Talk:Orgasm

Editorial Requests

{{editsemiprotected}} Please start a section (or combine it with the "Orgasm and Health" subsection) about the negative health effects of orgasm/orgasm stress/excessive orgasm/orgasm addiction, etc. E.g. http://www.reuniting.info/science and http://www.actionlove.com/extra/over.htm

It may also be appropriate to add a section about other non-orgasmal approaches to sex such as Karezza in the "In Tantric Sex" section, or merge them in a "Non-orgasmal Sex" section. --124uJkat9 14:05, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 Not done:First of all, welcome to Wikipedia! Edit requests should be used to propose simple changes. You should perhaps edit the article yourself to do what you're asking. You will be able to do that 4 days after your registration, assuming you will have made 10 edits by then. You need 4 more edits:Special:Contributions/Banjer12. But, please make sure that the sources comply with Wikipedia policies on that matter. --JokerXtreme (talk) 14:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I think there are some very roundabout formulations in this article which could benefit from clarification. Often, just cutting up an overlong sentence (of which there are many) into two or three will do the job. One formulation I find unlcear, for instance, is this (in referencing Morris' theory): "If males were motivated by, and taken to the point of, orgasm in the same way as females, those advantageous qualities would not be needed, since self-interest would be enough." I don't see how the self-interest is any different in either case (for men), nor therefore why it should have any effect on the advantageous qualities.Tue Sorensen (talk) 03:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

prolactine, ~depressed mood, ~irritation

In the preface you can read following: "Prolactin is a typical neuroendocrine response in depressed mood and irritation." This is wrong sentence, prolactine indeed has some inhibitory effects on sexual drive, but it is not associated with depressed mood. Drugs such as SSRI which cause higher prolactine release do not bring about depression! Moreover, mild depression seems to increase sexual drive. It seems like only severe depression can cause impotence, but that is not the specific effect in depreesion, it seems rather that all nervous system functions deteriorate in depression. I would also be very careful with the word "irritation" as irritation is rather psychological fenomenon, an emotional thing that occurs as a part of cognitive processes. Article needs correction!!

The article needs visuals

The lede image is artistic, and very nice, but does not seem to represent the topic very well. We need images to supplement the article. An image in the men's section, the women's section and the lede would be ideal. A video of a woman going through this process would be fantastic.

I saw a few images in the [commons], but none that grabbed me. Does anyone else have any ideas or thoughts about this?

Involuntary stimulation

"Involuntary orgasms can happen regardless of gender." Shouldn't gender be replaced with sex? Physiological response to a situation seems to be governed more by physical sex than gender identity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.122.65 (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Dubious

Please add tag/template after "Masters and Johnson were the first to study the sexual response cycle", the first line of "Medical aspects of orgasm/Physiological responses/Orgasm phases and cycles". Wilhelm Reich described the cycle in Die Funktion des Orgasmus: Zur Psychopathologie und zur Soziologie des Geschlechtslebens, published 1927. English version: The Function of the Orgasm, translated by Theodore P. Wolfe, 1942. --124uJkat9 13:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done --JokerXtreme (talk) 13:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I took out dubious tag and reworded the sentence. I think, indeed, Master and Johnsons were pioneers in their field. Whomever wrote the entry did not quote, they gave their opinion that M&J were the first, when in fact they were one of the first to research in depth. Merely removing the inaccurate claim that they were the first is sufficient. Atom (talk) 13:58, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

extremely offensive and opressive

Could you please remove the filthy painting of the woman on the back of a the crazy horse. It is a common delusion men have that has become topics for radio talks shows that woman and little girls love horses so much because they are sexually arrousing. This is extremely offensive and degrading towards women. It is actually possible for women to enjoy doing things that don't center around men. Men however, those who believe this delusion, don't want this to be so. They need to control women and have fabricated this delusion to further put women in their place and make them understnad they cannot exist without a man between their legs. I do not think women today should be showing young girls that this is acceptable by displaying willingly a painting encompasing this entire form of subjegation. Because riding and training horses is so difficult and women can do it just as good as men with no handicapping this threatens men and this painting you are showing represents the threat these type of men feel from women and how they need to overpower and control them. Orgasms and horses have nothing to do with each other and if a woman put this picture on here she should be ashamed of herself for simply allowing men to demean and control her. And please keep in mind if you are one of those men who needs to believe everything women sit on arrouses us little girls are the ones who ride horses the most. Go to any barn and you will find most of the leasons being given are to girls between five and fifteen years old. How disgusting are you to be thinking such things! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miafina (talk • contribs) 22:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Please get off your moral high horse (no pun intended). It's just a painting, nothing to cry over. Fabray23 (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Why would people be talking about bringing jellyfish to orgasm? Werthstar12 (talk) 17:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Cry? This one word alone tells me all I need to know about you. You are a male who believes women cannot have opinions that actually matter because we are too sensitive to see reason. This is what male chauvinism is and you are definitely one. With the idiot joke I can tell how immature you are. While you could be any physical age your psychological age is around seventeen. And you know nothing at all about art. Paintings are never just paintings. They are "Windows into the artists souls." Michelangelo was gay. This is clear in all his work where the women's bodies look just like the men's with large well defined muscles and almost no breasts but at the same time he painted men and women equally showing he had respect for both sexes. This painting shows the artist's complete lack of respect for women. It is not gracious. It is offensive. What is also important to remember in art is presentation. This painting is in an article about orgasms which apparently only women can have? That is what this painting says. If this painting had a partner painting of a man going up the hind end of a sheep then it would not be so offensive since it is no longer centering all focus of this article on objectifying women. And why aren't there any paintings of men having sex with anything at all? Are you telling me no artist ever has painted a picture of a man having sex? I am sure you can find something male? Why this painting? It was picked for a reason and that reason is what offends women and since it doesn't represent anything in this article there is no reason to keep it other than arrogance and pride. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miafina (talk • contribs) 10:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Miafina, I am female and do not fully understand your hostility towards the painting (even after reading your above comments). Or your removal of horse riding from the Hymen article (which I reverted). But if no one objects to your removal of the painting, I do not see why it should not stay removed; it is not exactly adding much to this article. Flyer22 (talk) 16:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I sort of do. For perhaps obvious reasons, there are no pictures here. The painting is called "The Frenzy of Ecstasy" or something of that nature, and at least to me appears to be an attempt at a visual representation of an orgasm. The issue briefly came up at Talk:Orgasm/Archive 14 but there aren't a lot of good ways to depict an orgasm. At he very least this is far more appropriate and just plain classier than all the various bondage and ejaculation images commons has. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Good points. Flyer22 (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Miafina, No Personal Atacks Wikipedia is not censored