Women Have 10 Types of Orgasms...Men Have 8?

Thu, 03/31/2011 - 09:32
Submitted by Anonymous

In this this video, Lou Paget discusses the types of orgasms that men and women can experience. According to Lou, women are capable of ten different flavors of orgasmic pleasure, while men enjoy eight.

Both men and women are able to experience mouth, nipple/breast, anal, blended, and zone orgasms. Paget also mentions that the different varieties of orgasm feel different because they ensue from different neural pathways.

Clitoral and penile orgasms result from stimulation of the pudendal pathway, while orgasms that result from G spot, vaginal, and rectal stimulation often involve the pelvic nerve. Stimulating the pelvic nerve, via the rectum, can also lead to pleasure in some surprising ways.

According to Barry Komisaruk and Beverly Whipple in their book The Science of Orgasm, one guy claimed that every time he took a dump he experienced something like an orgasm or an ejaculation - most likely due to inadvertent stimulation of the pelvic nerve (a type of neural "cross talk"). This also occurred during a strong urination. He experienced other odd symptoms as well, such as an increased pulse rate and extreme fatigue. The researchers claimed this went on for something like ten years! (Gee, it's a wonder he ever got out of the toilet).

The cervix is connected to three different nerve pathways: the vagus, hypogastric, and the pelvic. In an interesting experiment, Komisaruk and Whipple devised a unique cervical stimulator, essentially a diaphragm that had suction capabilities in order to study how the cervix responds sexually. The device was a huge success and one enthralled woman said it created a uniquely pleasurable sensation that felt like a "shower of stars". Stimulating more than one hot spot (i.e., vagina and clitoris etc.) at a time combines sensory information from different nerve pathways creating the blended orgasm (a much bigger band for your buck).

Our bodies are capable of some amazing things. But it's important to keep this information in perspective. Even if women are physiologically capable of ten different types of orgasms, many women struggle to have even one type, or even one orgasm. Not every woman is going to have a vaginal or G spot orgasm. And most women orgasm primarily from clit stimulation. It's interesting to me that men's orgasmic capabilities are still largely ignored. For example, while many women spend countless hours in a fruitless search for their G spots, often feeling like failures for their inability to manufacture the orgasm du jour, few men seem all that interested in digging in their behinds for a prostate gland (the unsung male equivalent of the G spot).

I would like to see more men look for their "great eight", and more women accepting of their unique orgasmic capabilities. Anyway, here's Lou...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The cervix suck toy and my thoughts

Tue, 04/05/2011 - 15:20

So Lilithland, can you locate more info on what that cervical suction device was, specifically? I'm wondering if the cervix responds pleasurably to suction or if the woman who liked it with her, "shower of stars" description was unique to the mix. Did anyone have a pelvic nerve-induced orgasm from it? If so, why isnt this on the market? Where are the blueprints? :)

Second, I like Lou's understanding of the nerve pathways and their roles, but
there's no guidance in her video, or mentioning of where that guidance is via her professional services, for how to trigger these more esoteric
than clitoral or penile, or for some, gspot, orgasms. It's one thing to mention sources on or in the body that can reportedly produce orgasm for one or possibly more individuals, be they a part of a sexology study or not. Its quite another to, as a sex teaching/coaching source to be able to successfully and with a high rate of consistency guide a client to the place where they develop a desired form of orgasm.The same goes for blending orgasms together or layered orgasms, as I call them, where one ends and other begins. I'll tell you from personal and professional experience, that's easier said than done even when you can consistently orgasm in two or more different given ways.

My clients appreciate it when I tell them what I know and have utilized myself to create non-standard orgasms (blended or layered too) in my partners, past and present, and also those expereinced by my clients via my guidance (once again, I don't make physical sexual contact with clients They learn orgasm skills from me in other legal ways.)

They also appreciate when I tell them that if say, a fantasy orgasm, is reportedly possible in someone, that's great, but if that isn't a possibility for them, then the conversation is academic; fine for inclusion into books like Alfred Kinsey wrote, but too often not applicable to real life for the majority. My and Betty's advice is to move on to things that are more likely to create orgasms that she and I feel we can teach a client. I also tell them, when I do not know of a method to trigger a particular orgasm, to go research other sex life coaching professionals who claim they have a way. Hopefully, their method will work for my client.

Another thing worth mentioning from this video is the differences between sex life coaches. We don't all agree with each other. For example, there are things Lou says in this video I disagree with and there are other sources for orgasm I am confident about that she did not mention. Sex life coaches, sex educators, whatever, I believe are very like a sports coach, a weightlifting coach, a piano teacher, etc in that they all have their strengths and not all are the best coach or the best coach for you or your given situation. Find the sex life coaching professional who gives you the most "showers of stars" for your buck. You, the client, be the judge.

Hi Eric, The only thing I got

Tue, 04/12/2011 - 22:11
LilithLand (not verified)

Hi Eric,

The only thing I got from my reading was that the device was like a diaphram that created suction on the cervix. Apparantly, it was a very unique sensation that one does't normally experience. The book that I read this in was The Science of Orgasm. I also heard it mentioned in How We Do It: How the Science of Sex Can Make You a Better Lover.

Frankly, I am quite curious about it myself. I know that I like cervical stimulation when I am very aroused. From what I understand, the pelvic nerve is activated through G spot and anal stimulation. Hence, the guy (that I mentioned in my blog) who got off from pooping. I also think that the vagus nerve is activated by cervical stimulation, and this bypasses the spinal cord; it has been used to induce orgams in women who have spinal cord injuries. I am curious what you disagree with in Lou's video, and what you think she left out?

Have you ever had an orgasm

Wed, 04/13/2011 - 11:09

Have you ever had an orgasm through cervical stimulation, Lilith? If
so, what kind of stim, for how long, was the clitoris involved
simultaneously, and can you put into words what pattern of sensation the
orgasm followed? i.e. repetitive throbbing, slow ascent and holds with
no throbbing, etc.

I've seen sex science people claim orgasms
induced by cervical buffetting is the path to, quote, "vaginal orgasm." However,
most women can't endure the discomfort of cervical buffetting long
enough to see if it will make them orgasm. Others say they like the
pleasure/pain of it, but I've only met one, ever, who claims to be able
to orgasm from that stimulation alone, fast and hard pounding, and that
individual is a BDSM/Ds player experienced and favorable to pain during
sex. I hope to one day understand why certain sex scientists make claims that are to the complete opposite of what people like Betty and I see in the real world.

I'm always interested in new knowlege and ways for women to
have new and different orgasms, but I want to see a consistent path for
women, not vague instruction, misleading or incomplete instruction, and
isolated claims.

As to my info and disagreements with Ms. Paget, you'll have to wait for them in books or come see me as a client. I save my very best info for them.

Yes, I read How We Do it.

Wed, 04/13/2011 - 11:53

Yes, I read How We Do it. There are a couple good things in there and some things I disagree with. The author makes several statements that show her bias that science is the ultimate source to make your sex life and sexual skill set better. I do agree that there are lay people, like your friends or next door neighbors, and also sex teaching hucksters out there who are not sex science-based who give out poor quality information. However, in my over ten years in this community, I also see sex science put out everything from erroneous claims to ones I strongly disagree with. Most often, they put out interesting tidbits that may help your sex life or help humanity understand broad topics like rape fantasies among women or what have you, but not many earth-shattering ways to forward our understanding of human sexual pleasure and the spectrums that exist in its creation.

To this day, for example, there are to my knowledge a grand total of two classes for sex technique, basic and advanced levels, at the Institute Advanced Study of Human Sexuality's graduate degree program. Count 'em, two. I'll understate it and say plainly, there's more. A lot more than what two classes can teach. But hey, at least they have two classes on that topic. Every time I hear a psychology-based sex therapist question my or Betty's credibility I wonder, quietly or privately, (until now) where was the 101, 201, 301, and 401 classes in oral sex skills or intercourse skills in their sex therapy credentials' graduation requirements? When those classes are instituted at Harvard or NYU, I'll show up to class and get my Ph.D. Until then, I'm not handing over tens of thousands of dollars for the level of sexual pleasure education that is, in my view, currently available in the academic world. By the way, NYU did away with their human sexuality masters program.

I know what you're thinking, but no. There's more to bringing amazing sex into being than what Helen Singer Kaplan wrote her book on. (Betty did the illustrations for that book and had a hand in Helen's process, by the way. Betty! Blog on that inside scoop!)

When academia creates a source for that and a pre-req for graduation as a certified sex therapist, I'll then take them more seriously as the best source out there for your sex life beyond treatment for sex abuse, couples counceling and the like. I do understand that the culture is often not supportive of the levels of sexual sophistication that I advocate. It's hard to get oral sex 401 level classes in the syllabus. However, until then, consider the possibility that there are other sources out there besides sex scientists and therapists. Some bad, yes, and others very good at what they do. Sexual pleasure creation is very much an art that can draw off of science to explain why stuff happens.

So if all women need is a little hard and fast cervical pounding for them to have vaginal orgasms... why haven't I met them all in the real world and why do so many women complain about that whether they are aroused or not? Why am I not seeing this pattern in the women I've had sex with if the time comes to pound hard and fast into a cervix? More women should be coming from this according to sex science, with no additional clitoral stimulation, but they aren't. Hrm....

Hi Eric, No, I have never had

Wed, 04/13/2011 - 14:47
LilithLand (not verified)

Hi Eric,
No, I have never had an orgasm from just cervical stimulation. In fact, if I am not turned on enough, it is uncomfortable. I have also never had an orgasm from just vaginal stimulation. Most women need clitoral stimulation to come. I always emphasize that in all my posts. I definitely need it to come. What I have found arousing has been clitoral stimulation with a dildo or penis aimed at the upper vaginal wall concurrently. It is not a pounding, but short strokes or pressure. Then, the cervical stimulation is arousing but not orgasmic.

Komisaruk and Whipple claim that they were able to induce orgasm in women with spinal cord injuries with their little cervical stimulator. It sounded like it wasn't a pounding with them either; the device apparently sucked the cervix. Frankly, I am curious what that would have felt like. It could have been the uniqueness of the stimulation (definitely not typical intercourse) that got the women off. It might have stimulated the nerves in a way that is almost impossible to replicate through standard means. I would love to try it.

I think science has some very

Wed, 04/13/2011 - 15:14
LilithLand (not verified)

I think science has some very worthwhile contributions to the field of sex, after all Kinsey is one of the reasons why we are able to talk about sex so comfortabley. But science is very limited. As you mentioned, most scients don't do any kind of in-depth research on sexual skills. It fact, most of them would probably freak out at the very thought, or worry about being booted out of academia. Look at the uproar at Northwestern University.

Plus, science is so limited in terms of the questions that are asked about sex and other subjects. I can't tell you the times I have had a question about a certain topic and run a lit search in the academic databases - only to come up empty handed. So, much is not asked. We don't know very much about anything but heterosexual sex among the young (low hanging fruit for researchers). We don't know much at all about gays and lesbians, older people, or people who have great sex lives. Science sees through it's own biases. And the questions that are asked are subject to cultural blinders.

I liked Judy Dutton's book, but she grazed the surface of the field and came up with the idea that science could  give us all a great sex life. Great for marketing, but not really true. Most scientists still think all sex is heterosexual intercourse. At least that's what they yammer on about. Since, your interest is sexual skills, you are right to be learning in field rather that worrying about about school. However, my interest is research and writing about research. I do hope one day to get more of my questions answered.

Always more complicated than it really is.....

Wed, 04/13/2011 - 17:15
typhon (not verified)

Females are chasing orgasm because they're not emotionally fulfilled. Males ejaculate too quickly (or, on occasion, not at all) because they're disconnected from their bodies, let alone their emotions.

I didn't orgasm with a female (I'm male, did ya guess?) until I was in love. (This is *not* an advocation of straight, two-person relationships, mind. Do whatever you enjoy.)

The remedy I suggest: be dauntlessly emotionally curious and open. With yourself, and with, yet independently of, everyone. I guarantee that those who aren't of the same magnificence will just drop away/not bother. And you will be sensual.

Dauntlessly open is not

Thu, 04/14/2011 - 16:21

Dauntlessly open is not something I recommend. I believe in boundaries to keep the right people in our sex lives and the wrong to dangerous people out. I've run across people who are out to take advantage of women, and men, for everything they can get out of them from pleasure to finance. I like amazing sex, but I don't wear rose-colored glasses. The majority of people are not like this, but they are out there. Some enjoy manipulation or worse, and getting away with it, very much. Those people need sex therapists, without at doubt.

While I do understand certain people orgasm for the first time with a partner when they are in love, the majority orgasm for the first time when the right combination of whatever erotic feelings plus quality physical stimulation of the most likely body parts. A past lover of mine had her first orgasm with clitoral stimulation done by her partner when she was in love with him. So yes! That does happen for some.

Me too!

Thu, 04/14/2011 - 16:36

Thank you much for that feedback, Lilith. :) Is your upper wall action gspot or aspot?  I want that cervical sucker in a box and on my doorstep! I can imagine using a very thin slick tube so that intercourse is still possible, then combining the suction with the penis's/dildo's administrations and topping it off with clit stim. After that orgasm she can get driven up the wall with gspot, clit (or give her a rest), and her cervix sucked. The imagination reels! Going to get Betty to email Whipple and make this cervix sucker happen. I have a new mission it seems.... This device's stimulation capability is similar to vibrators in that it provides a unique, otherwise uncreatable pleasure.

One way that I will say, in how I disagree with Paget, is she presents the info in an oversimplified way. I've had, obviously, a lot of experience stimulating the zones she mentioned. Do my partners orgasm from them easily? No. I have my methods for making some of them work, but it was not simple to figure out. Anal orgasm, for example, triggered by intra-rectal stimulation(no clitoral/penis stim involved), does not happen with just anything or any method used. There's way more to it, which is why I asked why she didn't highlight how you could maybe come to her classes to learn the specifics.

It's a pattern I see in too many sexperts. They give you the super-basic bare bones that looks like they pulled it out of a Kinsey book and that's it... on things like anal orgasm that is advanced for most of us. Some people get lucky and can do some things easily. Their neurology is gifted that way. But then, those people go out and tell other people that it's easy as pie and it isnt. Kinsey was an amazing documenter and data gatherer, drawing conclusions based thereon. He had the balls to do something no one else ever had before in the west and he wasn't afraid of holding the hard facts up to the camera. He wasn't an innovator, in my view. He gathered info from the field. He didn't create a lot from scratch. The downside I've mentioned before in only observing what's out there is you could observe millions of people with average sex lives, set up normalcy standards, close the book and walk away having never asked if there's more to it than what is observed. And then, can you then find and create ways to guide the majority to much better sexual pleasure than average, thus raising the happiness bar. That's what in my view a sex life coach does.

Always fearful....

Thu, 04/14/2011 - 22:49
typhon (not verified)

It's like some Marine Corps mantra (semper fi - always faithful). You're not understanding my words, son.
 
I don't ever solicit others, and people don't even come up to me unless they have the right stuff. And two females semi-recently have not been afraid of the light, so apparently there is some fertility in the land.
 
Further, without a sense of energistic providence, you're just looking to make yourself (temporarily) feel good. Yeah, probly sounds like religion. But ain't.

Something more 'local'...

Fri, 04/15/2011 - 17:15
typhon (not verified)

I want to mention that while I have nothing against devices and all, I find little use for them.
 
I don't intentionally do four-play. I just am sensual, and love to touch and taste another person - generally for quite a long time before and after intercourse. My end: being emotionally (and energistically) open and sensual. Relishing. Their end: allowing themselves to be open, and to accept me. (They can later become more active.)
 
Last year, I connected (arguably, fell in love) with someone who, despite having had at least fifty or so partners, had never orgasmed with one. Before we were even naked, I kissed her so intensely, she came in her pants !  (Of course, her cheeks were streaked with tears. And I drank them...heheheh, okay, okay....)
 
Another example is one of the recent females who approched me. She didn't immediately open up, and I don't ever court, so I just gave her the space she needed until she was ready. When she was and I entered her, she was pretty naturally wet, and I hadn't even licked her down there.
 
Conclusion: each person has the opportunity to develop their own open-ness. Everyone else has the opportunity to experience it. Do your own 'work'. Let everyone else do theirs.

Hi Eric, Gee, I don't think I

Sun, 04/17/2011 - 22:00
LilithLand (not verified)

Hi Eric,
Gee, I don't think I know my G from my A lol
just know that it feels good to simulate the area (vague, undefined,
upper vaginal wall). I think your mission is a great one. Go get one of
those suckers! I am surprised that Komisaruk hasn't actually done anything to patent it already (at least not to my
knowledge). Sounds like the latest step in toy technology.

As for your beef with Paget I agree most sexperts vastly oversimplify female (and male) response. I also don't think that most of
the paint by numbers approaches to the female orgasm work at all. I
think a lot of that is just marketing. I like Betty's approach of having
a woman stimulate her clitoris. Most women are more orgasmic alone, and
partly because they have greater control over the stimulation. Some
women simply don't come that easily with anyone doing it (themselves
included).

I disagree with your assessment of Kinsey, his innovation
was more in the realm of idea. It takes a certain degree of creativity
to ask questions, particularly ones that haven't been asked before. But
of course, he wasn't a sex coach. Your field takes what is and
transforms it into what is possible
There is a field in psychology called "positive psychology" that looks
at the science of the optimum, instead of the fucked normal. Sounds like
that's what a sex coach does.

Typhon, While I do understand

Sun, 04/17/2011 - 22:10
LilithLand (not verified)

Typhon,
While I do understand and respect your wanting to focus on sex that is more relationship based, what you are referring to as foreplay is "sex" for women. Look around this site, most women do not climax from intercourse alone. Just kissing and sensual touching is not enough. As for devices not being important for you, for many men there not, for their own satisfaction. However, some women are not orgasmic without intense stimulation.

Positive psychology?

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 11:15

That's interesting. It's self actualization-minded? Yes, psychology
on the whole is about creating a goal of normalcy, which is similar to
medical doctors aims. Is this normal or pathology. Anything greater than
than is wellness or some other path's responsibility. I like the idea,
though. Yes, sex life coaching is like positive psychology in that way.
I'll look more into that and therapists who work from that perspective!

Isolating your G from your A is a very, very good idea. :)

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.