you scared of being a virgin?"
Just to start, that wasn't what she was scared of.


"PArdon me if I sound vulgar, but do you really like the idea that your spouse may have sucked and fucked with godknowswhatkindofshit?"

No need to pardon yourself. I'm hoping my future wife has on 'sucked and fucked' a human being, so I will change your 'whatkindofshit' to 'who'. Okey?

Personally, I don't care. My future wife will likely not be a slut or a prostitute and I'm guessing I'll be well aware of any STD she may have had/has before I wed her. Her choice in life. I'm not about to base my opinion of a person on their sexual life.....as long as it's not too freaky!


"Sex is a form of commitment, though a LOT of teens forget it nowadays"

Ouch. I haven't given you my welcome to sciforums yet.....so; welcome to sciforums, please refrain from stating your opinion as a fact. Sex, biologically speaking (by your previous questions, I am taking a wild stab at thinking you're either atheistic or agnostic....so we can talk about sex biologically), is not at all a form of commitment. Sex is the only form of reproduction. In fact, men are not designed to be monogomous. At all. We're just the opposite! So that sex is 'a form of commitment' is ENTIRELY your ideal and value.


"Sex before marriage means you are taking that commitment for granted"
Like I said, sex is a biological necessity and in no way is a commitment.


"you are not respecting your spouse"

Now there's the kicker. To disrespect my spouse by having sex before meeting her would require her to (a) have the same view on sex as you...(b) have somehow convinced here that I either did not have premaritual sex or convince her it is unimportant. Otherwise, it's entirely her choice what shows disrespect to her....right?


"And it shouldn't b misused"

I'm glad you think you ahve the right and power to deside what everyone's morals should be. Could you also instruct me onto what is absolutely right and absolutely wrong on other debates? By the way, if you make this statement I would like to point out that you will only ever have sex once, twice....maybe three times in your lifetime. After all, biologically speaking, sex' pupose is to procreate. Anything else is misuse of sex. Therefore, have sex only when you want kids.

Enjoy!


"It's really up to you if you choose to do the same."

I must say, by eliminating every single woman who has had sex as a potential spouse you have consciencly ruled out many, many beautiful, brilliant and amazing women.
 
Zero, and you forgot one other argument for virginity before marriage: Venerial diseases. Basically the only reason they exist is promescuity; If we were all virgins until marriage, and monogamous afterwards, things like syphilus and gonerea, not to mention AIDS, would be extinct in a generation.

There's also the, how to put this, "conditioning" aspect. There's a certain amount of evidence from psychology that an extended period of intensive sexual activity with one person, especially if it's new to both of you, causes a form of imprinting, making you more likely to stay in love with each other. Honeymoons really do serve a biological purpose, after all. And it probably doesn't work nearly so well if you're already jaded.

Xev, I'm not a woman, but I DID do well in human anatomy and physiology, so I'm qualified to answer this: The reason women are ready to go again immediately, and men have this "refractory period" before we can orgasm again, is simply that male orgasm involves expending sperm and especially seminal fluid, and we only carry so much of those around with us, and only generate them so fast. So we need time to reload. And the woman doesn't, because she's on the recieving end. It's as simple as that. Orgasming before we had a wad to shoot would be pointless, from a standpoint of reproduction. Also, of course, erections are maintained by shutting off the blood flow from the penis, and if an erection is maintained for TOO long, the penis can suffer from lack of oxygen.
 
Zero

um

thats just silly

so you find "the one" and it dosn't work out

you can never have another partner cause you made a bad choice?

HA

silly

what happened before shouldn't MATTER
 
Last edited:
Zero:

For the record, I do not think that virginity per se is a bad thing.

Personally, I feel the lack of sexual experience to be shamefull after a certain age. But this is only speaking personally, of the standards I hold myself to.

A nation of virgins, however, is a very bad idea. Think of how many people would be running around cranky and sexually frustrated.

And I read somehwere that the female orgasm is more intense than the male orgasm. I wonder about that, too.
Click to expand...

From talking to guys, I'd say it is. And longer lasting.

Poor men. :(

And another thing. Guys tend to get somewhat crazed about sex (alright, let's be honest here...any guy who disagreees with me and my observations is either castrated, impotent, or nonmasculine)
. Girls aren't. Unless I misread the innocent and cute expressions??? Why is this
Click to expand...

Women seek commitment. Bloody hard to do if you screw every passing fellow.
Men seek to have as many children as possible. They aren't as "stuck with 'em" the way women are.

Thus, women who are monogamous will pass on their genes more, and men who screw around will pass on their genes more.

Tyler:

Her choice in life. I'm not about to base my opinion of a person on their sexual life.....as long as it's not too freaky!
Click to expand...

Or lack therof?

Brett:
Xev, I'm not a woman, but I DID do well in human anatomy and physiology, so I'm qualified to answer this: The reason women are ready to go again immediately, and men have this "refractory period" before we can orgasm again, is simply that male orgasm involves expending sperm and especially seminal fluid, and we only carry so much of those around with us, and only generate them so fast. So we need time to reload. And the woman doesn't, because she's on the recieving end. It's as simple as that. Orgasming before we had a wad to shoot would be pointless, from a standpoint of reproduction. Also, of course, erections are maintained by shutting off the blood flow from the penis, and if an erection is maintained for TOO long, the penis can suffer from lack of oxygen.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That does make sense.

Damn.

I'm sorry to admit this, I don't like to express pity, but -

I'm beginning to feel veeeeeeery sorry for your entire gender.
 
Not to mention that you get to live several years longer than us, on average, too. Real bummer for us, that.

On the bright side, though, I don't care what time of the month it is, and don't have any trouble with jar lids. Or 80 lb sacks of cement, for that matter... :D
 
K, I wanted to wait for the lady's opinion (koff koff). I did make a big hole in my logic, but...still, I think virginity until you marry is a great thing. LAck of sexual experience?? And is sexual experience or mental innocence (learning the first things with your beloved spouse, now I feel overly sentimental...a thing I hate) better? So is it the ability to please your partner or innocence? Hm. Personal choice I guess.

Tyler, I don't think sex is not a commitment. Yes it is. So biologically speaking, since few species find it an advantage to build long term single pairs, you would prefer practicing free love all your life?? So to you, there is no sense of marital fidelity or something? That could be dangerous.

It's a bit weird. Beofre you marry, you're going to bed with all these different people, and you're going to stop when you marry. That biiig transition could be difficult. Or will you still sleep around, along with your spouse?? Free love even during marriage? No wonder America has such a high divorce rate. No one considers sex a commitment, which is appalling in itself, and no one cares to control their immediate sexual desires. No self control at all, and no respect for one's spouse. Which is a bit pathetic. Any outlook on life should be respected, but keep in mind that America has one of the highest divorce rates in the world. I would not consider that a good thing.

Free love does not work, because sex has the potential power to create kids. It's not your generation's fault either, because your parents started the free love thing :D. But anyhow, free love can not lead to anything good. You're just giving in to your desires without any sense of self control or dignity. That's an act of idiocy Americans commonly commit.

And though I'm atheistic, and I do not have that retarded *sex equals sin* philosophy, I do have a sense of what is appropriate and what's not. Sleeping around is not. And true, all STI's and STD's would be gone if people did not sleep around. But sadly, mankind is frail.

I hope no one is in bed with anyone while reading this!?
 
Zero:
I hope no one is in bed with anyone while reading this!?
Click to expand...

Does typing my response one-handed count?


(Yes, that's a joke)

Seriously, sex leads to stds, sure. But there are proper precautions that one can take.

Brett:
On the bright side, though, I don't care what time of the month it is, and don't have any trouble with jar lids.
Click to expand...

It's late June.

Meh, mild discomfort, take a few tylenol, I still feel sorry for you guys.
 
Hmmm ...

Thanks, Tyler, for starting a thread that has given me more chuckles
than most: "My question is, why do women have the ability to have
an orgasm?"

Xev
"Men are weird, so I can't answer this one as well. Women are weird
too, but at least I understand myself..... "

kmguru
"Almost all female can achieve multiple orgasms one after another ..."

Tyler
"I just watched 4 hours worth of sex documentaries so I consider myself
slightly educated on the topic."

Adam
"Many other animals breed in batches."

Brett Bellmore
"There isn't any instinct to reproduce, folks. If there were, people would
go broke trying to sell contraceptives.

Tyler
"Certain chemicals released in the body are what control us having 'pleasure'.
Other animals don't have these chemical's released, save the dolphin and one
other animal I can't remember at hte moment. Maybe pig."

Zero
"I sound hypocritical, but I tell you that I do not plan to have sex before
marriage. I choose to respect my future spouse."

Tyler
"And I'm betting this would end up pretty painful for the woman but I really
don't know!

Zero
"... but do you really like the idea that your spouse may have sucked and
fucked with godknowswhatkindofshit?"

"Sex is a form of commitment, though a LOT of teens forget it nowadays."

Tyler
"... they are very, very interested in sex. Social pressure, of course, does
hold them back from showing this too much."

"Men, contrary to common knowledge, do have a g-spot. Um, but it's up your ass."

"My future wife will likely not be a slut or a prostitute "

Brett Bellmore
"If we were all virgins until marriage, and monogamous afterwards, things
like syphilus and gonerea, not to mention AIDS, would be extinct in a generation."

Xev
"Personally, I feel the lack of sexual experience to be shamefull after a
certain age."

And finally,
Zero
"And is sexual experience or mental innocence (learning the first things with
your beloved spouse, now I feel overly sentimental...a thing I hate) better?"

Take care, all ;)
 
Originally posted by Brett Bellmore
If we were all virgins until marriage, and monogamous afterwards, things like syphilus and gonerea, not to mention AIDS, would be extinct in a generation.
Click to expand...
It sounds good, unfortunately, it would not likely be so.

As one example, syphilitic women can transmit the infection to their fetuses at any stage of their disease. The following facts are from memory: approximately 75% of pregnant women with untreated primary syphilis and 90% of women with secondary syphilis transmit the infection to their fetuses. Birth by cesarean section is of little help, as T. pallidum is introduced directly into the circulation of the fetus while in the womb. A baby with congenital syphilis may appear perfectly normal at birth with symptoms of "septic" syphilis, most often manifested as multi- organ failure, occurring as late as age two.

So current carriers of the diseases can continue to propagate them. Unless you are willing to advocate eugenics, abstinence and monogamy would not eliminate STDs.

Peace.
 
I did not know...this topic is still going. No wonder...it takes longer...a lot longer for the female to achieve orgasm than male...:D
 
Goofyfish, "As one example, syphilitic women can transmit the infection to their fetuses at any stage of their disease. The following facts are from memory: approximately 75% of pregnant women with untreated primary syphilis and 90% of women with secondary syphilis transmit the infection to their fetuses. Birth by cesarean section is of little help, as T. pallidum is introduced directly into the circulation of the fetus while in the womb. A baby with congenital syphilis may appear perfectly normal at birth with symptoms of "septic" syphilis, most often manifested as multi- organ failure, occurring as late as age two. "

So, instead of being extinct in one generation, syphilis would be extinct in 1.05 generations...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top