As Ive said before, any subject could be discussed as long as it is a vehicle for more essential thought- to take advantage of the Heideggerian terminology making its way on the board at the moment: If discussed ontically only, its inappropriate for this board, if treated ontologically, its a fantastic topic. The same would go for any subject one can think of. What I had in mind was counter to the presupposing of female "orgasm", or rather, an exploration of what this ambiguous and politically charged concept is, and why it is so mystically explained in our age of scientific discovery. Clearly, it is not the same psycho-physiological response that occurs in males (an empirically defined causal chain resulting in observed and uncontroversial ejaculation that has clear reproductive effect). Female "orgasm" includes such ambiguities as "blushing", "spasms/contractions", speculation about the clitoris, vagina, anus, and surrounding nerve tissue. An entire industry has been set up to market this idea, and even make claims to "female ejaculation" and the existence of hidden, culturally unspeakable, or undiscovered glands. This nonsense (go to a med center and watch them dissect cadavers if your sense and experience is not enough) is motivated by deep seated agendas that form the foundations of modern gender relations. This demands discussion. It is clear that there is no equivalent female orgasm, unless we broaden its meaning to a whole host of psycho-physiological responses (this is what has been done). Certainly, I am not arguing that women cannot experience great pleasure and potentially undergo all sorts of physical changes- However, the issue is the cause of these responses, and why they differ so much from men. To crudely summarize, the female "orgasm" is a primarily psychological response similar to trances and religious experiences. The human ability to induce strong physical responses that are not wholly conscious is nothing new- it fact it pertains to any ritual of "ecstasy". The broadening of orgasm to include induced mental states cheapens their claim, and only displays how females in fact do not orgasm as males do. Why is this important? I certainly cannot do it justice here (especially when I have to catch a train
), but sexual "equality" is the bedrock for contemporary gender relations, and is used to support everything from economic "equality" to promiscuity. Sex is one of the most fundamental states and activities we engage is, and it amazes me that this issue is not one for most people. I think this is primarily due to fear- If one questions the nice setup, it must mean that he/she is "dysfunctional", similar to any other widely held cultural norm. Im eager to hear what you all think of this, both as a psycho-physical event, and its implications for human society and gender roles/relationships.
