Maybe someday female ejaculation will be a science, or maybe it will always remain somewhat mystical.
Maybe it’s an art.
Flood of Information
Maybe someday, enough educated explorers will perform sufficient sexological studies on a great enough volume of valiant volunteers so as to enable humanity to thoroughly understand this fascinating phenomenon.
But for now, the scientific facts about squirting are still (surprisingly, for this supposedly over-exposed age of information) quite vague. 10 to 40 percent of women ejaculate. Fluid volume ranges from two to 150 milliliters. Squirting is an involuntary emission of sex-specific bladder-originating fluids and / or a prostate-specific androgen secretion from the Skene glands.
In other words, at this point in time, the science behind squirting reads somewhat like this: ???!!
Gushing About Her Experiences
Much of the so-called ‘evidence’ about squirting is still anecdotal and, as such, possibly only indicative of the experiences of one or a few women. Here are a few interesting-yet-still-anecdotal details from women that I have interviewed about their particular adventures on Planet Squirt. These may / may not only represent the viewpoint of one / a minority / most of the fortunate adventurers.
Anecdotal Info to Soak Up
- For some women, squirting is synonymous with climax. When she cums, she ejaculates.
- For some women, squirting is a separate circumstance that may or may not occur in conjunction with orgasm. She squirts, then later she cums.
- For some women, squirting is an integral part of any sex. When she has sex, she invariably makes a hot mess.
- For some women, squirting is a special occasion that only occurs in very intense sexual situations or with a very specific set of sexual criteria. She only squirts occasionally.
- For some women, squirting involves a high volume of ammonia.
- For some women, squirting involves low levels of ammonia or no ammonia at all.
- For some women, squirting can result from any form of sexual stimulation including oral sex, external clitoral stimulation, penile-vaginal intercourse, and other forms of penetration. Arousal = ejaculation.
- For some women, squirting only results from a specific (and often ‘come hither’-motion-related) form of sexual stimulation. When she is fingered in a certain way at a certain speed, she squirts.
- For some women, squirting can only take place when the object of penetration (finger, penis, dildo) is removed at the moment of ejaculation. “Take it out now!”
- For some women, squirting can only take place when the stimulation is continued up to and past the point of ejaculation. “Don’t stop!”
For Those of You Who Didn’t Drown in the Above Deluge of TMI and Are Still with Me
So maybe someday intricate studies of vast quantities of actual human beings will prove, disprove, or partially prove many of the above suppositions, and we’ll finally nail down the science of squirting like we have the science of the Human Sexual Response cycle or the science of Serotonin Levels in Bisexual Mice.
But maybe some things are better when they’re still a bit mystical.
And you – how do you squirt?
or A Scientific Discussion of Promiscuity
What if women were objectively more sexually complex than men?
Although the ‘men are more visual than women’ theory is currently under heated debate, one recent study showed that, while men and women found certain visual stimuli equally arousing, men experienced higher levels of activity in the amygdala – the section of the brain that controls motivation. In other words, when we see a naked woman, we men are more mentally, cavemanically compelled to do something about it.
What is objectively provable is that women’s sexual organs are generally smaller and more concealed than men’s. And with all this tiny internal nanotechnology, as well as a more complex cognitive response to sexually-stimulating situations, it may be safe to say that women are objectively more sexually complex than men.
What if more complex activities required more hours of practice to master than simpler ones?
It’s easier to master building blocks or Legos than chess or Risk. Simpler sports like hopscotch or jumprope have a shorter learning curve than more complex sports like football, cricket, or war with other countries.
Some human behavioral experts cite a figure of 10,000 hours that it takes to master cognitively-demanding fields. Whatever the number, it seems like the more complex the task, the longer time and greater involvement it takes to excel in that task.
What if these two complementary factors required men to be the more promiscuous gender?
If you’ve sucked one dick, you’ve sucked them all (they say?), but every clitoris is different.
Maybe because more complex pursuits take more practice and because women are more sexually complex, men have to spend more hours practicing in order to be sexually competent with women than women have to with men.
Maybe this has been the underlying reason all along why men have been historically more promiscuous than women.
Maybe it’s for their own good.
or The Sexual She-Beast vs. the Average Male
or Are Men Just Nastier Than Women?
I want answers.
The modern woman insists that she is a sexual beast. She insists that, contrary to what man has believed for so long, her sexuality and hunger rivals that of the male. That if only you knew the filthy, salacious things going through her mind, which she represses due to the role in which society tries to pigeonhole her, you would be shocked to find that she matches you in raw sexuality pound for pound.
She is, in other words, just as nasty as any man.
I want to believe that’s true.
I, however, am way too familiar with male sexuality.
While women’s fantasies may be wild, strange creatures (as reading any Nancy Friday book will tell you), men’s fantasies seem to have an element of nasty in them that, in a fair fight, would kick women’s fantasies in the crotch and hold her face in the mud. An inter-gender skirmish in the nasty arena would seem to be somewhat of a mismatch.
He is, in other words, the king of nasty. Or at least he seems to be.
Maybe men’s sexuality is really just nastier than women’s. Or maybe I’m looking at it all wrong and there are reasonable explanations that have nothing to do with inherent, gender-specific sexual tastes. I’ve compiled a list of men’s nastiest fantasies – the kind that few women would touch with a ten-foot pole (or at least admit to touching). I’ve tried to put them into some categories involving possible ‘non-nasty’ explanations, but there are a still a few that I can’t explain beyond saying that men are just nastier than women. That’s where I need your help.
I am not a PUA or a feminist, I’m just a human person, a student of sexuality, politically incorrect, searching for truths about people and their sex. If you don’t like something here, tell me, and tell me why. Or if you can explain something better than my clumsy attempts, I will love you for it.
Here is my list of fantasies that men have and women decidedly don’t.
Gloryholes – Where he finds a magical hole in a public bathroom or other foreign place, inserts his cock, and something on the other side sucks the life out of it.
This one seems to be anatomical: we have a sexual organ that we can insert into a hole. Still, with the right kind of hole or covering, a woman could presumably be penetrated, licked, or stimulated by something she couldn’t see. Are there no gloryholes for women because it would be awkward and clumsy, or because the thought of being stimulated by an unknown thing doesn’t turn her on? Is this fantasy the sole property of man-kind due to purely anatomical reasons, or is it because it’s just nasty?
Dildos – Where he watches her get herself off with phallic objects that may include monstrous sex toys, shower heads, fruits and vegetables, tiny vibrators, or other unrelated technology.
Although this one could be anatomical (we can picture inserting ourselves into her in the dildo’s stead), a reverse fantasy IS anatomically possible. Why aren’t more women turned on by the thought of men inserting themselves into things (fleshlights, couch cushions, pies)?
Gagging – Where she stuffs his cock down her throat and gags on it, the fantasy being the act of gagging itself.
Anatomically speaking, we do have an organ we can stuff down her throat. But there are ways women could cause us oral discomfort with their sexual organs too. We could suffocate on her pussy or choke on her breasts. Is gagging a man’s fantasy because it’s just so nasty?
Cumming All over Something – Where he ejaculates on a certain place, her face, boobs, ass, stomach, in her mouth, or even in a cup and she drinks it.
Yes, we are the gender that generally expels bodily fluids during sex. But many women also ejaculate, and do they fantasize about squirting all over a certain place on a man’s body? How come there is so little talk about squirting on his biceps or his chest and so few female fantasies involving, “Honey, get down on your knees, I’m about to cum and I wanna squirt all over your face”? How come we so rarely hear, “I’m so wet right now, and I want you to put your face down in there and drink it”? Too nasty?
TRADITIONAL, CULTURALLY-INDUCED POWER ROLES
Slapping – Where he is turned on by slapping her ass, her face, her boobs, slapping his cock on her, or one woman slapping another woman’s body.
This one seems to be due to men’s centuries of immersion in patriarchal societies, with slapping representing his power over her. As women begin to take the power back, will we see more women sexually fantasize about slapping at his chest, slapping her boobs on his face, or about one man slapping another man’s ass? Or is this one just too nasty?
Teens – Where is she barely of age.
Although this one could be a fantasy that emphasizes men’s power over women, I’m not sure that fucking barely-legal teenage girls is strictly a power fantasy. Do powerful or power-hungry women fantasize about having that barely-18-year old cock? Or is this just another nasty thing that men do and women rarely do?
Politically-Incorrect Dirty Talk – Where he calls her derogatory things like a dirty little whore or a filthy slut or his bitch.
Maybe there just aren’t male-appropriate sexually-derogatory terms. Or maybe it’s just another nasty, male-only fantasy.
Bukkake – Where a group of men stand over a woman and cover her with their cum.
The monarch of nasty fantasies, there is a definite power angle to bukkake fantasies, and it can also be explained by anatomical reasons. Is there a woman alive who fantasizes about getting together with a group of women, subduing a man, and then standing in a circle around him and masturbating?
INTRINSIC BEAUTY OF THE FEMALE BODY
Is a woman’s body just intrinsically, objectively more beautiful than a man’s, and does that (indisputable, self-evident?) fact explain away a lot of nasty things that we want to do to them and they don’t want to do to us? Do we want to cum on them because they’re so beautiful and they don’t specifically want to cum on us because we are intrinsically less so? Do we want to slap them and objectify them because their curves are so beautiful and they don’t objectify us because our lines are not?
Panties – Where he fantasizes about her panties, smelling them, leaving them on during the sex act, keeping them afterward.
As beautiful extensions of a woman’s beautiful body, her panties and the fantasies involving them make prime candidates in the argument for the aesthetic attractiveness of the female form. Do women not fantasize about smelling/keeping our boxers/briefs because our bodies, and thus by extension our lingerie, are less universally aesthetically pleasing? Or is it just because men are so nasty and women aren’t as much?
Hentai – Where a cartoon depicts sexually-explicit acts.
Maybe it’s because her body is so universally attractive that she is sexually arousing even in cartoon form. Do women not fantasize about being ravished by cartoon men because even the best male forms are less intrinsically beautiful? Or is cartoon pussy just another example of men’s intrinsic sexual nastiness?
Shemales – Where he fantasizes about a beautiful woman with curves and boobs… and a dick.
I imagine that the female form is so beautiful that even if you love cock, it is possible to still want it served on a woman’s body. Is this the reason that he-women are not a thing, and that you don’t see women fantasizing about strong, muscular men… with vaginas? Or are chicks with dicks just another example of men of any sexual orientation being straight-up nasty?
Here are the man-fantasies that I could find no reasonable alternate explanation for other than sheer nastiness.
Feet – Where he licks her feet or she cups her feet around his cock and jerks it off.
Out of all the women I interviewed for this article, very few of them were turned on by any of the above fantasies. Only one or two of them thought they could possibly be aroused by a woman’s equivalent of a gloryhole, a man with a fleshlight, a man suffocating on her pussy or drinking her, by slapping a man or keeping his boxers, by a barely-legal or virgin man, or by a shemale (and these things had never occurred to them before as viable fantasies).
Not a single woman I talked to could ever fathom the thought of fantasizing about putting a man’s toes into her pussy or getting off with a man’s feet.
Feet fetishes seem to be strictly male fare, even though it is anatomically possible for both sexes, it doesn’t seem to be power-related, and let’s face it, feet are not universally considered to be intrinsically beautiful. Is this definitive proof of male superiority in the sexual nastiness arena? What else could possibly explain this nasty, nasty fetish?
Sloppy Sex – Where the juices flow freely, usually referring to blowjobs.
If you’re a woman thinking, “But I like wet cunnilingus,” in a man’s mind, this fantasy involves strings of saliva like spaghetti, gushing liquid all over her face and his cock, and a massive juicy mess. Do men like their sex sloppier because they’re nastier? Or do women also like it with buckets and buckets of spit?
Compilations – Where we watch videos of compilations of various sexual acts performed by various individuals in rapid succession, usually referring to male cumshots or female orgasms (cumpilations).
Men are more visual, and men generally prefer multiple sexual partners, and men are more goal-oriented. Are those the reasons why we don’t see women porning out on compilations of men licking women or masturbating or orgasming? Or is it because it’s actually kind of nasty?
Mother/Daughter – Where he has the milf and her daughter at the same time or in succession, possibly with the mother teaching her daughter.
A woman could presumably have a father and his son at the same time, or attractive twin guys, or just brothers together, but very few (possibly none?) do. The relative fantasy seems to be relatively male territory. Just nasty? Or can you think of a different reason?
or The Turning of the Tables
Women are supposed to be complicated sexual creatures. It’s their thing. They are supposed to need just the right magical amount of gentling or roughing or foreplay or fucking or imaginative, consistent, circular, clockwise voodoo to able to get off.
Men are supposed to be pretty straightforward. It’s our thing. A few well-placed curves, an intense look, and a good, solid rhythm should be all it takes to drive us crazy.
But what happens when you’ve used all the time-honored tricks in your bag and nothing seems to be working for him? What happens when he doesn’t cum?
I’m not talking about erectile dysfunction here, and I’m also not talking about weird domination or tantric fetishes (which can be fun/fine if they’re discussed beforehand but should definitely not be used to blindside a partner). I’m talking about when everything seems to be working right, but you just can’t seem to push him those few extra couple of inches over the edge.
What should you do? How should you feel?
Although there are probably more delicate nuances to this issue than I can fit in one screenful, I will address a couple of the most common reasons that have come to my attention.
Cumming, for a guy, has a lot more consequences than for a girl. Although his orgasm may usually be simpler to achieve, it also has a lot more bearing on the length, quality, and sometimes the long-term consequences of the sexual encounter. It’s a timing thing that is sometimes hard for women to understand.
He can’t cum too soon before she’s ready because then there will be hell to pay and he’ll get low marks. But he also can’t cum too late after she’s spent because then she gets sore, she gets tired, bored, or frustrated, and again, low marks.
There’s actually only a small window of time where it’s appropriate for a man to cum in any sexual encounter. It has to be after she’s fully satisfied, but not too long after.
In order to do this correctly, we have to arrive to have sex with you with our sex drives ‘calibrated’ exactly right – not having cum so far in the past that we’re too eager, and also not having cum too recently that it will take us too long. It’s like an advanced science that involves knowing our own body thoroughly, and also being able to correctly calculate the unknown factor – the ‘X’ – of the girl and of your chemistry together.
When a guy first starts hooking up with a new girl, he’s not fully used to her yet. The X can be harder to calculate correctly, and that can make it harder for him to calibrate himself correctly. Since, of course, it’s WAY better to cum too late than to cum too soon, he often overcompensates in that direction.
And then he gets there, gets his erection, plateaus, and focuses perfectly to turn himself off just enough so that he doesn’t cum (baseball, algebra). He pounds away at you for a bit, you’re going crazy, and everything’s going great. But then he discovers that he overcompensated this time, that ‘it’ is probably not going to happen without an excessive amount of sweat and tears all around, and that he’s just going to have to take the hit in order to make this a great sexual encounter for almost everyone involved. (You’ve probably done exactly that a few times yourself haven’t you?)
After a few good, solid sexual encounters with you, he figures out how to better synchronize his thing, the first few times when he didn’t cum become just a distant memory, and you and he make magic together.
The other reason is that maybe he just watches too much porn which = real life sex not doing it for him as much.
The point is, if you’ve tried your formidable best but he just can’t or won’t cum for his own (weird, psychotic) reasons, don’t let it be a dealbreaker for you. As long as you’re enjoying yourself and willing to help him enjoy himself as much as possible, let him figure his shit out, and don’t worry too much about it. That’s not to say you shouldn’t try and try hard to make your man cum, but in the end, if he’s not gonna, don’t let it bother you as long as YOU’RE having fun.
or Why You Should Be A Dick to People You Sleep With
As much as I would like to pretend to be a wise sage who has many of the answers (like the rest of you sex columnists undoubtedly are), what actually inspires me to write is real life, things that have happened, are happening, or happen regularly to me.
Fortunately, my life is a cherry on top of a huge slice of cake, at least in my imagination, and I can usually be upbeat and mystical, smile knowingly and joke inside-ly. Unfortunately, real life is not always as cookies and cream as the ‘sex’ in ‘sex column.’ Sometimes you will just have to put up with the other part, the part where I’m curious how it’s done instead of explaining how it’s done.
Anyway, answers are overrated. A wise man once said that an answer is always a form of death.
Here’s one that I haven’t quite figured out yet how best to handle, but that seems to happen to me… let’s just say quite goddamn frequently. 🙂
That is that awkward moment when you’re fucking one of your friends and then they stop talking to you apparently for no reason, and you later find out that they got into a serious relationship of some kind and decided that your friendship had to stop along with the sex in order to allow them to invest in said relationship. Like an innocent baby spiraling down the drain together with the rest of the bubble bath.
Gotye might be well-advised to look into this with a few somebodies that he may or may not have formerly been intimately acquainted with. I have found that this is most often the case when somebody that you used to fuck changes their number and sends their friends along to pick up their records. What happened is that now they are getting serious about somebody else and not only can they now no longer fuck you but they can no longer be friends with you, and not only that, but they can’t even tell you about it.
If this just happened once or twice, I might be able to write it off as a ‘neighbor’ or ‘weigh’ fluke in an otherwise ‘i before e’ life. But, no, it seems to function as the rule rather than the exception, and I don’t like it one bit. Is eventually losing a dear friend a bargain price to pay for the privilege of knowing her completely, inside and out, or is the disappointment not worth the mindblowing friend sex that precludes it? Is it better to just have your friends close and your enemies closer but keep the people you are fucking at arm’s length? -Then at least when they eventually cut you out it won’t matter as much to you.
I like to think that it is possible to extract the friendship pill from the sex sugarcoating and still have the one without the other if that is made necessary by a third party’s obsolescent monogamous green eye. Or maybe it’s more like trying to separate the yolk from the white after you’ve already cooked your omelette.
I understand that I am so irresistible that, to paraphrase another wise man, ‘to see me is to fuck me,’ and jealous would-be husbands can have none of that in the fledgling period of their droll lifelong conquests. The danger is simply too great! But it can’t be that because women supposedly, although I can’t imagine how, think with their heads.
So this is the flaw in my great scheme of being nice to the people I have sex with. -That there is always the risk of them not being nice back. Maybe it’s an acceptable risk, par for the course, probability and contingency. Sometimes you kill Bin Laden, and sometimes there are no WMDs in Iraq.
A wise man once said that it’s better to have fucked and lost than never to have fucked at all.