squirting orgasm discussion for all

[Tattooed Goddess]

Lets consider these,
1. how much fluid can these "skenes" glands hold. why do they not show up on ultrasound ?
My guess is they hold very little, certainly not the amount attributed to squirting. So if I squirted 0.5 mls would that count ?
2. squirting- the female ejaculation. Implies its something better/beyond a normal orgasm. Better for whom ?
3. Does it contain urine ?
Having squirted once I would say yes, how do I know ? I pee everyday so I know when I'm emptying by bladder.
4. was it great? the orgasm was yes, the squirting, to messy for my liking.
5. can all women squirt ? maybe, but more importantly, do they want to, desire to and why.
Thats up to them, personally I prefere to pee in the toilet, thats just me.

^ QFT!

 

[hugeboto4ladies]

Lets not forget, most of the squirting in porn is FAKE.....I don't believe Cyntheria can squirt gallons across a room. So I wouldn't base anything concerning squirting, on porn movies. I will agree that it does reaffirm just how "studly" I feel when it does happen, yet I know when a woman has an orgasm without the squirting. When I said almost every woman I have been with has done it, that does NOT mean it happened every time, or right away. And I am by no means saying I am special. Some took months/years for it to happen. Trust me, the sex was just as good without the squirt as with it (as far as I am concerned).

 

[ManlyBanisters]

It's odd to me how this conversation is going. If you've 'squirted' then say so, if not, then don't say anything or set up some of the links already given to more discussion on this topic. The argument that this liquid is pee seems odd, since the proof is that the liquid is stored somewhere....so it's urine. There's nowhere else to store liquid in a woman's body....uh, if that's the case, what's the liquid we produce when excited? When we're 'wet' and ready for some hot sex? (or any kind of sex...lol) Is that urine?

Don't be so disingenuous. It is neither clever nor amusing.

There is an accepted, proven scientific knowledge of where vaginal and cervical secretions come from. That liquid is not stored. The Skene's glands just can't contain the large amounts of fluid that many people claim isn't urine. It is highly unlikely (I'd say impossible) that a gland could output that much fluid that quickly without it being stored somewhere. WTF is wrong with it being urine anyway? Can't we be honest about our bodily functions? Does shit not stink?

Lets consider these,
1. how much fluid can these "skenes" glands hold. why do they not show up on ultrasound ?
My guess is they hold very little, certainly not the amount attributed to squirting. So if I squirted 0.5 mls would that count ?
2. squirting- the female ejaculation. Implies its something better/beyond a normal orgasm. Better for whom ?
3. Does it contain urine ?
Having squirted once I would say yes, how do I know ? I pee everyday so I know when I'm emptying by bladder.
4. was it great? the orgasm was yes, the squirting, to messy for my liking.
5. can all women squirt ? maybe, but more importantly, do they want to, desire to and why.
Thats up to them, personally I prefere to pee in the toilet, thats just me.

Yup - I can't really disagree with anything implied there.

I have 'let go' when cumming - is wasn't any better and the next day, when I was putting the towel in the wash it smelled faintly of pee. No big deal. I peed a little as I was cumming. It did feel that different. I do have very powerful orgasms when Hick stimulates me in certain ways and I am very, very wet afterwards. There is no squirting. You'd have to ask Hick if he feels a gush. We don't tend to analyse our sexual pleasure, we just enjoy it.

 

[B_chinagirl4u2]

Lets not forget, most of the squirting in porn is FAKE.....I don't believe Cyntheria can squirt gallons across a room. So I wouldn't base anything concerning squirting, on porn movies. I will agree that it does reaffirm just how "studly" I feel when it does happen, yet I know when a woman has an orgasm without the squirting. When I said ry evewomaalmost n I have been with has done it, that does NOT mean it happened every time, or right away. And I am by no means saying I am special. Some took months/years for it to happen. Trust me, the sex was just as good without the squirt as with it (as far as I am concerned).

I think your missing the point , the girls here are from all over the world, some of us dont agree with eachother on most things, some not even like eachother very much.
But I think what we are are saying is that this notion of the "female ejaculation" is as fake as "porn squirting".
Squirting is peeing while having a orgasm, if your into "water sports" thats fine.
You say that "almost every woman I have been with has done it" has it crossed your mind that their doing it for you ? the ultimate in faked orgasm ?
I only say this as the girls here seem pretty sexually aware, from many countries and most are saying its of little interest to them.

 

[overly_straight]

The large quantities of fluid come from another dimension, via a wormhole opened up during a particularly intense ladygasm. I thought everyone knew this.

Small quantities, I think, can be explained by conventional biology.

 

[B_chinagirl4u2]

The large quantities of fluid come from another dimension, via a wormhole opened up during a particularly intense ladygasm. I thought everyone knew this.

Small quantities, I think, can be explained by conventional biology.

lol :wink:

The squirters will assimilate us :tongue:

 

[Pandora77]

Hmmmmm, I'm really not sure about this. I have never experienced squirting myself, in fact, I had never even heard about it until I joined this site.
I have experienced the "having to pee sensation" though. But I think Miss Rouge described her bladder as shutting completely off during sex or when orgasming and even for a while after it. I have experienced the same thing. I try to go up to pee right after sex to avoid UTI's, but sometimes I press really really hard and nothing comes out, even though I know my bladder isn't empty.
I also have to agree with the women that said that IF squirting really exists and isn't urine, then they would have already found some kind of gland or something else that contains the liquid.
I'll have to think about this some more. Very interesting discussion!
:Thinkingof_:

 

[hugeboto4ladies]

I think your missing the point , the girls here are from all over the world, some of us dont agree with eachother on most things, some not even like eachother very much.
But I think what we are are saying is that this notion of the "female ejaculation" is as fake as "porn squirting".
Squirting is peeing while having a orgasm, if your into "water sports" thats fine.
You say that "almost every woman I have been with has done it" has it crossed your mind that their doing it for you ? the ultimate in faked orgasm ?
I only say this as the girls here seem pretty sexually aware, from many countries and most are saying its of little interest to them.

No, they are not doing it for me. Believe it or not, we never discuss "squirting". My very first love was a squirter. I was 16 and so was she, and she squirted in 1986.....I am pretty sure she wasn't faking anything for me or that I wanted her to do it because I saw it in a porn movie (which I hadn't because the industry hadn't discovered this yet). Notice I have never debated or stated that "female ejaculation is not peeing. Nor have I said it is better than a non-squirting orgasm. Believe it or not I totally agree with you that it does in fact contain urine. The medical community has looked at this for close to 60 years. even now, they go back and forth on the G-spot and female "ejaculation". If they can't get to the bottom of it, then god knows I can't either. I can only say sex with or without is awesome to me when both people love each other and are totally comfortable with each other. fact is I support your views...

 

[B_quiet_man]

I've tried to refrain from saying this, but it's got to me now, so I'm going to blurt it out anyway.

IF you want to be strictly scientific about this matter - then you have to concede that there is currently no real concrete scientific understanding as to what a female orgasm is or why women have them at all. Female orgasm is a mystery to science, whether squirting or otherwise.

So does the fact that science cannot currently explain something mean it does not exist? Does that mean that ALL women are faking their orgasms - to fool themselves or please their partners - just because science can't explain what's going on?

Science also has no explanation for consciousness, or free-will. Are these therefore illusions too? Some - like Steven Pinker and Richard Dawkins - argue that they are.

However, I reject this argument that "because science doesn't understand it, it doesn't exist". Science cannot explain the most important things in life (consciousness and free will) so it should never be taken as the only barometer of what is entirely real or not. Science is s method to explore and attempt to understand what we experience, not a means to dictate what is and is not possible.

There are many things science cannot currently explain, including female ejaculation, and female orgasm generally.

 

[paigexox]

Few things rattling around in my brain-can right now:

1) There is an understanding of what female orgasm is, there is not a full understanding about why it exists/it's function. However, there are many scientific theories, and those are focusing our understanding towards the direction of truth.

2) Science cannot explain everything, nor does it ever purport to. This doesn't mean the phenomena does not exist (nor would an empiricist ever state that), rather, it means you have to be agnostic towards the topic until more is known (if that's your thing).

3) Even if science does understand something, it's not truth. Theories aren't proven, they're agreed upon with convergence and are by no means permanent.


The biggest problem with sex research isn't really any of the above; it's sampling. We live in a stigmatized world that leads to non-response, non-representative samples, and a lot of negative friction when it comes to exploring the domains of sexuality. In some cases, we know quite a bit more about reproduction in species other than our own, and that's because for some time now it's been OK to study "them" but not us.

 

[SilverTrain]

Few things rattling around in my brain-can right now:

1) There is an understanding of what female orgasm is, there is not a full understanding about why it exists/it's function. However, there are many scientific theories, and those are focusing our understanding towards the direction of truth.

2) Science cannot explain everything, nor does it ever purport to. This doesn't mean it does not exist (nor would an empiricist ever state that), rather, it means you have to be agnostic towards the topic until more is known (if that's your thing).

3) Even if science does understand something, it's not truth. Theories aren't proven, they're agreed upon with convergence and are by no means permanent.


The biggest problem with sex research isn't really any of the above; it's sampling. We live in a stigmatized world that leads to non-response, non-representative samples, and a lot of negative friction when it comes to exploring the domains of sexuality. In some cases, we know quite a bit more about reproduction in species other than our own, and that's because for some time now it's been OK to study "them" but not us.

i love it when you talk like that.

**Dreamy-eyed bloke sits in a trance awaiting more**

 

[B_quiet_man]

Few things rattling around in my brain-can right now:

1) There is an understanding of what female orgasm is, there is not a full understanding about why it exists/it's function. However, there are many scientific theories, and those are focusing our understanding towards the direction of truth.

Yet without a scientific understanding of consciousness - and even "scientific" attempts by hardline reductionists to paint consciousness as an illusionary phenomenon - no subjective experience can ever be understood, or proved to exist at all.

So orgasm is still a mystery for that reason alone.

2) Science cannot explain everything, nor does it ever purport to. This doesn't mean the phenomena does not exist (nor would an empiricist ever state that), rather, it means you have to be agnostic towards the topic until more is known (if that's your thing).

But there's no need to be "agnostic" towards something you personally experience. Why let the lack of scientific explanation make you doubt that you have free-will, consciousness, or squirting orgasms if you already know you experience them? To use science in that way is an attempt to deny the validity of your experience, and that's no help at all.

It's like asking "Are you really reading this right now?" - according to your argument, you'd have to remain agnostic until someone does a test that can prove the truth of the matter either way. But would your experience of the test results be real?

3) Even if science does understand something, it's not truth. Theories aren't proven, they're agreed upon with convergence and are by no means permanent.

Yes, absolutely.

I tried to refrain from taking this discussion in the direction of the philosophy of science, because I didn't want to drag everything off topic.

But my intention was to denounce the argument being used here which claims that "science doesn't have an explanation, therefore it's not real". Anyone that follows that argument would also have to believe that free-will isn't real, nor is consciousness, nor the subjective experiences of love, happiness, and orgasms.

The fact that science doesn't yet have an explanation only means something is not understood, not that it isn't real, so nobody should be trying to use that argument.

 

[ScotRandom]

Love squirters.

 

[FOXY252]

I have squirted before. Hasn't been many times, and had to be when I was VERY comfortable and HIGHLY aroused.

No, it's not piss. I read a study where they broke down several women's ejacualtory fluid, it was 1% or less urine.

In my opinion, clitoral orgasm, 10 points of pleasure.
Vag orgasm 50 points.
Squirting orgasm 1000 points.

Yes, for me, it is THAT fucking intense.
Toes curled, calves cramping, back locked into arch, legs froze, hands locked into retarded nonfunctioning grips .... hehe.... whew!!!
And... since several women on here, no finger pointing intended, haven't experienced, no need to be snide and bash the men as though they are chasing unicorns! Some of them DO know what they are speaking of, do not let your resentment & jealousy color an honestly questioned thread.
Seriously, sour grapes.

When life hands you sour grapes, squash 'em, add sugar + water and make koolaide!!! Sluuurp! AH! Sooo refreshing!

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Could you provide links to these studies you have read, please?

 

[FOXY252]

No, I can't, I ,an't save links on this old raggity cell phone I have, no highlighting capability nor paste, so OBVIOUSLY I MUST BE LYING EH?
I'm quite sure you are as capable of hitting google as I am... It's been quite some time since I read the report, so I couldn't begin to tell you which site. BUT I have always been curious to this phenominom and have indeed researched it.
So, discredit my post if you like, it will NOT change the truth.

And I'd love to meet this man who claims to have a perfect batting average for making women squirt. I myself would love to figure it out exactly which mechanics it is that sets it off.

 

[B_chinagirl4u2]

i love it when you talk like that.

**Dreamy-eyed bloke sits in a trance awaiting more**[/QUOT

ummm... we orgasm for pleasure same as men do, does there need to science involved ?

 

[B_chinagirl4u2]

Few things rattling around in my brain-can right now:

1) There is an understanding of what female orgasm is, there is not a full understanding about why it exists/it's function. However, there are many scientific theories, and those are focusing our understanding towards the direction of truth.

2) Science cannot explain everything, nor does it ever purport to. This doesn't mean the phenomena does not exist (nor would an empiricist ever state that), rather, it means you have to be agnostic towards the topic until more is known (if that's your thing).

3) Even if science does understand something, it's not truth. Theories aren't proven, they're agreed upon with convergence and are by no means permanent.


The biggest problem with sex research isn't really any of the above; it's sampling. We live in a stigmatized world that leads to non-response, non-representative samples, and a lot of negative friction when it comes to exploring the domains of sexuality. In some cases, we know quite a bit more about reproduction in species other than our own, and that's because for some time now it's been OK to study "them" but not us.

i love it when you talk like that.

**Dreamy-eyed bloke sits in a trance awaiting more**[/QUOT

ummm... we orgasm for pleasure same as men do, does there need to science involved ?

 

[ManlyBanisters]

No, I can't, I ,an't save links on this old raggity cell phone I have, no highlighting capability nor paste, so OBVIOUSLY I MUST BE LYING EH?
I'm quite sure you are as capable of hitting google as I am... It's been quite some time since I read the report, so I couldn't begin to tell you which site. BUT I have always been curious to this phenominom and have indeed researched it.
So, discredit my post if you like, it will NOT change the truth.

And I'd love to meet this man who claims to have a perfect batting average for making women squirt. I myself would love to figure it out exactly which mechanics it is that sets it off.

You're a bit defensive - I only asked for links to something I was interested in reading.

Seesh!

 

[SilverTrain]

i love it when you talk like that.

**Dreamy-eyed bloke sits in a trance awaiting more**[/QUOT

ummm... we orgasm for pleasure same as men do, does there need to science involved ?

I'm not sure how my playfully sycophantic reply to Paige is relevant to your reply to my post( ), but I definitely support women's orgasms, science or no.