She's 22, with a four year old kid, and she's spending a couple of thousand dollars on unproven surgery to make her more orgasmic? The class/financial issues in that are really peculiar -- the combination of having a kid at 18, and having enough money to spend on something like that is unusual, isn't it?
The other thing is that she's apparently given up on the idea that sex with her husband is going to get any better without medical assistance. At 22, that seems like premature despair.
Does the article mentioned her financial situation?
I'm guessing that we wouldn't give her a hard time for electing to buy one car that costs $2,000.00 more than another car. What is the yearly cost for cable or a cell phone?
Leaving aside the unproven aspect of the surgery, how much are good orgasms worth?
I realize she's taking action, agency and all, but my first thought is "What's with this relationship?" Wouldn't you expect people to deal with this by doing something else, where the G-spot wasn't an issue?
and pwned by LB's 2
It sounded to me a bit like she holds the orgasm as the be-all and end-all of sex. Finally, I'm done in three minutes, she says. Not enough time for all that....foreplay.
And hey, if the surgery makes her happy and she has money to blow, whatever, but I hope she and her husband manage to slow down and enjoy more than just the finish.
I'm making guesses about her finances (probably wrong ones, but that's what I'm basing them on) based on her age and the age of her kid. I don't know anyone who had a kid at 18 who has a couple of thousand dollars to throw around casually by the time she's 22.
And you'd think maybe buying herself a high-end vibrator would be a step to take before having someone stick needles in her foldy bits. The story just seems odd.
She said that they had tried other things. ("The failed attempts at satisfactory sex with her husband had diminished her sex drive overall, she said, and had triggered a deeper tension in the relationship.")
I'm guessing it is easy to say, slow down and enjoy it when you have orgasms. But, I'm willing to bet that being unable to orgasm any more is a serious downer.
Personally, I was more troubled by this:
"Roberts, who has also had work done on her lips and thighs"
I'm sure a decent person would cluck a bit, know that this is wrong, and worry that the Apocalypse was upon us. But I can only think "How awesome." In the DF Wallace essay on the porn convention, Wallace claimed that one of the women he met had resizeable breasts, with access shunts just under her armpits. The woman was very young, obviously overwhelmed woman, and associated with a genuinely bad dirty old man. It was really quite sad. And yet my reaction was the same: it's so strange, stupid, and--gawd, what--sci-fi cartoon-ish that I can't think anything but "How awesome."
If the country ever does truly fail, it's going to be caused by something stupid and tacky, not something obviously nightmarish. I'm betting on some kind of chicken and biscuits giveaway.
Forget the high-end vibrator. If she's not enjoying sex and expects to have three-minute orgasms, it's almost certainly a combination of too little foreplay and a belief that sex leads to instant screaming orgasms on the part of the woman, brought about by too much television.
That's why I'm marrying a sex therapist...
("The failed attempts at satisfactory sex with her husband had diminished her sex drive overall, she said, and had triggered a deeper tension in the relationship.")
Yeah. This does not sound like a happy marriage, and I'm doubting that, even if it works, a procedure to give her a hair-trigger twat is going to solve anything serious.
Okay, I'll cluck anyway. That's just really, really depressing and...and...commodifying. Not, I suppose, in each individual case, but in general--the whole idea that what we need is for women to be able to have orgasms immediately, on cue, because there's something wrong/inconvenient about the usual way. It seems that as a good post-feminist pronified woman one is supposed to have an orgasm from sex not because it's pleasant but because it makes the man in the equation feel more successful and manly--having an orgasm turns into just another requirement. And since it's too much trouble to actually go through all the foreplay and the sexual variations, well, why not get needles stuck into you every six months at astounding cost?
You don't think that being unable to have an orgasm is going to create tension and/or frustration? Assume that we are not talking about it not just happening once or twice, but never?
hair-trigger twat
There's your band name.
11: Great. Now I'm going to have the phrase "hair-trigger twat" going through my head all day long.
sex leads to instant screaming orgasms on the part of the woman, brought about by too much television
Gosh, if that's how she thinks orgasms are brought about, no wonder she's having problems.
13: But we're not talking about never, we're talking about too much trouble.
reaching an orgasm was a time-consuming endeavor that took more effort and energy than she and her husband had to offer.
And what Frowner said, particularly here:
It seems that as a good post-feminist pronified woman one is supposed to have an orgasm from sex not because it's pleasant but because it makes the man in the equation feel more successful and manly--having an orgasm turns into just another requirement.
The point of having an orgasm is that it's enjoyable, not that you've failed your sex-partner or yourself if you don't get there.
This isn't to say that if this works, there aren't some people it might benefit, and maybe the woman in the article is one. But there's all sorts of unpleasant issues involved.
Especially with cable. $30 a month and still, no orgasms. "Honey, I think we've got the remote wired wrong."
13: We're not talking 'unable', we're talking 'too tired to bother.' Suggests to me that an underlying problem is that they're both too tired for intimacy, and tweaking her so they can both get off during a commercial break doesn't fix that problem.
LB-pwned. I am never pwned by LB. We shall settle this in the arena.
I was going to quote the same part of Frowner's comment that LB does and ask what part of the linked article might cause one to assign a higher probability to its truth than you did prior to reading the article.
Is there any government regulation on surgery?
The point of having an orgasm is that it's enjoyable, not that you've failed your sex-partner or yourself if you don't get there.
As a man, I don't enjoy sex if I don't have an orgasm. It's hard to imagine people who don't feel that way. If all women don't feel that way...well, it's still hard to imagine.
There was an episode of Nip and Tuck that had a woman getting this procedure done. What's-his-name was drunk when he did it, and put too much collagen in, and the woman had orgasms just sitting down doing nothing. She came back two weeks later to get the procedure reversed.
Language like 'failed attempts' and 'deeper tension in the relationship'. She's failing at sex, which is hurting her relationship, in a way which she believes can be fixed by fixing the way her body functions. It's not unambiguous, but I do get the impression she feels that she's failed to satisfy her husband because she can't get off with the amount of time and effort that he'd like to spend on it.
I think I figured out why the article's a bit unsettling. "Three minutes, just like a man."
It reminds me of something I saw in some column where the husband and new father wrote in to ask whether there was a pill he could give his wife to increase her libido because she was too tired to have sex with him since the baby came. The columnist suggested that maybe he could try helping out with the baby so his wife could take a nap. And something about this surgery, as presented, bothers me in the same way: we have sex for three minutes and she's not having an orgasm. There must be something wrong with her... is there a pill she should take or a surgery she could have?
What's going on here biomechanically? Is the swollen grafenberg supposed to be more sensitive? Engorged, um, organs are generally more sensitive, but I don't know if that's true when the engorgement is induced by collagen. Or is the swollen grafenberg just supposed to be easier for a penis to hit? (Couldn't you just try some different positions?) Or something else entirely?
I must have skipped the too tired to bother part.
Now, if she had said, "we cannot do it in the limited time when the rug rats aren't in our room," I would be more sympathetic.
1
"... The class/financial issues in that are really peculiar -- the combination of having a kid at 18, and having enough money to spend on something like that is unusual, isn't it?"
Remember you don't need cash if you have a credit card. Actually I would expect this sort of thing (like breast and penis enlargement) to be more popular with the lower classes. But perhaps this is just prejudice.
We're not talking 'unable', we're talking 'too tired to bother.' Suggests to me that an underlying problem is that they're both too tired for intimacy, and tweaking her so they can both get off during a commercial break doesn't fix that problem.
I think that's the problem that the article identifies.
If they have enough money for these operations, maybe they should budget their time better.
I'm interested not just in the money but in the referral pathways whereby women discover surgeons doing this kind of quasi-experimental surgery. Active recruitment? Passive advertising? Network ties?
24 to 22.
To 22, I'm mostly with you, but think back to high school, or whenever you started making out with people. I'd be surprised if you never enjoyed a protracted makeout session that didn't lead to orgasm. There's lots of fun stuff about sex other than the minute or so in which you're actually coming.
Remember you don't need cash if you have a credit card. Actually I would expect this sort of thing (like breast and penis enlargement) to be more popular with the lower classes. But perhaps this is just prejudice.
Yes it is, thanks for being self-aware.
I'd be surprised if you never enjoyed a protracted makeout session that didn't lead to orgasm. There's lots of fun stuff about sex other than the minute or so in which you're actually coming.
I enjoy the kissing and hugging, but when the genitals actually get involved, it leads to frustration if it doesn't lead to orgasm.
Okay, time to get to work around here.
26: I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't a placebo.
So you would be surprised if it were a placebo?
Heh. I noticed that after I wrote it, but I think I'm idiomatically correct; that the double negative works as an intensifier rather than cancelling. Unless it's not an idiom, and just something I say, in which case you know what I meant.
I think the idiom does not include a double negative. People who say it that way bother me.
I'm reading the "too tired to bother" with an underlying hint of "too frustrated to keep at it." It's easy to take the position of "Geez, if they're not willing to put in the effort..." But there's also a point where, when you are putting in the effort and aren't exactly approaching the endzone, it gets disheartening and much more difficult to keep soldiering on. Uh, so I've heard.
I'm with Cala in 25 that it is troublesome that the assumption seems to be, "If it isn't working, SHE needs to get fixed." But, on the other hand, if the procedure does get them over the mental hump, even if it's pure placebo affect, then why not?
If you all start arguing over grammar, I'll come to the next meet-up and smack you.
"I'm with Cala in 25 that it is troublesome that the assumption seems to be, "If it isn't working, SHE needs to get fixed.""
Ok, change the words. How would you react if someone suggested that she needs to get fixed when he isn't having orgasms?
Let's assume that he cannot get it up, who is going to suggest that she needs to do something differently?
Clearly the answer to all the questions in this thread is that her husband is an elderly doctor.
after i was on prozac for a bit, i basically couldn't cum, and i sorta figured out that orgasms didn't really mean much, except the psychological sense of closure. There is tensions in sex and w/o cuming you can't release, its not that its really all that great itsle.f
"hair trigger twat" really wins the board today though. we should just shut down and all come back tomorow, because we aren't going to do better than that.
30: The LA Weekly, an "alternative" newspaper in Lalaland, is filled to the brim with ads for plastic surgery of all types, including various "rejuvenations". If it's offered in LA, they will come. Then the rest of the country follows.
And there's really no guessing about her finances. Median price of a home in Vacaville is close to half a million.
instant screaming orgasms on the part of the woman, brought about by too much television.
I didn't know too much television could do that!
47: You haven't been watching hard enough....
40: In theory flipping the sexes is fair -- in practice I'm not aware that it's at all common for men to have insufficient-foreplay related erectile disfunction.
I would say that if the story were "He's lost interest in sex, I think he needs Viagra," and it turned out the guy in question was massively overworked and overstressed, I'd advise working on his schedule to get him a vacation and some regular down time and see if that fixed it before heading straight for the drugs.
40: Situations aren't parallel, given just the basic mechanics. Women don't, generally, come (ha ha) with a hair-trigger twat. Needing more than three minutes of attention to orgasm just isn't all that unusual. A guy not being able to get it up at all signifies a pretty serious problem. If you want to make it parallel, make it like this:
"My boyfriend can't go for the fifty minutes it takes for me to orgasm via penetrative sex. Can he get a little bit of scaffolding put in so he stays harder longer, or some sort of numbing cream?"
You going to recommend he get the surgery, or that they have a little more foreplay?
But there's also a point where, when you are putting in the effort and aren't exactly approaching the endzone, it gets disheartening and much more difficult to keep soldiering on.
Yes, but that point is considerably beyond the three minute mark.
In China, leg extensions are apparently popular for women seeking beauty-enhancing surgery. They cut the shin and put some sort of tube extender in. I think that concerns about cosmetic surgery as harbinger of the social apocalipse is overblown, since perfectly resiliant civilizations have gone in and continue to go in for much odder stuff. Both this procedure as well as Chinese leg/foot alteration seems really gross to me, though, and the mindset of people going in for either is hard to think about.
50: I'd recommend the numbing cream.
"If it isn't working, SHE needs to get fixed."
Yeah, that's weird. See, I just got a vibrating glans installed at Meineke. Because I'm a feminist.
52: That's incredibly gross. It must be crippling for months, at least, even if everything goes right.
In China, leg extensions are apparently popular for women seeking beauty-enhancing surgery. They cut the shin and put some sort of tube extender in.
AAAAAAAH.
i thought thats what condoms are for: if you're too young to keep your load in, you're too young for serious relationships
Do you really think that her expectations were for an orgasm in three minutes? I think you are not reading the article correctly.
"doctor, fifteen minutes is too damn long!!"??
i only knew about leg extensions surgery from Gattica. I had a friend who suggested i get it though.
The surgery in China isn't just for women.
Isn't it driven by companies having height policies in hiring? Have to be so tall in order to get into university or to be a flight attendant, or something like that?
And I think China has banned the procedure.
"If it's offered in LA, they will come."
Isn't that the whole point?
Do you really think that her expectations were for an orgasm in three minutes? I think you are not reading the article correctly.
The last lines of the article:
Just as she hoped, she could reach climax within a few minutes, and with little effort.
"Just like a man," she said.
w/o cuming you can't release, its not that its really all that great itslef
So very wrong.
A few people are being too literal, the 3 minute line at the end is clearly a joke.
40: Maybe I'm an outlier, but if he was having problems getting to the endzone, I would similarly not jump to the conclusion that he needed medical intervention. I would, in fact, consider the possibility that a variety of other things needed work -- techinique, time management, emotional issues. BUT, if he found a medical intervention that excited him, I wouldn't immediately poo poo it either. A handy crutch to address the acute problem might well take enough pressure off to make it easier to address the underlying issues. (Or, might make it easier to ignore the underlying issues, too, which is probably less advisable.)
40: Maybe I'm an outlier, but if he was having problems getting to the endzone, I would similarly not jump to the conclusion that he needed medical intervention. I would, in fact, consider the possibility that a variety of other things needed work -- techinique, time management, emotional issues. BUT, if he found a medical intervention that excited him, I wouldn't immediately poo poo it either. A handy crutch to address the acute problem might well take enough pressure off to make it easier to address the underlying issues. (Or, might make it easier to ignore the underlying issues, too, which is probably less advisable.)
gswift = sting
Same first name, same initials.
68, 69 -- uh, not sure how that posted twice...
Okay, because I'm avoiding urgent work I just googled what I believe to be your name. The first two results are really funny.
71:
Once you get going, you just cannot stop!
In China, leg extensions are apparently popular for women seeking beauty-enhancing surgery. They cut the shin and put some sort of tube extender in.
For some reason the first three times through I read that as "butt-enhancing surgery". And I was trying to figure out how the one would help the other, and finally just thought whatever, you know, those Chinese and their weird tastes.
(The first time through I also paused after the first sentence and pondered how doing leg-extension exercises would improve your butt, thinking the one was being offered as an alternative to the other. Like your were required to try the leg extensions for a few months to see if that helped things, and only if you then still had problems did you qualify for the butt-enhancing surgery. And I thought "well, they don't really target the right area, I would think squats or deadlifts would be more effective, but hey, whatever works." Then I got to the second sentence and was like "WTF?!?")
Wait, gswift, is that first google result for your name about you? If so, I think the apostropher might have to surrender the hero title.
From the state, I'm guessing it is.
We need to be sure before we undertake something as momentous as declaring a new hero.
And now I'm worried -- gswift, if you want this turn of conversation redacted, just ask. I'm figuing probably not, but just in case.
What do i lose if it took an hour to realize where the post-title came from.
Yeah, that's me. The student paper decided one year that it's new policy was to publish every letter they got. I trolled them a bit. That one was from my wife.
Are there any links to those "recent letters?"
Redaction not needed. I'm not anonymous or anything. I use "gswift" just so a search on my name doesn't pull a bazilion of my internet ravings.
Not so fast, I posit that it was his wife trolling the newspaper with untrue statements.
I think it's pretty clearly jswift who is teh hero!
I see that the project of erecting monuments to the new hero has already begun. Much more impressive than that lame ice arena in Edmonton.
If you google "site:theschoolnewspaperinquestion gordon smith", you get a whole bunch of stuff. Which completely cracks me up.
The Swifts are teh heroes.
Back to the original topic, perhaps Ms. Roberts should have talked to her doctor about trying Jeremy before resorting to surgery.
you get a whole bunch of stuff. Which completely cracks me up.
I normally didn't even read the student paper. Then one fall I grabbed it a couple times, and I couldn't believe the shit that was in the letters section. Complaints about R movies being shown on campus and such. I asked someone what the hell was up with the paper, and they said the policy was to publish every letter. So I started trolling. Kind of juvenile, but I was annoyed.
You people are some seriously fucked up. (I think I'm going to create a macro to type that for me from now on.) Finally, a plastic surgery that's actually intended to do something for us chicks, and y'all are tut-tutting about how sad it is? Look, if there were some surgery that could make guys have better orgasms, they'd be lined up around the fucking block, and if we were bemoaning it it would only be because it were further evidence of men's selfishness, not because they should learn to enjoy orgasmless sex.
Fuck more foreplay. Gspot orgasms rule, and if you can get one in three minutes, more power to you. You can fiddle about with the goddamn foreplay afterwards if you want.
Oh, and btw, "if you don't really need it"? Apo, honey, you and Roberta need to have a li'l talk.
Some of the stuff about how women should just be happy not quite having orgasms, reminds me of the reaction to the no-periods pill -- "but menstruation is so wonderful" etc.
Leaving aside the likely problems with the woman's husband, etc., the fact remains: if the surgery works, then hell YEAH it's a good idea.
We can scoff, but meanwhile she's screwing her brains out.
Yeah, I just took some terms off the path and read the whole correspondence. What names those people have! My wife would laugh at the waspiness, although my high school was full of those characters too.
Pwn'd by Bitch. I can live with that.
The only person pure enough of heart to deserve an orgasm was Jesus, and he's dead. No orgasms.
Not even bong hits orgasms for Jesus?
93: Eh, it's not that you don't have a point, it's that three minutes of sex even with an orgasm still sounds kind of sucky. So if the choices are "Putting enough into the sex that you can enjoy yourself and have an orgasm with the body you've got, taking the time it takes" or "Fixing yourself so you can have a three-minute orgasm and qwitcher bitchin about being unsatisfied", the latter sounds lousy.
If the woman interviewed were all about "Wow, this sounds like fun", rather than "This will solve my sexual/relationship problems", it wouldn't bother me the same way.
and he's dead. No orgasms.
Haven't you heard? Jesus is coming!
104: Taking a wee bit longer than 3 mins though...
The end could be nigher, yes.
103: Yes, and taking several hours to prepare and enjoy a divine culinary experience is better than takeout. But 9 times out of 10, we don't have time for the former, and if you can make takeout that good, well, go for it.
--I would think that even with the HTT, sex remains mental enough that it can't be *all* wham-bam-thank-you-man ...
Oh, and btw, "if you don't really need it"
Take it up with Elvis Costello, dear. I didn't write the song.
ttaM: I didn't catch you yesterday. Do those watches have a fairly loud tick? I'm presuming they're mechanical and need winding. I've always worn my watch to bed, unless asked to take it off, and could easily get used to it, but I'm curious.
"I found the letter pretty comedic. First was how Swift judged Marlo and assumed that she's an active LDS member based on the fact that she's protesting sexual content in movies.
Seeing that this is Utah, his assumption is probably true-but it is pretty ignorant to just assume something of someone.
I'm from Texas and there are not a lot of Mormons there, so if you were to make the same assumption of Marlo in Dallas instead of Salt Lake City, you'd be wrong."
I'm speechless. If all the conditions were different, you'd be wrong!
I've mentioned before, in earlier threads, I know someone who claims never ever to have had an orgasm. She, the person concerned, was absolutely adamant that she had a perfectly satisfactory sex life. In fact, had a fairly high sex drive. Just no orgasms.
* Or at least did up until a few years back [I am no longer current on the state of affairs].
I've mentioned before, in earlier threads, I know someone who claims never ever to have had an orgasm.
A nontrivial % of the female population, I think.
113: "Satisfactory" seems a somewhat unambitious aim.
95: No, I think it's more that women should realize that there's not something wrong with them if they don't achieve simultaneous orgasm with their brand-new partner (ON THE TELEVISION) after a few minutes of soft-focus humping.
I'm glad the woman in the article has found a fix, but at $4,000 a year, I sure hope she has the money to keep paying for orgasmic quickies because it's not going to be fun if the money runs out and they are still tired and stressed.
ON THE TELEVISION.
115: If you don't know what you're missing, you don't know what you're missing.
In the land of the adequate, the satisfied woman is queen.
re: 111
I have three soviet era watches already. They aren't any louder than other mechanical watches I've owned in the past. One of mine is very quiet.*
Some of those soviet watches are quite highly collected --rare ones, pilots watches etc -- but others are very cheap. $10 - $15 + shipping.
* this one - http://tinyurl.com/2y8oep [bad photo, it's actually immaculate]
re: 115
Perhaps I used an ambiguous word. I'm from the land of the understatement where 'not bad' is about the highest compliment that can be conferred upon something.
Put it this way, she would have gotten pretty angry at the suggestion that she wasn't having a fun, enjoyable sex life.
Seeing that this is Utah, his assumption is probably true-but it is pretty ignorant to just assume something of someone.
Heh. Mormons get lectured about media in church all the time, and specifically about R rated movies. There's a way of clucking about R movies that is like hanging a big "I'm Mormon" sign around your neck.
We should not ridicule someone who takes her orgasming responsibilities seriously. Would that every chick in the world had such willingness to "do what it takes".
I'm not going to name names, but there are some slackerettes here who could take a lesson from Karen Roberts.
119: That's a very handsome design. Reminds me of one I once had, but better.
Even movies made by the LDS church are too violent.
http://www.harktheherald.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,/topic,47117
Anderson gets it. Having a 3- minute orgasm don't mean you can't have lovey dovey ooh baby i don't need a fast orgasm or any orgasm at all because i'm so fulfilled by just foreplay and cuddling sex ALL YOU WANT. It ain't an either/or, people.
And women who claim they're perfectly satisfied without orgasms aren't lying, exactly, but they damn well are learning to settle. You know it and so do I.
Can we get Natargacam's female friend in here to argue with 126?
126: Yeah, but I don't think anyone was saying "Teh procedure should be BANNED, even if it works." More that the woman in the story sounded like she had problems that three-minute orgasms wouldn't help with, and acting as if the source of those problems was her lack of a HTT seemed way off base.
I did. The article's all "not everyone believes the Gspot exists! Is this yet another plastic surgery being foisted on poor, victimized women? Tut tut!"
Fuck that shit. If it works, and it means g-spot orgasms on demand, good for it. Let's tut tut over something else, like the poor, poor people who are victimized by having won the lottery.
Letters to the editor of Utah papers are a black hole of idiocy. The Provo Daily Herald and the BYU Daily Universe are the best of the worst. Be very careful.
129: The source of her problems ain't gonna go away with more foreplay, either, people. But at least if she has good orgasms, she has good orgasms, knowhati'msayin?
If women could, in fact, have orgasms just by sitting in chairs, strictly controlling their access to chairs would be a good idea. Perhaps a non-orgasmic chair could also be designed.
This letter is a piece of work: I would like to say that the message of my letter was not that men should stare at women's breasts, as you implied, but that women should not dress like sluts.
Ah, thanks for clearing that up.
Maybe we should take up a collection to buy B one of these. The oversize constant-orgasm kind. I'd be curious to see how it affects her blogging style.
This thread is developing in a very surprising manner.
126a: I am not a doctor and all that, but wouldn't the surgery at least limit the lovey dovey takin' your time options somewhat? I mean, if the point is to create a bullseye too big to miss, it's at the very least more difficult to dance around. I'm also imagining it would limit a fella's willingness to get creative when he knows there's a big magic button he can hit to get the job done.
126b: That, or what Ned said in 117. Being perfectly satisfied with never having had an orgasm seems more likely than being perfectly satisfied without when you actually do know what you're missing.
134: From the letter:
You, Swift, are a liberal.
That means that you have no moral values whatsoever. I don't need some Satan-worshipping liberal lecturing me about moral values. It is because of people like you that I can't even let my pet dog loose in the yard out of fear that some perverted liberal will to jump over the fence and rape him.
Dude, I live in dreams of inspiring that class of invective.
Damn, formatting error. The last para is me, the middle two are the letter.
Liberals rape dogs.
Well, only the good-looking ones.
re: 126
Well, no-one would dispute that her existing sex life PLUS orgasms would have been better. All I'm saying is that she was fairly vocal about the fact that she liked what she had, and, having had exactly this sort of conversation, didn't feel she was settling. She may have been wrong about that, in denial, etc. but was fairly clear about how she felt.
In Soviet Russia, orgasm blogs you.
OK, I'm on a limited income so I pledge $10.
And here's the letter that presumably ran next to "Liberals rape dogs".
141a: Am I wrong in thinking that the G-spot is actually in the vagina? They could still have foreplay without penetration.
"Doc, you do understand, don't you? I want you to turn it up to eleven".
137, 148: I'm all for charity, but B doesn't really seem to be the candidate with the most need.
141: If she is a rather anorgasmic individual in the first place, the surgery could just be bringing her back into the normal range. (Well, three minutes is a little faster than the normal range, but still. I wouldn't exactly call it hair-trigger.)
150: That would certainly make her at least one louder.
Isn't the precedent for community gifts from this blog that the recipient's mother be present when the committee presents?
141.1
Um, look. Guys can come fast with lotsa direct stimulation to certain areas, but they don't *always* come fast, with or without. Jeez. It's like you folks have never even *had* sex.
130 does not look like it was posted by someone who's read the article. The article mostly quotes the doctor saying that he does what women request, and a couple women who say that it's really helped them out. Then it quotes somebody who says that this should not be promoted as something that helps people with sexual problems, but as something that enhances already-functioning people. Then it quotes somebody who says these things have not been scientifically proven to be effective. Nothing at all about women being fooled or victimized.
There's no mention of "3 minutes" in the article either.
149b: That's why I said limits rather than prohibits.
154: Thanks, John. That seems more fair, doesn't it?
142: Just move here. Then it's surprisingly easy.
hair-trigger twat
Well perhaps I am, but what's it to you?
I must say that even if having a special magic multi-orgasm implant is just a soulless technical solution that doesn't address the real underlying problem, as soulless technical solutions which don't address the real underlying problem go, it doesn't sound all that bad.
(I am familiar with all these "but it will remove the incentive to bla bla blah" arguments from all the welfare policy debates where someone is trying to argue that what the poor really need is X, where X something that isn't money).
157: To be fair, though, it does say, "Just as she hoped, she could reach climax within a few minutes, and with little effort."
"Few" = 3 is a pretty straighforward understanding, although perhaps not universal.
155: Okay, fine. Then I nominate my mother instead.
130: LB and I are mostly reacting to the idea that the fact that a woman, who can have orgasms given adequate time and attention, is in need of an expensive treatment because she doesn't come "like a man" when they're too tired for foreplay. It's not that we're anti-orgasm here, it's just that something seems off when something pretty normal for a woman is pathologized because it doesn't line up with what is normal for a male.
And, you know, expensively pathologized. 4K a year for your magic multi-orgasm implant, IIRC - doesn't it need renewal every six months?
I do feel that B or Di Kotimy in a constant state of orgasm would lose their edge and perhaps go all New Age on us, but in my opinion the scientific interest of this makes the risks well worth it.
Why hasn't this thread digressed onto food yet?
The problem is that the man can't tell what the vagina wants, except in the most general terms. She should just get surgery to become like the woman in this movie.
I love today's letter to the Salt Lake Trib about the perennial school vouchers debate:
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_6226468
152
You all seem rather willing to assume the procedure is in fact safe and effective of which I am doubtful. Surgeons are constantly inventing wacko procedures of dubious worth.
Absolutely. I've been assuming it probably isn't effective (although collagen injections have enough of a history that they're probably reasonably safe). But what's the fun in arguing about it if it doesn't work?
Word to B on this one. I know that as a guy, I know that if someone told me, "Hey, how would you like to orgasm only unreliably and after like 20 to 60 minutes of work, because then you can cuddle better?" my response would be something like, "Get the fuck away from me." And I like cuddling.
If this chick finds a downside to having orgasms after only a few minutes, well, then, she can stop getting the injections, or maybe tell the doctor, "Could we dial that back 30%" or whatever.
It is because of people like you that I can't even let my pet dog loose in the yard out of fear that some perverted liberal will jump over the fence and engage in extended foreplay.
163: But I (and bitchphd, given 130) don't think the article is necessarily describing the situation well. If the conditions are as ya'll are describing, then I agree with you. Otherwise, I agree with B.
162: When I was a boy, on Mother's Day, we all wore red paper carnations to church if our mothers were living, white if they weren't. Priority to the whites!—which does seem fair. Although if you're the Queen, you could wait a damn long time.
Probably involving disgusting endearments like "Who's a good girl? Are you a good girl?" and ear scratching.
141: As the husband of a woman with one of those wonderful hair-trigger twats, let me say that I don't miss the "takin' your time" option at all.
If it's permanent, the $1850 is a bargain.
Oh, and if they come out with surgery to enable men to have multiple orgasms, sign me up!
163: But she's not "in need of" the treatments. Nobody is saying, "Women, line up: if you can't achieve orgasm in under ten minutes, this treatment is mandatory."
Well, John Emerson may be saying that. But only him.
She -- who is presumeably way more qualified than anyone on this thread to actually understand the state of affairs before and after the treatment -- has decided that they're worthwhile for her happiness.
Have we decided to chip in for Di Kotimy yet? For science, of course.
Anyone who can be first on top of google with the headline " ______ Does Get Laid" deserves some sort of award. Unfogger of the Day?
I think that it's precessed to Di Kotimy's mom by now. My $10 is still on the table, though.
179 -- nicely argued from the Libertarian perspective. But what about all the young women who feel peer pressure to get the clitoral implants "because everyone's doing it" and end up going under the knife against their better judgement and then regretting it for the rest of their lives? Huh?
166: Okay, you can all chip in to buy me dinner instead. But it had better be damned good dinner.
But what about your stomach surgery? Won't that limit the dinner options?
"Okay, you can all chip in to buy me dinner instead. But it had better be damned good dinner."
We'll have it to you in three minutes or less!
183: O for christ's sake. No one went there. No one said the woman's a bad person. Or that the surgery should be banned. Or really much of anything except observing it's a little weird to rush for the surgery because women aren't made like men so the men won't have to work so hard.
185: Nah, I'm fine as long as I take my meals nice and slow.
You'll get the best $10 3-minute dinner that can be found. Probably not at a sit-down place, though.
187 -- temper, temper. I was only joshing.
You know, instead of arguing about some weird ass g-spot surgery, we could be GLAMMING THE FUCK OUT in the other thread. You people are a constant disappointment to me.
189: I've never eaten in a sit-down restaurant anyway, so that will be completely satisfactory.
192: Oh, you'd love it. Constant orgasms.
Forget dinner. Just order dessert. Anyone who says they don't like dessert is settling.
I've never eaten in a sit-down restaurant anyway
What?
Well, I don't agree with B. (Sorry, B.)
I mean, I'm as much about the post-humanism/oncomouse/cyborg thing as the next gal, but this seems so heavily mediated by things I don't trust that I just don't like it. It's a new surgery that's been a media buzz item, it promises something that we're not sure it can deliver, it seems to allure as a quick, surgery-based fix for the modern condition of "too stressed and tired to enjoy sex", it seems to be about making women's sexuality keep up with (yes indeed, vicar) men's, and it's expensive.
In fact, it's interesting that most of the time corporate/plastic surgery apologists invoke the "oh, but men and women are so different; men like their women nubile, women like 'em craggy, men's balls will explode if they can't have sex with whomever they want at any point while women are just sweet and romantic, men hate monogamy and women need it to feel secure, etc--and this is routinely used to justify really retrograde stuff. But now that there's an $1800 surgery, well, those differences aren't so important anymore.
And this choice is a free choice. Unlike all those other choices. Those are paradoxes of free choices. But there's no baggage at all attached to sex.
196: You're accusing people of hypocrisy? I'm not sure the same people you you call corporate/plastic surgery apologists are the people who are defending this particular surgery.
195: 'Twas a joke. Apparently, not a very funny one...
I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused.
Apparently, not a very funny one
I laughed. Well, smiled.
196: Er, not people here. You know, people. Them. The ones that you use as Bad Examples. The Other People who say all those indefensible things and buy the albums that you don't like and wear the shoes that you think are either hideous or frivolous and so on.
Although honestly, I think there's some plastic surgery enthusiast overlap in the "women need the implants/ surgery/ whatever because men just can't find anything else teh sexy, and that's what's important" category.
196: Oh, c'mon. It's a collagen injection, it just happens to be to a different place than other collagen injections. And, while it may not be all things to all people, this woman suggests that her orgasmic potential is vastly improved by it. It seems on the face of it ridiculous to suggest that your prima facia dubiousness of the procedure should be given any credence based on her actual experience with it.
And it's not plastic surgery as plastic surgery is ordinarily understood. Plastic surgery usually is about altering someone to conform to an expectation of beauty that they've cast on themselves (usually, but not always, a fairly conformist ideal of beauty). Any pleasure the plastic surgery patient gets from the surgery is a second-order or third order effect (ie, surgery --> "beauty" --> people like/are impressed by me --> I'm happy). In this case, the pleasure is first order (ie, surgery --> orgasms), and any conforming to social expectations is at most second order (surgery --> orgasms --> perhaps conforming to social expectations of sex partners). That's a pretty major difference.
This new medical procedure may make the sit-down restaurant obsolete.
"No, I think I'll just stand. Chairs send me right up to eleven, IYKWIMAITYD.
The plastic surgery debate is all a matter of degree. Hair cuts, nose hair plucking, make up, acne cream, g-spot enhancements...
I'm waiting for the wing attachment procedure to be perfected. I want to fly!
The next wave in medicine are procedures that make you *better than nature intended*. Like laser eye surgery that corrects to better than 20/20, or steroids for athletes. If this works (which I have my doubts about), it's one of 'em. It's not that the natural is pathological, it's that technology lets us improve things. Having been with women who were easily multi-orgasmic, it does seem like it's, well, lots of fun for all. Yes, there's the problem of rising sexual expectations, technologizing of sex. Those are real issues, but maybe they can be successfully worked out within the multiple orgasm context.
On the other hand, my bet would be this is a scam, like all those ridiculous enlargement surgeries for men. Effects could easily be placebo.
201: Well, now you're just settling.
I had multiple orgasms during each of the videos in the glam the fuck out post.
Do we want to hear about Apo's orgasms? Right when we started I knew that we'd end up at the bottom of the slippery slope. There have to be some limits.
The slope is more sticky than slippery, John.
You planned this, didn't you? Our decline to depravity was lubricated with your precious bodily fluids, wasn't it.
Excess of shame can unfortunately inhibit fully satisfying laughter.
If it really works, & works better than more conventional means to a better sex life, then I don't have a huge problem with it (except for the personal ohmigod no you will not inject collagen there response) --it's cosmetic surgery & like all cosmetic surgery is a luxury, but I have less problem with it than many other operations.
Those are pretty big ifs, though. I'm skeptical.
Seriously, dude, if that Slade video doesn't get you off, no surgery can help.
How would they do a placebo-controlled study? The placebo group gets water injected?
The placebo group could get a collagen injection next to the G-spot, not on it.
This woman is having the procedure done because she believes it will enhance her life somehow. You can claim that she's wrong, or that she's right in some restricted sense but wrong in some larger sense, or right about its effects for her but doesn't account for its societal effects. How this differs from any other plastic surgery I cannot see. I suspect that opinions about other kinds of plastic surgery predict one's response to this pretty well. I think it's a bit creepy, but most plastic surgery weirds me out a little. And, as everyone has acknowledged, it's her life and her choice.
(Whatever became of the B- and C-group rats in NIMH?)
In the article that was mentioned as a problem - the collagen makes a detectable lump, so you can't control with a placebo. Anything that doesn't make the lump is known to the patient not to be the treatment.
Maybe you could try not telling the subjects what it's for? "We're testing a treatment for [gynecological condition X], and want you to report any side effects," and see if they report being hyperorgasmic. If the effects show up only, or more strongly, in women who've been sold on the idea that it will work for them, then you'd start thinking it was a placebo.
the collagen makes a detectable lump, so you can't control with a placebo
What about 218?
From the article:
>"If I could come home like my husband, have sex and feel that release," Roberts said before her appointment, "I'd be one happy woman. But instead I come home, I spend all this time concentrating, hoping something will happen and I just end up frustrated."
If this works i don't see it as being a bad thing.
213: Take, eat: this is my semen, which is spilled for you: this do in remembrance of me.
218 might work -- I hadn't thought of it.
The problem is, even a lump right next to the g-spot might stimulate the g-spot, so if the result was that both groups reported increased orgasms in the same numbers, you wouldn't have any hard conclusions to draw. Maybe if it were further up, just past the g-sport or something.
g-sport
No need to get overly competitive about it.
Surgery is generally not that well-suited to placebo-controlled double-blind trials. Really not at all.
Really, even if it is a placebo effect, it seems like that alone is worth something.
228: Double-blind is probably more of a problem than placebo-controlled. You might be able to fool the patients into thinking that they'd had the procedure when they hadn't. It's basically impossible to fool the surgeon as to whether the procedure is being done.
G-Sport would be an excellent name for a coupe.
Well, there's the ethical problem that someone just paid you 1,800 dollars for something that didn't actually get done. Is that really ethically unsound if we have serious doubts that the procedure works? Hmmm.
No, silly, this would be a study of effectiveness -- the subjects wouldn't be paying for it.
(or a windsurfing association.)
This woman is having the procedure done because she believes it will enhance her life somehow.
Well, screw her. You're trying to smuggle some kind of funky tolerance principle in here, Tim, but that won't fly. No Donahue type is going going to get away with telling me to be tolerant and accepting!
re: 230
Yeah, there have been surgeries carried out that are non-functional. In order to fool the patient. It hasn't happened particularly often though, as far as I am aware.
I don't think ethics committees look to kindly on putting people under general anaesthetic and cutting them open so they can act as a control in a study.
233: Not a clinical trial, then? One of those studies where they advertise for participants?
"I'm sorry, Ma'am, but all those orgasms you thought you had were null and void. You were in the control group, I'm afraid."
238: People don't normally pay to participate in clinical trials, right? Or am I very confused?
I thought that clinical trials were performed by ordinary doctors who want to participate without the knowledge of the patients. The doctors report back whatever their patients tell them in the followup, and that's the data that comprises the study.
I think the doctors might tell them something like "this is a new or experimental treatment, but you can try it if you want".
re: 241
NO! Consent is required. In the UK at least, there's usually three stages in a clinical trial process.
Stage 1: a small number of people take the drug to test if it's physically safe [these are usually paid volunteers without the disease the drug is for]
Stage 2: small-scale clinical trial in disease sufferers. Control group given placebo or controlled in some other way.
Stage 3: large scale trial in many patients who have the target disease.
At that stage the pharmaceutical company will apply for a license to market the drug.
At all stages the participants know they are part of a trial.
There's an extremely complex set of legislation surrounding the running of trials and a government body that oversees the whole trial and licensing process, along with the ethics committees of academic departments, hospitals, etc.
A clinical trial doesn't have to be run against a placebo or use any particular blinding scheme. In a case like this, you would compare the post-surgical results against the standard treatment for female sexual dysfunction.
241 - that's one small subset of clinical trials, and maybe the least reliable.
the standard treatment for female sexual dysfunction
That being, of course, Jeremy.
without the knowledge of the patients
That would be very much against the law. You can't even collect a medical history on a subject with them signing an Informed Consent form first.
re: 245
Yeah. I know the process can often be different and controlling against standard treatments is pretty widespread.
I did a bit of work a few years ago for a pharmaceutical company who wanted to run a non-standard trial process on a traditional Chinese medical product and their planned trial process was different from the 'traditional' 3 stage thing in a load of ways. It was still going to blinded and placebo controlled but it varied in other ways.
Wow, 224. As a longtime practitioner of faux-scriptural blasphemy, I shouldn't be shocked, but, wow.
The question that arises for us utilitarians is, "Can this surgery be applied to a warehouse full of rabbits?"
I don't think warehouses have g-spots.
Do lady rabbits have multiple orgasms? If so, it would be easier to accumulate utility credits in a lady-rabbit warehouse than in a guy-rabbit warehouse.
My gross sexism really showed itself on that one. I've always assumed that you'd be jerking of guy rabbits.
221
As others have noted not telling the subjects what it is for would probably violate ethics guidelines. However there are still things you could do. Such as asking women suffering from difficulty in achieving orgasms to participate in a study of experimental treatments one of which would be a placebo. So you could have for example 5 groups surgery, testosterone, viagra , placebo and no treatment and compare the results. Personally I would expect to find a rather strong Hawthorne effect .
yes, 241 is very atypical, and pretty strictly limited as to what sort of information you can report in such a situation.
The actual structure of clinical studies tends to vary a lot depending on what you are trying to study, I think. Protocols are complicated, and the legal strictures probably quite variable with location.
Huh. I had at some point had the vague notion that it worked the way everyone's saying, but then I read something somewhere that implied that normal clinicians participated in these things (which I bet they sometimes do) and extrapolated too far out.
The thing that really disturbs me about this, besides the very good points Cala and LB have raised, was this part:
Matlock had performed every G-Shot injection from his Sunset Boulevard office until early April, when he shipped his trademarked G-Shot kits to 35 associates [...] The package included a 30-minute instructional video
Jesus. There are toasters that are shipped with more instructions than that.
So, some brief googling seems to imply there isn't already a dance anthem called "pump it up til you can feel it".
Dibs!
i read that, and first i thought it was an instructional video for the hair trigger box. and wondered why it was 30 minutes long, when the whole point was to not go that long.
You know, I'm all for the idea that different doesn't mean better or worse, but g-spot orgasms fucking rock, and having more of them would be an unmitigated good. That doesn't have to be about being inferior to men, or adhering to some male norm; it's just hey, orgasms fun, this thing make more orgasms? Yay! You might as well start talking about how cock rings signify some kind of male inferiority complex or something like that.
Anyway, as everyone knows, women are *perfectly* capable of 3 minute orgasms on their own. And I rather suspect that guys usual climax faster solo, too.