food for thought

[Resolute]

http://www.cosmopoli...vaginal-orgasm/

an excerpt:

You very rarely hear women say they can achieve orgasm just from penetration, but like the Loch Ness Monster, the legend sticks around just enough to make those who are more clitorally-oriented wonder if it's worth working towards. And men put a premium on it for a few obvious reasons: (A) Porn and ( B ) They want to feel like their penis is a sexual hot-rod that will make you speak in tongues and throw your vibrator in a volcano.

So how, if it's even possible for mere mortals, can we have a vaginal orgasm? Ian Kerner, the author of She Comes First: The Thinking Man's Guide To Pleasuring a Woman, says that if you interpret "vaginal orgasm" as achieving orgasm from penetration alone, it's pretty damn rare. "Vaginal orgasms don't happen without some kind of clit stimulation. They can be enhanced with the G-spot, which provides a different sensation, and clitoral orgasm during penetration can give you the feeling of vaginal orgasm."

So, are vaginal orgasms bullshit? "I don't want to say they're a myth, because some women do have them. But it's very rare to take a dildo or a vibrator and have an orgasm simply by thrusting."

i know many will argue that many women like the fullness etc,which is a valid point,but still....

Edited September 4, 2014 by resolute

[Jessie]

… in the uk this particular book was lauded by Catherine townsend…

..sigh… guess what she thinks about small penises….

ps in any the book was published before imaging techniques revealed that the clitoris surrounds the vagina- a thick penis directly stimulates the clitoris via pressure

[Resolute]

i don't know if you opened the link or not,but i didn't quote from a book,but from a short article,and notice this part:

So, are vaginal orgasms bullshit? "I don't want to say they're a myth, because some women do have them. But it's very rare to take a dildo or a vibrator and have an orgasm simply by thrusting."

You very rarely hear women say they can achieve orgasm just from penetration,....

Ian Kerner, the author of She Comes First: The Thinking Man's Guide To Pleasuring a Woman, says that if you interpret "vaginal orgasm" as achieving orgasm from penetration alone, it's pretty damn rare....

whether the above statements are accurate or not,either way,imaging techniques have no bearing on them.

Edited September 4, 2014 by resolute

[Jessie]

even ross and dobson admit you need a large penis to cause vaginal orgasms

surveys constantly report girth as popular due to the fulness sensation - not the same as an orgasm-but lasts longer and is physically and mentally powerful.

People often use the 'only x amount of women can orgasm vaginally' as if that logically means size doesnt matter but its a misconception as I have mentioned many times before.

Also there is also the social disgrace associated with a small penis and the sexiness/coolness associated with a big one.

[Resolute]

even ross and dobson admit you need a large penis to cause vaginal orgasms

surveys constantly report girth as popular due to the fulness sensation - not the same as an orgasm-but lasts longer and is physically and mentally powerful.

People often use the 'only x amount of women can orgasm vaginally' as if that logically means size doesnt matter but its a misconception as I have mentioned many times before.

Also there is also the social disgrace associated with a small penis and the sexiness/coolness associated with a big one.

ok,ok,i concede,but i have a question:

i know it's not an ideal scenario,but if a guy with a small penis pays a lot of attention to foreplay and clitoral stimulation (of course skillfully),is this guy also likely to lose his woman (cheating or breakup),or her being unhappy/unsatisfied with the overall sexual experience (not just penetration)?

[Jessie]

From what I can gather the overall sexual experience is poor with a small one.

They miss the feeling of an average/large one so much it makes them unsatisfied and frustrated…

I like to think I was a nice partner, with a good SOH and tried to very hard to be skilfull…. 100% of them left me…

But I'm not basing this on whats happened to me- but on what I am have heard and read consistently.

[Resolute]

From what I can gather the overall sexual experience is poor with a small one.

They miss the feeling of an average/large one so much it makes them unsatisfied and frustrated…

I like to think I was a nice partner, with a good SOH and tried to very hard to be skilfull…. 100% of them left me…

But I'm not basing this on whats happened to me- but on what I am have heard and read consistently.

for what it's worth,i think it's their loss.

[Jessie]

well its nice of you to say so Resolute…

But 2 are now married with kids and I daresay all 5 of them are with people who now satisfy them and make them happy….

or at least happier than I ever made them…

[Resolute]

well its nice of you to say so Resolute…

But 2 are now married with kids and I daresay all 5 of them are with people who now satisfy them and make them happy….

or at least happier than I ever made them…

only time will tell.

[Jessie]

nice little routine by an asian comedienne on uks apollo live about girls using their little finger to suggest ugly guys have little willies….

… always refreshing…

[Resolute]

even ross and dobson admit you need a large penis to cause vaginal orgasms

surveys constantly report girth as popular due to the fulness sensation - not the same as an orgasm-but lasts longer and is physically and mentally powerful.

I don't agree with this. I would say an average sized penis could bring some women to a vaginal orgasm.

i don't completely agree with either of you.

i say it depends on the vagina in question;sure most vaginas are big (specially nowadays),but that doesn't mean they all are.

i've seen some tiny vaginas literally being stretched by small penises,which means fullness and friction.

of course i don't know how many of those women (with small vaginas) there are,but i know they're out there;i even specifically remember one of the members who hasn't been on here for a while,saying just that -from his personal experience- almost explicitly.

Also there is also the social disgrace associated with a small penis and the sexiness/coolness associated with a big one.

there are also people who make fun of short guys,and it's surely much sexier and cooler being tall.

[Resolute]

nice little routine by an asian comedienne on uks apollo live about girls using their little finger to suggest ugly guys have little willies….

… always refreshing…

what do you make of those dr. evil gestures?

[Jessie]

haha- yes that hadnt occurred to me… but now you mention it!!

[Resolute]

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=-DJtHL3NV1o

("...8 Inches? Shouldn't we ask for more than that? 8 inches isn't a lot these days...")

of course,with inflation and all,an inch isn't what it used to be .

[dvnJ22]

I don't get the point of this. Women still don't like small dicks regardless.

[dvnJ22]

i've seen some tiny vaginas literally being stretched by small penises,which means fullness and friction.

Lol where did you see that?

[Resolute]

Lol where did you see that?

where do you think?

[gone]

The thing about "inch inflation" was really just kidding. But I think there is a serious aspect too: I'm pretty sure that 100 years ago it was much less common to find men worrying about penis size! There were, presumably, people with micro penis syndrome back then (assuming it isn't caused by pollution in the modern world, or something?) and that would always have been a problem. But as regards men who are just a little on the minus side of average (i.e. typical cases of SPS) I honestly doubt whether many guys in the past would even have given it any thought at all?

Before the widespread availability of porn, most straight men probably didn't ever get to see other mens' penises while erect. And many (or even almost all) women prior to the 1950s would only ever have had one partner - their husband. If so, both men and women wouldn't have had much basis for comparison.

The modern world is - in many ways - a more dysfunctional and unhappy place, I guess.

I've often thought that this "new sexual revolution" (that, unfortunately my generation brought you) was a mistake and actually demeaned this ultimate act of intimacy. Many folks in grandmas and grandpas generation were married 50, 60 years. They LOVED each other, big penis or small penis. Big breasts or small breasts. Being devoted to each other was what was important, not counting the inches or counting the orgasms.

Honestly, has anything got better because of it? My generation is the ME ME ME generation. Selfish. What's happened? Lots of kids raise themselves today. If a couple bothers getting married at all, over half of marriages end in divorce.

RogerJ used a great word...dysfunctional. Courtesy of todays 'new enlightenment'.

[gone]

There is no intimacy in most modern relationships. It's " what material possessions can he offer me?" versus " how much, and what type of sexual services will she offer me?". Young women, many of them are turning into whores trading their body for money and other status based things to show off to their girlfriends. I'm not talking about escorts or prostitutes here, I'm talking about the majority of average women who may be offended if you were to call them a prostitute yet their intentions are just the same just the difference is you pay a prostitute for their time and then leave. With a lot of modern women you're stuck with the moaning and spoilt attitude. So is the sex worth it? No it isn't.

Yeah, but skynight I won't let the young men off the hook either. It's bragging rights. How many sexual notches can they get in their belts or headboards.

There's no loyalty. At the first sign of trouble in their lives or marriages they "go out to buy a pack of cigarettes" bolt and run. Presto! Another single mom on welfare and kids with no father figure in their lives.

[Resolute]

I think you're right - there is a whole high-profit industry built around these breast enlargement ops, and there is indeed something pretty troubling about it.

I heard the other day that some young women today are saving practically every spare bit of cash they have for years on end to have this trash done! And what exactly are they doing? Subjecting themselves to the (never trivial) danger of surgery and general anaesthetic in order to have bits of (quite possibly dangerous) artificial material inserted into their bodies, which don't look or feel real, and which only last about a decade before needing replacement and new surgery!

Even as recently as 3 or 4 decades ago most women would have considered this behaviour - quite literally - insane, IMO.

As a man I just don't get it: the idea that a woman is suddenly going to become more elegant or attractive (or even feminine) by having larger breasts is totally bizarre to my mind. I guess there are some men who have a fetish for exceptionally large breasts? And I guess quite a lot of men would be slightly turned off by dead flat/non-existent breasts. But within reason, the size of a woman's breasts is surely 99.9% irrelevant to most men?

i really wouldn't go as far as to say that 99.9% of breasts,or breast sizes,don't matter to most men;surely,they do matter to most men to some degree.

now i don't wanna get in a "breast size" discussion,but i will say this,99% of fake tits suck;they're simply not well done;their shape,perkiness,etc....

in 99% of cases,i'd choose the chick with small but natural breasts over the one with larger but fake ones.

and that's not even considering the costs,health risks,time,energy,etc of any surgery.so it's really unwise,i think,in most cases.

[Resolute]

its not off topic- I too would like to see these mythical scenes where women are stretched by small penises… alongside levitation clips and perpetual motion machines in action….

sorry- i got my threads confused…. but no adult women had her vagina stretched by a small penis…. sorry… its a contraction in terms…

if it wasn't unethical,i'd tell you where in porn i saw these.

but believe me,they were certainly adult and attractive.

[Resolute]

Because they were only with the woman to satisfy their sexual urges. They never wanted children. Call me old fashioned, but what is the point of getting together if there's no intent to build a family? Instead of this silly romance and lust that's promoted, if people actually got together with the intent of wanting to build a family first and foremost and left the lust and materialism and greed behind, maybe they'd be less fatherless households?

These women who claim they have no intent to have a family until they hit 30. Well why the heck do they have a boyfriend then? Stay single until you're 30 and then have a family, but they instead don't do that. And many of them fall pregnant and don't really want the child.

sorry skynight,maybe i misunderstood some of your previous posts,but wasn't your position on monogamy a negative one?

[Resolute]

No, my position on it is this. I think as humans we are polygamous. The problem is not so much about having multiple sex partners, but the intent behind it. If a man and woman have a child, they should stick together to raise that child. But once the child is off a older age, if both feel it's best to move on then that's not a problem. But many men/women now, are just having sex and not thinking about the consequences. This has happened always, but more so now that sex is viewed first and foremost as just pleasure.

i see.

my position,as most may already know by now,is that the couple stay together until death,or divorce if necessary,whether they have kids or not.and of course in the event of divorce,they still must have a role in raising and/or providing for- the child/children.

but i will say this,instead of:"I think as humans we are polygamous",i'd say: I think as men we are polygamous.

[gone]

No, my position on it is this. I think as humans we are polygamous. The problem is not so much about having multiple sex partners, but the intent behind it. If a man and woman have a child, they should stick together to raise that child. But once the child is off a older age, if both feel it's best to move on then that's not a problem. But many men/women now, are just having sex and not thinking about the consequences. This has happened always, but more so now that sex is viewed first and foremost as just pleasure.

Agree 100%

[gone]

Because they were only with the woman to satisfy their sexual urges. They never wanted children. Call me old fashioned, but what is the point of getting together if there's no intent to build a family? Instead of this silly romance and lust that's promoted, if people actually got together with the intent of wanting to build a family first and foremost and left the lust and materialism and greed behind, maybe they'd be less fatherless households?

We agree 100%

These women who claim they have no intent to have a family until they hit 30. Well why the heck do they have a boyfriend then? Stay single until you're 30 and then have a family, but they instead don't do that. And many of them fall pregnant and don't really want the child.

The exact same thing could be said about the guy. Stay out of bedrooms until you find the woman you love. Quit trying to see how many beds you can hop in and out of. If you're not willing to strap on a condom and at least try to be responsible, keep the damn thing in your pants.

If you do father a child, MAN UP. Quit making excuses about how you're too immature and not ready to be a dad. You weren't too immature to have sex with that girl, were you? Did she force you into bed? Did she rape you? No?

Just be a man.....