Research - College Students and Sexual Pleasure

INTRO

A part of our project was doing our own sociological research at Clark University. We created a short survey to measure responses quantitatively and used convenience sampling in recruiting our participants. A link of the study and recruitment information were posted on Clark University groups on a social media service. The study was inspired by a similar study looking at determinants of sexual enjoyment and an article assessing the gender inequality in hook up culture. Receiving oral sex, a skilled partner and intimacy between partners helped women achieve orgasms more often (446, 448, 453). However, our current culture of hooking up is inequal, women are much more likely to give than to receive oral sex. They also have difficulty communicating their desires to partners in short term relationships. 

DATA

Our sample consisted of 79 participants: 73% women, 26% men, 1% transgender and 1% gender queer.

Most participants identified as heterosexual: 81% straight, 8% gay and lesbian, 8% bisexual, 2% pansexual, 1% queer.

88% engaged in sexual activities (oral, vaginal, anal, digital), 91% of those who are sexually active also engaged in sexual activities while in college

51% have been in long term relationships and 50% have been in short term relationships

In long term relationships: 63% experienced orgasms frequently, 100% valued their partner's experience and 84% valued their own experience

In short term relationships: only 31% experienced orgasms frequently, 81% valued their partner's experience and 72% valued their own experience

BARRIERS

There were several limitations to our study. Firstly, we lacked a qualitative component that could have gone more in depth about the experiences college students have. We could have conducted interviews, but we believed subjects would be reluctant in openly talking about their experiences to researchers who went to the same school. Confidentiality could be maintained, but participants might not feel comfortable discussing a taboo subject in such detail.

Another issue was the female skew we saw in participants. Our study was not aimed at the experiences of women only, but rather wanted to compare results across genders, sexual identities and orientations. Having a heavily female sample can give us more distribution in the data on women, but it also limits us by keeping all other groups in small proportions.

The sampling may also reflect issues. Since sexuality is such a taboo subject in many societies, it would not be a surprise if several students decided not to participate due to the subject matter of the survey. This discourages participants from making their behaviors and attitudes known for study.

Designing the study also posed problems when we were collecting data. Not agreeing on what a word or phrase means can provide inaccurate results that do not reflect the true image of the population, in this case, Clark University students. Terms such as relationship (long and short term) had to be clearly defined in the study. Short term relationships were considered to be shorter than a month and included hook ups and one night stands, long term relationships were those lasting for more than 6 months. 

CONCLUSIONS

The most surprising discovery is that both male and female participants seems to care more about the experience of their partner than their own. This may be due to not wanting to seem inexperienced. 

The data show what we have expected. Women experience fewer orgasms and give more than they get compared to men. Long term relationships allow women and men to experience more orgasms, more communication, less judgement, more giving and receiving and an increased value attached to sexual enjoyment. 

References

Armstrong, EA.; England, P.; Fogarty, ACK. Accounting for women's orgasm and sexual enjoyment in college hookups and relationships. American Sociological Review, 77(3), 435-462. 2012 

In Hookups, Inequality Still Reigns (Well In Hookups Inequality Still Reigns Comments)

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/women-find-orgasms-elusive-in-hookups/?_r=0

Where do we learn about this?

A subject as rich as sexuality would surely be discussed in theory on gender. Students studying social sciences would surely come across chapter deconstructing the meaning of sex as a social behavior. It turns out that not so much, in fact. Our assigned texts did a fantastic job at showing gender in social institutions, however there is no topic dealing exclusively with human sexuality. The issue of the orgasm, male and female, is not tackled either although it stands at the center of our definition of sexual activity.

Mentions of sexuality are present in Kimmel's book in various sections, however there is no concentrated chapter looking into the matter. The Weitz reader has some chapters that almost touch upon the issue of female orgasm and sexual pleasure, however, the perspective of these articles is more specialized in looking at other issues in sexuality, such as breasts, the body, black femininity and sexuality and subcultures. 

The lack of information on female orgasms in the literature, in itself, seems to be a bigger statement that may emphasize that even scholars have a difficult time stepping out of ideology. 
It also raises questions about sexual education, especially in a country where sex ed is not always offered or is not medically accurate. The missing conversation on the topics of sexuality and sexual pleasure carries on the notion that sexual activity is centered around reproduction, reinforcing the male-dominated heteronormative views of society. 

References
Kimmel, Michael S. The Gendered Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Weitz, Rose, and Samantha Kwan. The Politics of Women's Bodies: Sexuality, Appearance, and Behavior. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Course Presentation

Below is the link to our course presentation. This is the collective work of all four authors, enrolled in Sociology of Gender at Clark University in Fall 2014.

Presentation link 

The presentation is public and viewable to the public.

Social and Behavioral Constructions of Female Sexuality

This paper critiques some theories of sexuality that emerged in the second half of the 20th century.

KINSEY remains the most controversial and comprehensive source of information for female sexuality, however the authors note that male biases are present in the research (Miller and Fowlkes, 785). The issue with Kinsey's work is that it employs gendered double standards. While he is critical of the distinctions between female and male sexual activity which disproportionately inhibits "women's sexual activity outside of marriage", he does encourage coitus although it is significantly less frequently a source of orgasmic response for women (Miller and Fowlkes, 785). Although he acknowledges that penetrative sex is not that pleasurable for females, they are told to engage in it (both premarital and marital sex) to help the male reach his physiological response (785).

"A similar bias is revealed in Kinsey's interpretation of his finding that female sexual unresponsiveness is a major factor in women's premarital coital reluctance. A man, of course, may reach orgasm through coitus without doing much at all to arouse or stimulate response in his female partner. Rather than portraying men as the victims of women's unresponsiveness, it would be fairer to suggest that women may be victimized by men's self-interest and failure to show the consideration necessary to incorporate female orgasm into the coital experience." (785-6)

Another traditional bias he holds is stating that an orgasm cannot be the "sole criterion" for female pleasurable activity, as many women find satisfaction knowing their partner enjoyed the contact and that she "contributed to" his pleasure (786). This idea is very similar to the gynecology texts of the 1940s-1970s that maintained a male-oriented perspective with gendered biases in the field of female sexual and reproductive health.

Alfred Kinsey
http://static.businessinsider.com/image/5256ce91eab8ea6d5dbb7257/image.jpg

The works of MASTERS AND JOHNSON are also presented in this theoretical review. Their contribution to the field is highly significant because their laboratory tests helped recognize the clitoris as a vital part of the female sexual response (787). They described it as a "unique organ in the total of human anatomy. Its express purpose is to serve both as a receptor and transformer of sensual stimuli." (787). Therefore, the passive, sexually unresponsive, unorgasmic woman was equipped with a mechanism specialized solely on pleasure, while the man - the dominant gender in the equation of sexuality - was not. This discovery helped combat the myth of absolute female frigidity: women were not possessing a "lesser sexuality" (787). Moreover, their tests revealed the autonomy of female sexuality, women were experiencing a higher frequency of orgasmic response through "self-regulated mechanical or automanipulative technique" (787). However, the researchers are criticized for insisting that orgasms are the sole meaningful conclusion of a sexual contact, they fail to recognize the cultural importance of other behaviors expressing commitment and intimacy between partners (789).

The introduction of sexuality to the field of sociology would not have been possible without the work of GAGNON AND SIMON. They presented a social interactionist perspective on human sexual behavior which combats the narrow views of Kinsey, Masters and Johnson (789). According to Gagnon and Simon, sexual behavior is a subtype of social behavior and must be analyzed as such; they conclude that this behavior is learned (789). The degree of sexuality can be assessed by consulting the meaning assigned to behaviors "by the actors involved" (789). However, even their work has major setbacks, reflecting a male bias. Their view of adult sexuality emphasizing marriage is considered "limited in scope and shallow in content", not accounting for the inclusion of diversity of sexual expression (790).

Conclusions

The authors conclude by assessing the overall field of sexuality. They believe that a paradigm for female sexuality studies has yet to emerge, but that the studies presented and critiqued have created significant progress despite their limitations (800). The emerging literature helped dispel Freudian ideas about sexual development and reinforced the legitimacy of sexuality as a field of study (800).

References

Patricia Y. Miller and Martha R. Fowlkes, "Social and Behavioral Constructions of Female Sexuality"Vol. 5, No. 4, Women: Sex and Sexuality (pp. 783-800), Summer, 1980

A Sociological Sexuality Model

The paper starts by listing the critiques for popular human sexuality theories. Freud's theory is rejected for being too psychological in approach and being centered a specific time and place (early 20th century Vienna), Marxist perspectives do not follow because gender roles are not influenced exclusively by the mode of production, and sociobiological discoveries fail to account for cross-cultural differences noted by anthropologists (Reiss, 233). His view emphasizes comparative sociology and connections to cultural anthropology.

http://modernpsychologist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Sociobiology-Times.jpg

Having rejected there theoretical perspectives, the author constructs his own human sexuality model. His approach is at the macro-level, looking for patterns in aggregates, as micro-level interactions may contaminate the data since it wouldn't provide clear distinctions between separate categories (Reiss, 234). He then defines sex, gender role and sexuality as follows: sex is the genetic sex, gender role is what theorists referred to incorrectly as sex role-learned social behaviors, and sexuality is composed of "those cultural scripts aimed at erotic arousal that produce genitalia responses" (Reiss, 234). Furthermore, the process is not innate, but learned behavior (Reiss, 234).

Sexuality is important is all cultures as a process of human interactions; societies will either encourage or restrict it (Reiss, 235). However, the author does not think reproduction has a significant role in this cross-cultural interest in sexuality. Looking at nonindustrial cultures, he noted that becoming pregnant is not the center of sexuality, but rather the effect of a particular type of sexual interaction, "repetitive coitus with one's marriage partner", and raising children is a collective activity, not the independent responsibility of one woman (Reiss, 235).

http://en.slovoidilo.ua/uploads/news/7a941704bd72667a788eab044cbe4b24.png

Next, Reiss looks at ideology as the fundamental general perspective, "our ideological beliefs [...] promote our popular perspectives on sexual normality" (Reiss, 237). Opinion polls from the era suggest that women were much more in favor of economic, political, religious and social equality, but were not as accepting of equal sexual rights (Reiss, 237). On the other hand, men were accepting sexual equality, but were reluctant to embrace overall gender equality.

Reiss talks about the male premature ejaculation again. This time he compares it to the fact that a woman being able to achieve orgasms in a short amount of time is praised for being responsive and her orgasm can help her male partner feel like an adequate lover (Reiss, 238).

Reference:
Ira L. Reiss, "A Sociological Journey into Sexuality" Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 48, No. 2 (pp. 233-242) , May, 1986

Ideology, Sociology, Sexuality

Reiss's paper analyzes the origin and relation of certain ideas concerning sexuality.

Firstly, he discusses biological differences, based on hormones and states that androgen is related to aggressiveness and sexual motivation and is more present in males than females (Reiss, 273). While the average male has more androgen, there are many differences within sex categories. Also, learning behaviors can alter our hormonal tendencies, showing that in this case nurture wins over nature (Reiss, 273).

Discussing normative behavior, the author analyzes a series of cultural phenomena present in our society.

http://www.joshreads.com/images/09/11/i091123shoe.gif

He chooses to start his discussion with the issue of premature ejaculation, noting that our construction of the word references the female orgasm as the central one since the male ejaculation is said to be achieved before this culturally imposed standard (Reiss, 276). The author notes that some South African, male-dominated societies do not have this concept of premature ejaculation. Further on, he asks why the typical response from therapists for men who encountered premature ejaculation isn't to tell them to "bring the female to orgasm orally or manually"(Reiss, 276). He suggests that our current sexual ideology focuses on penetrative, heterosexual intercourse that reinforces traditional sexuality .(Reiss, 276). According to him, our culture is aimed at promoting the male orgasm more than the female orgasm (Reiss, 276). The man is the one who directs the sexual encounters, who initiates, who decides within our cultural sex ideology (Reiss, 276). These hegemonic ideas pressure our bodies, behaviors and attitudes into conforming roles (Reiss, 278).

Our sexual history maintains the myth of absolute virginity, especially during the Puritan period, however, data shows that the a large number of people, men and women, engaged in premarital sex

(Reiss, 278). Male nonvirginity is rarely celebrated and in almost all known cultures most of the males reaching the age of physical maturity are not virgins (Reiss, 278). This has been influenced by men's position of authority in society. Their access to power allowed them to define a sexual code at their advantage, with cultural practices and beliefs enforced by socialization and enculturation. 

In the conclusion of his article, Reiss talks about the clash of two opposing ideologies in 1980s American society. Traditional Romantic ideology, emphasizing female sexual subservience and inferiority, is opposing the Modern-Naturalistic view that embraces gender equality and values sexual experiences of both men and women in various expressions (Reiss, 280). He notes that while tolerance and equality in sex were increasing, this ideology of acceptance and equality was not in a dominant position in society, hence unable to change the status quo (Reiss, 281).

Reference: 

Ira L. Reiss, "Some Observations on Ideology and Sexuality in America" Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 43, No. 2 (pp. 271-283), May, 1981

Women in Gynecology Textbooks

The Scully and Bart piece published in 1973 analyses 27 gynecology texts written from 1943 to 1972 by looking at the viewpoint presented. The scholars conclude that the literature remains oriented towards maintaining the male-dominated, traditional views of sexuality despite the revolutionary findings of Kinsey, Masters and Johnson (Scully and Bart, 1048). Overall, ideas of the centrality of motherhood in women's lives persists, while men as defined by their active sexual responses and desires.

The authors note that "one's perspectives are constrained by one's place in the social structure and thus gynecologists may not adequately represent the interests of the group they are supposed to attend and advocate" (Scully and Bart, 1045). An overwhelming majority of male practitioners would mean that the field lacks a female perspective on what is a female health issue.  Considering that 40 years ago, when this article was published, over 90% of gynecologists were male, it is not hard to imagine that their academic writings on the subject reflected their male perspectives and portrayed female sexuality in a way that maintained traditional sex-role stereotypes (Scully and Bart, 1045). 

MOTHERHOOD
Gynecology texts from 1943 to 1972 revolve around the idea that women as "anatomically destined to reproduce, nurture" (Scully and Bart, 1045). One text refers to the experience of motherhood as an "urge" (Scully and Bart, 1046). This biological explanation is used to define the role of females in a very strict way which does not allow for possible deviant behaviors and attitudes. In the medical literature, the natural inclination for motherhood is balanced by sexual pleasure, considered "entirely secondary or even absent" (Scully and Bart, 1046). In other words, the automatic, biological female response is seeking motherhood, while sexual response is not important or present as women as frigid.

FRIGIDITY
The texts dating from this period assume that women are "almost universally generally frigid" (Scully and Bart, 1046). Their role in sexual health is defined as constricted to motherhood, while men are defined as active and pursuing their sexual drives. This was done, in the case of women, by reporting that the vagina was the main erogenous zone, even after Kinsey debunked the myth of vaginal orgasms (Scully and Bart, 1047). The vagina was considered the "mature response", while the role of the clitoris was greatly diminished and linked to immaturity and frigidity (Scully and Bart, 1047). This generalized female sexual unresponsiveness, the passivity, was for some authors part of the core of the female personality (Scully and Bart, 1048). The construction of the myth of female frigidity was in opposition to the active male sex, who had an insatiable appetite for intercourse (Scully and Bart, 1046).

MALE SEXUAL DRIVE
These texts in a woman-oriented field claimed that women are biologically designed to keep their husbands happy, they are to at the control of their male counterparts (Scully and Bart, 1045). Sexually, women are frigid, unable to perceive or care about pleasure, but men have a much greater appetite and capacity for intercourse. So, their sexual contacts already have a paradoxical nature, however they were greatly encouraged. Gynecologists were told to suggest that patients, unresponsive in nature, should deceive their partners by using innocent simulation (Scully and Bart, 1046). Faking sexual interest or an orgasm was part of making your husband happy. 

"The frequency of intercourse depends entirely upon the male sex drive ... The bride should be advised to allow her husband's sex drive to set their pace and she should attempt to gear hers satisfactorily to his."(Scully and Bart, 1048).

This was advice given to young women in 1970, a time was less than 30% of women had premarital sex (CDC, 1991). Men were described in the literature as wanting to dominate and subjugate women(Scully and Bart, 1048). It means that the submissive behavior was natural, but for women it was also learned behavior, as a means of social control. The norm was that women had to adapt to the male response their husbands exhibited or else there was a "real [medical] problem" (Scully and Bart, 1048).

INTENTIONAL SELECTIVITY
The article notes the rigidity in textbooks along the studied decades. After Kinsey, Masters and Johnson made their discoveries in human sexuality, most textbooks cherry-picked the data to present their points of view. Result? Most books included some details pertaining to male sexuality, but failed to include any of the discoveries on female sexuality such as the myth of the vaginal orgasm or the existence of female multiple orgasms (Scully and Bart, 1047). This level of selectivity of results leads the authors to characterize the general tone of gynecology literature as having a male bias (Scully and Bart, 1048). The evidence does indeed point to severe opposition to change in mentalities concerning human sexuality. Women's sexuality is barely researched and discussed, although the lack of knowledge can be detrimental for public health. 

FOREVER MALE FIELD?
The article dates back from 1973 and we are seeing changes. While almost two thirds of ob-gyn doctors are male, the majority of those training are women.The increased supply of female doctors can benefit research and policy making by bringing a new perspective and patients can feel like their doctors can empathize with them. However, the current demand for ob-gyn doctors is skewed towards the female applicants, their male counterparts feel unwelcome in a job market that is searching for female doctors.  http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/07/us/women-s-health-is-no-longer-a-man-s-world.html


RELATION TO ORGASMS
The literature has changed from the 1970s, but many of these deeply embedded beliefs have carried over to this generation, some have turned into other forms of controlling and underplaying female sexuality. Female orgasms are not discussed, are considered nonexistent, unimportant. The problem with medical literature that is not accurate is that is reinforces gendered social behaviors and attitudes, instead of objective results. Beliefs and stereotypes are heavily used used in social interactions, thus it is no surprise that these are some of the most popular ideas in regards to female orgasms we currently hold seem to stem back from a few generations ago  http://www.everydayhealth.com/sexual-health-pictures/dr-laura-berman-top-10-female-orgasm-myths.aspx#01



Reference:
Scully, Diana, and Pauline Bart. "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Orifice: Women in Gynecology Textbooks." In American Journal of Sociology, 1045-1050. Jan. 1973 ed. Vol. 78. University of Chicago Press.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 

Current Trends Premarital Sexual Experience Among Adolescent Women -- United States, 1970-1988. 1991

 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001869.htm

"Social Construction Theory: Problems in the History of Sexuality", Homosexuality, Which Homosexuality?"

Social construction theory in the field of sexuality suggested that one of the last remaining outposts of the “natural” in our thinking was fluid and changeable, the product of human action and history rather than the invariant result of the body, biology or an innate sex drive.Social construction theory has become the influential, some charge orthodox, framework in the new sex history. It has generated enthusiasm, which make it all the more necessary to identify and explore current problems in social construction(160)

For all of us, essentialism was our first way of thinking about sexuality and still remains the hegemonic one in the culture. Only those who depart from the dominant system have cause to label themselves; those who work within it remain more unselfconscious.Construction theory is committed to asking the questions and to challenging assumptions which impair our ability to even imagine these questions. Construction theory is against premature closure, and its price is tolerating ambiguity. (161)

Social construction approaches call attention to the paradox between the historically variable ways in which culture and society construct seemingly stable reality and experience: here, the ways in which the prevailing sexual system seems natural and inevitable to its natives, and for many individuals the expression of some deeply felt essence.(161)

Sexuality is constructed at the level of culture and history through complex interactions which we are now trying to understand does not mean that individuals have an open-ended ability to construct themselves, or to reconstruct themselves multiple times in adulthood.(162) At minimum, all social construction approaches adopt the view that physically identical sexual acts may have varying social significance and subjective meaning depending on how they are defined and understood in different cultures and historical periods. Some social construction theory posits that even the direction sexual desire itself.(163)

The most radical form of constructionist theory is willing to entertain the idea that there is no essential, undifferentiated sexual impulse, “sex drive” or “lust”, which resides the body due to physiological functioning and sensation.(163)

The intellectual history of social construction is a complex one, The point of briefly noting a few moments in its history here is simply to illustrate that social construction theorists and writers differ in their willingness to imagine what was constructed.(164)Many other social constructionists assume that specific, core behaviors and physical relations are reliably understood as sexual, even though they occur in diverse cultures or historical periods. The often implicit assumptions about the sexual nature of physical acts or relations depend in turn on deeply embedded cultural frameworks that we use to think about the body. Social construction’s greatest strength lies in its violation  of our folk knowledge and scientific ideologies that would frame sexuality as “natural”, determined by biology and the body.(165)

Social constructionists do not grapple with theoretical issues about degrees of social construction, the object of study, or the meaning of the body in a vacuum. The new sex history is indebted to feminism and gay liberation for many of its insights, for non-academic settings which nurtured this work during the early states of its development when the university disapproved, and for its intellectual urgency. Variability, subjectivity, negotiation and change often violated the wish for a continuous history.(167)

In contrast, the social constructionist framework common in lesbian and gay history has become disseminated to a larger lesbian and gay public. (168)All movements of sexual liberation, including lesbian and gay, are built on imagining:imagining that things could be different, other, better than they are. Social construction shares that imaginative impulse and thus is not a threat to the lesbian and gay movement, but very much of it(169)

History of the Female Orgasm: Part 5: Looking to the Future

   Today, I'm finishing my summary and review of Rachel P. Maines' book, The Technology of Orgasm. In her last chapter, which is fairly short, only a little over twenty pages, she looks at more contemporary discussions about orgasm, and looks toward the future.


In doing so, she returns to her original idea about the androcentric model in heterosexual relations- that "real sex" is vaginal penetration, male erection, and then male orgasm, and nothing else (116). She talks about how it's only in the 60s that we began even questioning that model, and even as she wrote this, in the 90s, women who admitted to needing clitoral stimulation were still pathologized, and seen as asking too much of their men, inconveniencing them and making their sexual experience less fun because they couldn't "relax" (112, 113, 115).

 And pressure was- and is- put on women to fake orgasms, in order to make sure their husband didn't feel badly, with seventy percent of women admitting to faking orgasms regularly, rather than to try to explain to their husbands that they needed other stimulation (117-118). It was to the point that faking orgasm was seen as a "common courtesy" for women to do (119). On the other hand, men are expected by society to be automatically sexually talented, which obviously is a lot of pressure, but it also hurts women, in that men therefore often don't actually want to know the truth about whether their girlfriends are enjoying sex, and therefore don't ask, because they don't want to know, or don't question when it appears that maybe an orgasm wasn't "real" (117). It also results in men blaming women for not orgasming, for insisting that there's something wrong with her, not with his method (117).

She also brings up the vibrator again, and discusses the way that though many women do like it, it's also more or less the only socially acceptable means of masturbation for women, and she doesn't think that's unrelated to the way that it's seen as really only a substitute for a penis, or even "the imagined male accompanying every dildo" in the eyes of many men (122).


Men's sexual needs, and egos,  were still clearly elevated above women's, and Maines wants us to ask ourselves why we think that is- it may be clear, given the history she covered in the rest of the book, why this androcentric model would be put forth, but she wants us to question why we actively participate in its maintenance now, through not being honest in our relationships, or faking orgasms.
She sees us at a point where we have a choice- maintain the model through silence, or talk to our partners, communicate, and address this issue.




I think this is a strong way to end, and in general I thought this was one of her better chapters in awhile. Overall, I think this book provided a lot of interesting and important information, and I only wish that it was less repetitive,  and as I've discussed at length in earlier posts, I wish there was greater effort to take into account women's emotional experiences, and emotion in general.

Trans Women and Orgasms

So far, the articles and chapters on women's orgasms that we've reviewed and summarized here have not made a point to take into account trans women's experiences, or acknowledge trans women at all.
Many people assume that trans women have the same experience with orgasm as cis men, but that's just simply not true. Trans women are socialized differently than cis men, have different hormone levels, are treated differently by sexual partners, and sometimes have different parts. In Julia Serano, PhD, 's best selling 2007 book, Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Women on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity, she spends a chapter, entitled "Boygasms and Girlgasms: A Frank Discussion About Hormones and Gender Differences", discussing her experience with orgasm, and what other trans women have experienced with their orgasms. She doesn't claim to represent all trans women, and I do know trans women who have had different experiences than what Serano discusses here, all experiences she discusses are experiences she says she's heard from many trans women, and appear to be common (67).  She discusses these experiences within the book's larger argument, that both a biologically deterministic view of gender, and a socially constructionist view of gender, are overly simplistic and flawed. One of her  overall arguments, which I highly recommend reading (the book as a whole is super interesting, and discusses things mostly within a cultural and social context, and is less focused on her body, which can be rare given society's obsession with trans bodies), is that there are biological differences between men and women, mostly related to hormones, that socialization exaggerates (74).

      She starts off her chapter by stating that while yes, biological determinism is wrong, the backlash against biological determinism often overemphasizes socialization, and ignores the importance of hormones, though she stresses that hormones are not "on off switch", and that everyone has some of both, in varying levels, on a continuum (66). One of things she talks about, rather tongue-in-cheek,  is what hasn't changed since she started taking estrogen and androgen blockers. She cries as much as she used to (although she says her emotions are harder to ignore than they used to be), is still as rational, still has the same tastes in women, food, and culture, and has retained all her skills related to mathematics, science, and reading maps (68, 72).  Even before transition, she was never as competitive or aggressive as men were, and remained the same personality-wise after transition (73).
     When it comes to sex, however, the hormones changed not everything- her sexual orientation, for example, remained the same- but a lot of things. She reports a sharp decrease in sex drive, with her going from wanting sexual release at least once a day, to only desiring it a few times a week (70). The way she masturbated also changed. While she always preferred erotic stories and fantasies over pictures of naked bodies, the way many women do,  she used to prefer  "back and forth stroking action", but after she started hormones, and without having had surgery, she began to prefer vibrators (70).  With her wife and by herself, she noted that it took her longer to orgasm, but that when an orgasm finally happened, it was much more intense, and diffused throughout her entire body, in a way that pre-hormones orgasms didn't (71). The orgasms are also multiple, when they weren't before, starkly different from each other, when they used to be more or less the same, and are less dependent on anything visual (71).  After treatment with hormones, her orgasms and sexual experiences were the same, more or less, as a cis women's. Though Serano does not discuss this, I know trans women whose sexual experiences were like this pre-transition as well, which might complicate this slightly.
    What does this tell us about orgasm and gender more generally? Certainly that hormones have a lot to do with the physical mechanics of orgasm, much more so than, perhaps, the actual clitoris itself, or certainly anything vaginal. It also tells us about some of the major differences between orgasms that men have  (and non-transitioned women) and orgasms that women have (and non-transitioned men).

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?

"The Moral Significance of Female Orgasm" Review

    In her article, "The Moral Significance of the Female Orgasm: Toward Sexual Ethics That Celebrates Women’s Sexuality”, published in a 1993, in volume 9 of Journal of Feminist Studies of Religion, Mary D. Pellauer suggests important questions concerning the orgasm that she believes the feminist movement and women working on women’s sexuality and experiences in academia, should address. Published in 1993, this is the earliest of the academic articles that I will be reviewing, which is why it is also the first I am reviewing. It will be interesting, moving forward, to see the extent to which the questions Pellauer suggests here, are addressed and answered. In this particular piece, she does not attempt to answer many of the questions she poses, leaving it largely open for other writers and researchers.

        I don’t know that this diminishes the article’s significance, as some of the questions posed, just by nature of them being asked, complicate or nuance the traditional narrative that surrounds woman’s orgasm. Some of these questions are: What are the differences between women who find talk of orgasm exciting, and are willing to participate in discussions, and those who feel that they’ve talked about it too much, and do not want to hear about it? (165). Does the ability to have orgasms confer moral status? (165). Can sex without orgasm still be good sex? (165). Is orgasm a male-dominated standard for evaluating sex? (165). How do your backgrounds inform our orgasmic experiences? (167-170). Should we ask “should woman have orgasms?” and should the answer be yes? (177). Should women take orgasms more for granted, or should men take them less for granted? (179). Interestingly, in 2014, over twenty years later, I don’t think there are conclusive answers to any of these questions. These are all still relevant today.

     She does attempt to make some assertions, in the form of guidelines for discussions about orgasm, which can be briefly laid out. She argues that as important as it is to correct misconceptions about the female orgasm, it is also imperative that we “create more adequate accounts of female sexuality”. (161). And that is what she begins to do here. She also emphases the importance of the fact that women, unlike men, do not take orgasm for granted in their sexual relations, and encourages us to investigate the causes and consequences for this. (162-165). She stresses that is important when we discuss the significance of orgasm, to remember women who have not or cannot orgasm, and not marginalize their experience or shame them for it. (181).

       She also suggests “six important elements” in orgasmic experience, that she feels are important both to the experience, and investigations of that experience. There are: (1) “being here-and-now” (how “in the moment” one is during sex, and how varied sexual likes/dislikes/needs can be depending on specific circumstances), (2) the varieties of the orgasmic sensation, (3) the experience of ecstasy, (4) vulnerability, (5) power, and (6) the fact that, again, none of this, for women, is taken for granted.  (170-175).

      She makes a second list as well, of four “phonological problems”, or problems that she experiences or anticipates in discussing the female orgasm. They are: (1) that orgasms are brief and overwhelming, and thus hard to describe, (2) in order to describe it one must also be able to remember a single orgasm and keep it separate from other orgasms one has experienced which she says is difficult, (3) orgasms are very different from one another, both between women, and in the same woman, and finally (4) that woman do not talk about orgasmic experience enough for women to have an idea of whether their experience of orgasm is different from other women’s experiences. (167-168).

          At each point, while she writes about these elements, she discusses her own personal experience with these things, as she experiences them in her sexual relations with her husband. She admits that, in focusing on her personal experiences with her husband, she is focusing only on sexual relations with men, and ignoring personal fantasy and masturbation-to-orgasm (176). She is also ignoring sex with women, though she doesn’t explicitly state that. In general, Pellauer frequently emphases that she wants a “multiplicity” of women’s stories, and that she does not speak for other women, cannot do so, and therefore does not universalize, focusing only on her own personal, individual experience. She stresses that she is a “1” on the Kinsey scale (very heterosexual), white, Lutheran, highly educated, and well-off financially, and that her (very privileged) experience cannot speak for all women (168).

      The Kinsey scale.

     Of course, this perspective is also the most commonly discussed narrative. In some ways, this is good, as she is right that her experience is not all women’s experience, and she shouldn’t assume that it is. However, I wished she had then done some research into other women’s experiences, so that she could speak to that, instead of just accepting that she can’t and leaving it at that, so she provide us with some useful answers to her questions and ideas.  Her own personal experiences alone, regardless of her background, really don’t tell us too much about women’s orgasmic experience in general (not even about all WASP straight women, as she focuses so strongly on details specific  to her as an individual), which is why I am not discussing them here- although when we write about the collection of individual narratives we’ve read, her perspective will of course be included.

        Some important statistics given this article: 10% of women, in 1990, had never experienced orgasm, and of the 90% that had, 50-70% did not have orgasms by “penile thrusting” alone (163). 23% of women who have orgasmed experienced their first orgasm before the age of fifteen, and 90% of the woman who have orgasmed, experienced their first orgasm before the age of thirty-five.

Orgasm Inc. - Medicalizing Sexual Pleasure

Orgasm Inc., the 2009 documentary, sets out on a journey that explores the intricate industry banking on Female Sexual Dysfunction. It aims to introduce the new gadgets and pharmaceuticals that guarantee sexual fulfillment, while exposing the risks and false communication of research results. This documentary brings together an unexplored market for Big Pharma, cultural gendered norms and women who fall victims of society's mores and customs regarding expression of sexuality. 

Front Cover of Documentary

An important first question raised by the film is the medicalization of orgasm (or lack thereof) - more specifically, where do we draw the line between normal and abnormal, "healthy" and "diseased. The medicalization of sexual pleasure is based on vague symptoms that are not necessarily signs of a dysfunction, but may be natural, temporary imbalances in the organism. The ability to orgasm is impaired by body image issues, psychological barriers or affections, a history of abuse or stress; moreover, a female's libido may be influenced by relationship problems (such as lack of communication), use of antidepressants or contraceptive pills and hysterectomies. The complex biological and psychological dynamics paint a more nuanced picture than what companies trying to capitalize on sexually-unfulfilled women convey in their black-and-white definitions of what an orgasm is.

Screenshot from Orgasm Inc.

Personally, the very definition of this disease is essential, as the construction of the Female Sexual Dysfunction allows companies and practitioners to engage in a battle of leading the development of "cures" and securing a strong market share for such products that claim to dramatically reduce lack of sexual pleasure. The competition for research, FDA approval and release is stiff, as the documentary portrays the efforts of businesses in the field. It is not a surprise that Big Pharma, one of the leading industries of the United States, encourages the aggressive promotion of its cures for sexual dysfunction. The United States are well-known for leading in terms of consumption of prescribed medication, so market estimates for products that guarantee orgasms surely appear optimistic enough for these companies.

Moreover, let's consider the linguistic implications of the Female Sexual Dysfunction. The language employed by companies and advocates of such products is constructed by associating lack of orgasms to a disease, something that is sick in the organism and is in need of a cure. The psychological effect of such language creates fear and confusion around women who are still trying to understand their sexual lives and may not have access to non-biased, accurate information.

Screenshot from Orgasm Inc.

 One of the experts interviewed, owner of "Good Vibrations" refers to the Female Sexual Dysfunction as the hysteria of our ages. A small historical analysis can point to the early 1900s as one essential moment in the medicalization of the orgasm - the hysteria epidemic (click here for an article on hysteria and the first vibrators).