Lesbians Have Orgasms More Than Straight Women, Bisexual Women May Have Less

    In the December, 1994 volume of Off Our Backs, a peer-reviewed journal of contemporary women's issues, a short article, without an author's name attached was published entitled, "Lesbians More Likely to Have Orgasms." More appropriately, it would have been titled "Women Who Have Sex With Women More Likely to Have Orgasms", as it was reporting on the National Lesbian and Bisexual Women's Health Survey, put out by the Lesbian Health Clinic,  of lesbian and bisexual women (4).  In any case, it was discovered that, using another study that asked heterosexual women about their orgasms, that 65% of lesbian and bisexual women regularly experienced orgasm during sex, compared to 26% of heterosexual women (4).

    This actually makes a lot of sense, because we know from previous studies reviewed here, that women are socialized from a young age to put their partner's s pleasure before their own,  including sexual pleasure, and we know from Kimmel's chapter on social construction, that socialization has a powerful influence on the way people think about themselves and others, and act. If women consider their partner's sexual pleasure the most important thing, and men are not socialized this way, as been shown in other studies discussed on this blog, then in a heterosexual relationship, it makes sense that women don't orgasm very often. However, when both partners are women and they are both socialized to put the other's sexual pleasure before their own, it's no wonder they both enjoy sex more! (Perhaps to answer Mary D. Pellaneur's question of whether it's men or women who need to change their attitudes about sex- should women care less about men's pleasure? should men care more about women's?- this study would suggest both partners prioritizing the other's pleasure gets good results!) Furthermore, we know from Maines' book that the majority of women cannot orgasm from intercourse alone, and need clitoral stimulation, and sex between women definitely emphasizes the clitoral. 

When another study was done twenty years later, in 2014, in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, that compared sexual pleasure between heterosexual, bisexual, and lesbian men and women, and was covered by the Huffington Post by Cavan Sieczkowski, it was discovered that not only were men still more likely to orgasm then women (85% vs. 61%- so the number of even heterosexual women orgasming has increased significantly since 1994!), but lesbians were still more likely to orgasm then heterosexual women- 74% to 61%. The gap is closing, but lesbians still orgasm fairly significantly more often, so the above factors should still be present as well- women are still socialized to prioritize others over themselves, and men are not. A reason why the gap might be closing, is that men might be more encouraged than now than before to take women's needs into consideration, women may be in better places to advocate for themselves more, and also other forms of sexual pleasure might be becoming more popular. (The article is entitled, "Lesbians Are Having More Orgasms Than Straight Women.")

What's different, and interesting, is that bisexual women orgasm only 58% of the time, which is not only lower than the percentage for heterosexual women by just a little bit, but also lower than bisexual women's orgasm rate in 1994, and I can't think of why this is the case.

Any ideas?

Summary: Gerhard on Koedt's Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm

 In her article, “Revisiting ‘The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm’: The Female Orgasm in American Sexual Thought and Second-Wave Feminism” published in 2000 in vol. 26 of Feminist Studies, Jane Gerhard, PhD, describes the trends, conversations, and  controversies amongdoctors, psychologists, and feminists in 20^th century America, surrounding women’s orgasms.  The titular ‘Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm’ was a 1968 treatise written by Anne Koedt and published by New York Radical Women (449). An instant success, it argued against the common assertion that women received intercourse exclusively through intercourse, and explored women’s sexuality. In Gerhard’s article, she places this piece in its historical context.

Book by Anne Koedt.

        In her first section, “Woman as Vaginal”, she discusses the beliefs about the orgasm that existed in the first half of the 20^th century. At this time, a “companion marriage” where a heterosexual couple would love and care for one another, and have sex, was considered the proper and “normal” thing to do (451). It was agreed upon, amongst psychologists and sexologists, that intercourse was normal for women, but most strongly discouraged clitoral stimulation, warning that it would lead women to reject intercourse, and begin masturbating (452). As discussed in my other posts, Freud associated the clitoris with immaturity, and the vagina with maturity in women (452). In the 30s, 40s, and 50s America, his beliefs were solidified, and his followers placed an emphasis on this that even he did not- in those decades, sexologists strongly emphasized that naturalness of intercourse and heterosexuality, and the “masculine” and “immature” nature of the clitoris (454).  

        His student, Helene Deutsch, especially argued that female sexuality was rooted in the vagina, and that a normal, proper woman neither had sex too much or too little, and was subordinate, passive, dependent, and maternal- a female sexuality rooted in the clitoris, she argued, is associated with improper sexuality and improper femininity in general (455-457). A woman, she argued, could adapt to any sexual practice, and enjoy it- even rape (456). Certainly, no effort should be made to please her.  Hischmann and Berger agreed, connecting vaginal orgasm not only to proper femininity, but heterosexuality as well (459). Thus, when Koedt and other feminists attacked the “vaginal orgasm”, they were arguing against not only the idea that orgasms in women were mostly vaginal, but also the expectations for femininity associated with them.

Helene Deutsch.

    Her second section, “Clitoral Visions”, examines sexual thought, as it pertains to women, from 1953-1966. Kinsey, Masters, and Johnson all challenged the existence of vaginal orgasm, and argued for an understanding of sexuality that was based in pleasure, not reproduction- and thus, they focused on clitoral orgasm (460). They discovered that vaginal intercourse was not what was most pleasurable for most women, and that in fact, women behave sexually like men, and enjoy clitoral simulation (461-462). Both feminists and sex revolutionaries found these findings useful, but feminists also criticized the sexologists for being focused solely on the body, not on psychological responses, and being unconcerned with politics, and both criticized their maintenance of the status quo, as Kinsey, Masters, and Johnson  were mostly concerned with improving marital sex.  (461, 463).

     Her third section, “The Politics of Sexual Freedom”, explores sexual thought from 1968-1973, which is the era in which Koedt wrote her text. Like the sexologists from the earlier period, most sex revolutionaries emphasized the bodily (464). Much to the frustration of feminists, and women in general, the “radical” men of this period, looked at sex in an entirely ungendered way, and put forth an idea of freedom that only amounted to , “I have the right to have sex with women whenever I want, and they have the right to have sex with men whenever they want.” (465). There was little to no advocacy for  the social or political freedom that was badly needed for women to truly have a liberated sexuality, and women were subjected to sexism, objectification, and assault in the pursuit of this particular kind of sexual “freedom” (465, 468).  Black women, and other women of color, were especially subjected to sexual exploitation and violence, and they found that many white feminists  instead of working with them, were unwilling to examine these consequences of racism (471).

            Feminists in this period, including Koedt, were part of a productive dialogue, in which “a range of perspectives” were put forward. They agreed on little, but the conversation had not yet transformed into the divisive Sex Wars of the 1980s (450). Agreed upon goals were to emphasize the importance of the clitoris, see women’s sexuality as “female sexuality”, not heterosexual or homosexual sexuality, and to criticize the two main constructions of women’s sexuality in a way that would allow for the development of  women's sexual empowerment and agency (451). These two constructions were the original construction of sexuality, advanced by Freud and still present, which approved only of sexually passive women, and the modern construction of sexuality, advanced by the sexual revolutionaries, that defined women primarily by her sexuality, and expected women to be sexual only with men (451).  Many of these ideas were originally Koedt’s, or formed with her help, and all are highlighted in the treatise.

    Koedt, in her text, emphasizes that these constructions of female sexuality resulted in women experiencing feelings of guilt, inadequacy, and shame, and were constantly receiving messages how they should be behaving, sexually, everywhere, and especially from the therapists who they turned to for help (459). She advanced the idea that if women were unhappy with their sex lives, it was not because of anything they were doing or not doing, but because of sexism, homophobia, and mandatory heterosexuality (466). She wanted women to be able to “full sexual agents” who could be responsible for their own sexual pleasure, and she believed that the clitoris was integral here, because anyone, the woman herself, or a partner of any gender, could pleasure her via the clitoris (466-467). Feminists in general, in this period emphasized intimacy, love, psychological pleasure, and lesbianism and bisexuality, as important components of women’s sexuality (469-471).

    Overall, I was really impressed by this article, which I found through, helpful, and attentive to many other women’s experiences- unlike in other articles, queer women and women of color are not ignored, although more attention to Black women’s criticism of not only “radical” men, but white feminists as well, would have been good, and I am also interested in how trans women figured into all of this. But as a whole, the argue provided a good, cursory overview of the period that incorporated multiple views and experiences.