Classical models defend the idea that orgasm is something that someone gives us and, therefore, if they don’t give it to us, it’s because of us, but this is a problematic view.
In recent times it seems that it is not possible to talk about women’s sexuality without using certain medical terms, which are even happily quoted in the media and social networks.
Clinical diagnoses such as “hypoactive sexual desire” or “female anorgasmia” have become so popular that it is said that in the world of heterosexual relationships there is an orgasmic glass ceiling, which would function similarly to the world of heterosexual relationships. work, where men have privileges and women lose.
But this creates confusing discourse that takes very little account of the reality of orgasm and interactions as a couple. This way of talking generates the idea that orgasm is something that someone gives us and, therefore, if they don’t give it to us, it’s because of us.
Goodbye to orgasm phases
The orgasm process is first fully described by the
sexologists Masters and Johnson in their seminal 1966 work “The Human Sexual Response”. In their work they describe in detail the phases and processes that occur during sexual arousal.
Masters and Johnson thus created what today, after the influence of other authors such as Helen S. Kaplan, is known as the DEMOR schema, which means Desire, Arousal, Plateau, Orgasm and Resolution, the classic phases of human arousal.
In this model, orgasm would be a specific phase within this curve of the human sexual response. To reach the orgasm phase, a series of previous stimuli and a concatenation of physiological events are necessary.
Ultimately, for Masters and Johnson, orgasm is the culmination of the arousal process, but it is not a process in itself. However, despite the DEMOR schema’s usefulness for understanding sexual arousal, it is insufficient to explain the reality of the orgasm process.
The circular orgasm model
As early as 2005, other authors such as Basson developed a biopsychosocial model of the female sexual response. This leads us to two types of explanations for orgasm:
- On the one hand, the classic and strictly physiological model of Masters and Johnson, which would be applied to male sexuality.
- On the other hand, the biopsychosocial model, which takes into account social and environmental conditions, is applied to female sexuality.
Unfortunately, this leads to false dichotomies between physiology and psychology and male and female sexuality. But there is a third model that escapes these traps. It is the circular model proposed by sexologist Joserra Landarroitajauregui.
For Landarroitajauregi there is a circular feedback relationship between excitement, desire and satisfaction. Within the excitement would enter the orgasm and the physiological response of Masters and Johnson.
These three factors interact with each other, generating the desire to have sexual encounters, to spend time with each other, to mate, how much or how little our partner excites us, and the orgasms we achieve in our encounters with her.
Nobody owes you an orgasm
Perhaps there is the key to all this apparent conflict. In the face of problematic ideas like “orgasmic debt,” or that there are good and bad lovers depending on their ability as orgasm givers, we are ignoring several fundamental facts.
On the one hand, that our sexual encounters are not better depending on the number of orgasms produced, but on the satisfaction achieved. And satisfaction is mediated by many factors, such as general (not just genital) pleasure, intimacy, comfort, and many others.
On the other hand, that every sexual encounter is an interaction between two people who at the same time are subject to the environmental circumstances in which they find themselves. And finally, it makes no sense to say that female sexuality is one way and male sexuality another. Each subject (whether male or female, cis or trans) has their sexuality with their personal characteristics.
How to find yourself without pressure
Maybe it’s time to start meeting up to have fun with no other expectation than the date itself. A meeting where a series of intimacies are generated that allow mutual knowledge and the generation of a positive synergy that can lead to mutual satisfaction.
- As long as we continue to believe that our lovers give us orgasms and not that we have orgasms, we will continue to introduce problematic elements into our encounters.
- As long as we are convinced that the ability to achieve orgasm is independent of each subject’s personal circumstances, we will continue to look for errors in our sexual encounters that can be found in other spheres of our lives.
- As long as we believe that orgasm is a matter of technique and not a part of the relationship, we will remain frustrated.
Faced with this, we can only meet without pressure, get to know each other and understand that the sexual encounter is a matter of two (or more). Only then can we have satisfying encounters, whatever the final orgasm count.
REFERENCES
Basson R, Brotto LA, Laan E, Redmond G, Utian WH. Assessment and management of female sexual dysfunctions: problematic desire and arousal. J Sex Med. 2005; 2(3): 291-300.
Landarroitajauregi, JR To better understand the human sexual response. Fundamentals. 2009
Photograph: Smiling man and woman hugging tenderly lying on bed – depositphotos.com
