Emotional Aspect of Sexual Pleasure and Orgasms

[pink_silk_glove]

Like, you don't think you can get hard if you're being raped? WTF? Or it's impossible for a woman to cum? That's the kind of misinformation that helps cause so many rapes to go unreported.

"Well, I got hard." Or "I did kind of enjoy it once he got going..."

No, I think that you have it backwards. The claim that I am refuting at least is that "rape victims cum all the time" or "rape victims cum just as much or more than normal" that seems to be trotted out by a couple of folks here. It's just not true.

That certainly doesn't mean that a climax erases a rape. I don't think anyone is making that assertion here. As far as I can tell, everyone here seems to agree that no does in fact mean no, and considering the touchy subject at hand I have to commend everyone for not blowing up this thread. I think that this is a pretty darn good discussion.

 

[lustychimera]

No, I think that you have it backwards. The claim that I am refuting at least is that "rape victims cum all the time" or "rape victims cum just as much or more than normal" that seems to be trotted out by a couple of folks here. It's just not true.

That certainly doesn't mean that a climax erases a rape. I don't think anyone is making that assertion here. As far as I can tell, everyone here seems to agree that no does in fact mean no, and considering the touchy subject at hand I have to commend everyone for not blowing up this thread. I think that this is a pretty darn good discussion.

Granted I didn't read all of them, but the ones on the first page really got me:

No way I'd be able to get hard if I wasn't turned on or something was skeeving me out.

I believe I wouldn't be able to get hard even as there is nothing about men that attracts me.

For women to orgasm they must be in a comfortable environment. Saying no... Means that the person is not prepared to enter into whatever is proposed.
No means no. You can't fuck her into submission. You can't make her orgasm.
If she is truly afraid for her personal safety. There's no way orgasm could happen. The rapist may be the most talented lover in the world. It would make no difference. The physical triggers might be ticked, but the brain wouldn't engage.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

How many pseudo-rape stories involve male victims? In the non-con category? There probably is but I've never seen one. Perhaps there are more in the gay male category.

Really? That's something I find hard to believe. So, here's some examples.

NC/R: "The Three Mother Pact". You don't even have to read the full nine pages. Just read the last one. It's enough.
LW: "Becoming a Slut Wife: Angie". Straight up rape. MC doesn't orgasm, but he does get hard, which his seven assailants immediately take as proof of him liking it, despite him crying the whole time.
I/T: "Sometimes Love Hurts".

I could go on. In the BDSM category, I would have liked to use MadelineMasoch's stories, which almost exclusively portrayed male characters getting raped, but they just removed all of their stories. Or you could just look at all the unwilling cuckold stories in the fetish category.

What that number tells us essentially is that circumstances are irrelevant and if we are touched in a certain right way we have no choice but to experience a reflexive climax. Pretty much all of us don't need a study to tell us that that's not true.

Yes. Which is exactly what I wrote in my initial reply to your opening post. And I stand by that because that's my professional experience that, as I said, is backed up by every therapist and psychologist I ever spoke with about it. Which is a lot. Because I deal with that stuff for a living. So, I really don't care whether you believe it based on your personal experience.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Yes. Which is exactly what I wrote in my initial reply to your opening post. And I stand by that because that's my professional experience that, as I said, is backed up by every therapist and psychologist I ever spoke with about it. Which is a lot. Because I deal with that stuff for a living. So, I really don't care whether you believe it based on your personal experience.

So the proof is in. Intimacy in a sexual context is meaningless. Love and affection in a sexual context is meaningless. Close the thread, we're done here. Thanks for coming out.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

So the proof is in. Intimacy in a sexual context is meaningless. Love and affection in a sexual context is meaningless. Close the thread, we're done here. Thanks for coming out.

No, all this proves is that at least 30% to 40% of women can orgasm without love and affection. Not sure how this, in any way, would mean that love and affection are meaningless.

 

[SimonDoom]

I guess what this thread is trying to ask is, is pseudo-rape simply just a zero-plausibility fantasy, or do readers and writers out there actually think that it's a reasonably common real world thing, and do people really think that women's bodies/minds really work that way a significant amount of the time?

And if they do think this, how the hell are they coming to these conclusions?

I guess my view is that I don't see why it matters or is important, for purposes of what we do here or for this forum. Who cares? I have no clue what percentage of women who are raped achieve orgasm, and I don't see why it's important to anything. What I DO believe is this: our own personal intuition about the "right" answer is completely worthless. Only evidence matters. But regardless of what the evidence is, I don't see how it affects what we are doing here.

The thing about threads like this that rubs my hair the wrong way is the insistence by some that reality MUST be a certain way for all people--the refusal to accept that one's personal experience is not universal reality. It's tedious, it's uninformed, and it's nearly always wrong. And I don't see the point in trying to figure out what the "correct" percentages are. 60%. 1%. Whatever. It makes a difference for policy makers, but not for story writers.

 

[AlinaX]

I imagine any human can be forced to orgasm with sufficient time and focused stimulation. A safe and consensual context merely acts as a catalyst.

However, because we associate orgasm with passion and desire, perhaps even with secret fantasies of perfect intimacy, to be forced to an unwanted orgasm will feel like a profound betrayal of the self.

 

[Britva415]

to the guys, is it really all physical for you? How much of it is emotional?

I'm able to let it be all physical, but even then, it has to align with the other person's mood and feelings.

Things like pity-sex or grudge-sex are absolute turn-offs and I wouldn't be able to enjoy them. It would be difficult to be aroused for transactional sex.

But casual, no-strings sex is fine, though I do have to find the person at least to be likeable, and to find them likeable I have to connect with them on some level.

So even when it is all physical, it's still not all physical.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

No, all this proves is that at least 30% to 40% of women can orgasm without love and affection. Not sure how this, in any way, would mean that love and affection are meaningless.

I think you do know how it would mean, but I'll spell it out again.

If 30-40% of consensual sex results in female orgasm and then 30-40% of non-consensual sex results in female orgasm then we have isolated any non bodily reflexive factors as irrelevant. What are the chances that all non physical non reflexive factors balance out the same? Yeah, fat chance.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I guess my view is that I don't see why it matters or is important, for purposes of what we do here or for this forum. Who cares?

It certainly matters. Some of us do not care about plausibility of the plot, but many do. Plausibility certainly isn't necessary to keep a reader turning the pages, but it is a very common and valuable tool in the author's arsenal to do so. Many readers do in fact hit the back button (rightly or wrongly) the moment that they've had enough disbelief. So for non-con writers out there interested in maintaining some plausibility this discussion could matter very much.

 

[Britva415]

I imagine any human can be forced to orgasm with sufficient time and focused stimulation.

I wonder if those "hysteria" patients were faking it. Forcing them to orgasm was basically the idea. It doesn't seem to me that it could have been perceived as much of a safe and consensual context, but I don't know how much of that is my 21st century conditioning and my inability to put myself into the shoes of a Victorian-era woman seeing the doctor, probably at her family's insistence, after succumbing to the vapors.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

I think you do know how it would mean, but I'll spell it out again.

If 30-40% of consensual sex results in female orgasm and then 30-40% of non-consensual sex results in female orgasm then we have isolated any non bodily reflexive factors as irrelevant. What are the chances that all non physical non reflexive factors balance out the same? Yeah, fat chance.

Just because the numbers are the same doesn't mean that there's an overlap, though.

If you take a subset of one hundred women, there can be thirty of them who orgasm during consensual sex, but not during rape. There can be another thirty women who orgasm during consensual sex AND rape. And, believe it or not, there could be yet another thirty women who didn't orgasm during the consensual sex they tried so far, but did orgasm while raped.

Your argument is like saying: 30% of the population have driver's licenses. 30% of the population has been in a car accident. Therefore, logically, driver's licenses are meaningless to enable safe driving. It makes no sense.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Again, consenting to relinquishing control to someone that you trust.

Her control, and thus her consent is in her trust.

With someone that she trusts, she sometimes enjoys having her hair pulled, her flanks slapped, or her nipples twisted and pinched. She sometimes likes being bent over the back of the couch or someplace public, her panties pushed aside and being taken by her mate's irresistible desire for her. She doesn't always crave sexual release because it is reconfirming the trust in her partner's desire for her that she has she wants the most.

It was never non-consensual with any of the women I knew. It was "I consent to letting you do with me what you will."

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Your argument is like saying: 30% of the population have driver's licenses. 30% of the population has been in a car accident. Therefore, logically, driver's licenses are meaningless to enable safe driving. It makes no sense.

No, it's not like that at all. It's a straw man and you know it.

Almost anyone that you talk to will say that they enjoy sex much more when there is intimacy between the partners, and by intimacy it is inferred a comfortable intimacy. Non-consensual sex has no comfortable intimacy in it. So we know by our own personal and shared experiences that intimacy and comfort are generally not only components or enjoyable sex but large components of enjoyable sex. So I put to you, what are the other non-physical factors that mitigate to the point if neutralizing comfortable intimacy in enjoying sex?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Her control, and thus her consent is in her trust.

With someone that she trusts, she sometimes enjoys having her hair pulled, her flanks slapped, or her nipples twisted and pinched. She sometimes likes being bent over the back of the couch or someplace public, her panties pushed aside and being taken by her mate's irresistible desire for her. She doesn't always crave sexual release because it is reconfirming the trust in her partner's desire for her that she has she wants the most.

It was never non-consensual with any of the women I knew. It was "I consent to letting you do with me what you will."

Exactly. This is fully consensual.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

So I put to you, what are the other non-physical factors that mitigate to the point if neutralizing comfortable intimacy in enjoying sex?

I can't. As I said, I'm not a psychologist, nor am I a therapist. I don't know how it works.

I had multiple victims report during their interviews that they "went somewhere else" during the act, completely disassociating themselves from what was happening to their bodies, but got pulled back when their orgasm hit. I had multiple victims tell me during the follow-up questionings, after they had some time to accept what happened to them, that they felt like their bodies "betrayed" them when they climaxed. And, of those who have been drugged, I had victims tell me that they were completely out of it, no memories at all... apart from the few seconds they came back to notice that they're having an orgasm, before going under again.

In my initial response to your opening post, I wrote that it messes them up. I later also used the term "existential crisis". So, I guess it IS in direct violation of your "personal and shared experiences", and it DOESN'T make any sense to the ones who had it happen to them, but it DOES happen.

 

[lustychimera]

So the proof is in. Intimacy in a sexual context is meaningless. Love and affection in a sexual context is meaningless. Close the thread, we're done here. Thanks for coming out.

That's a lot of words being put in mouths and logical leaps.

It's like there's two different discussions happening at once.

 

[Cagivagurl]

And you were wrong, and you were wrong for saying it.

Look, I get it, we are all anonymous on the internet and can spout off whatever we want to say, but even then I try to be at least somewhat informed about what I talking about. May try researching your ideas before posting?

No I wasn't....
Just like what you wrote. My opinion is my opinion and just as valid as yours.
I have experience working with victims of rape.
I have spoken to them. Consoled them. Helped them.
Can you say the same.
I do not believer that a woman having sex forced upon her will orgasm.
If the mind isn't connected to the physical. There can be no orgasm. No lubrication, no passion.
Merely physical interaction will not cause orgasm if the women is scared, angry, and had her trust removed.

Believe me, I have plenty of actual case notes to refer to.

Cagivagurl

 

[Cagivagurl]

Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just because the women you volunteer for haven't told you about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/193e3x/iama_sexual_assault_therapist_discussing_when

https://www.teenhealthcare.org/blog/sexual-assault-orgasm/
https://www.researchgate.net/public..._non-consensual_sexual_stimulation_-_A_review
https://www.thedoe.com/2020/07/01/orgasm-during-rape-myth/ (cn for graphic description of rape)

It's clear that you feel passionately about this, and I'm sure your intentions are good, but to repeat what others have already said: when you insist that "no woman would orgasm from rape", you are telling women that if they came, it wasn't rape. This is a myth that fucks up a lot of rape survivors very badly and gives cover to rapists who don't deserve it.

Please stop a moment and try to put yourself in the shoes of a woman who has been raped, who has experienced an involuntary physical response, and hears somebody like you telling her that this isn't what happens in real rape, that she must have felt comfortable with the guy to be able to orgasm.



Brains are complicated, and they are not separate from the body. Sexual response is different from one person to another. Your experiences are not universal.



I don't think you realise how much you're sounding like the guys who say "no woman goes out dressed like that unless she's looking for sex...no woman accepts a ride from a guy unless she wants to have sex with him...it can't have been rape, her clothes would've been ripped...it can't have been rape, she doesn't look upset enough..."

I am sure you have no intention of sounding like those guys, but when you try to impose this one idea of what rape is like, and negate the experience of anybody whose rape didn't match your ideas, that is what you're doing.



You've complained about other people putting words in your mouth, but this is you putting words in other people's mouths, and extremely offensive ones at that. None of the people you're arguing with are trying to sell any such belief.



I don't know exactly what your volunteering involves, but in general I'd think it would be a weird and inappropriate thing for a volunteer to ask all those women for details about their rape. I suspect you're doing an awful lot of assuming about their experiences, without knowing for a fact just what those experiences were, and if that's the case I suspect some of them might object to you presuming to speak for them on this.



It's kind of gross that you keep on acting like you're the only person in this conversation who's ever spoken to a rape victim. You are not.

I'm sorry but we disagree.
I never said if they came it wasn't rape... That's your thought process not mine.
What I specifically said is.
I do not believe women will come from rape.
We could all search the internet for supposedly realistic data to support what we clasim.
What I said was, and it is my opinion. Women cannot be forced to orgasm through rape.
Untyil you've interacted with and been involved with helping victims. You do not understand how harrowing and frightening it is...
Under those circumstances. Orgasm would never happen...
I have been involved with literally hundreds of of women victims, and survivors, and a couple that didn't.
So please don't tell me that you know....
By perpetuating the myth that women enjoy it. You increase the chances that it will continue to happen.
In my opinion...

Cagivagurl

 

[Cagivagurl]

I have three things I'd like to say to that.

1. I didn't claim that 60% of women experience an orgasm during rape. I said that 60% of rape victims experience it. That includes men and children. I did say that men/boys experience it more often than women/girls, but women/girls still experience it in about half the cases I worked on. That is because...

2. ...drugs. During those "consensual" sex sessions, how many of the women were sedated in some way? Or dosed with MDMA? It makes one hell of a difference during the act, but seldomly afterwards.

3. The cases that didn't involve drugs... I'd claim that the female victims in roughly 30%-40% of the cases experienced an orgasm. I don't know why, and I'm not going to pretend I understand it. I once asked a psychologist about it, and she started with some kind of metaphor about looking at orgasms as if it was the "purr of a cat". It doesn't just happen when they feel good, it's also a reaction to extreme stress or pain.
She honestly lost me on that one. But I'm not a psychologist. So, I just accepted that this woman, who is way smarter than me and specialized in the field, told me that it was perfectly normal for it to happen.

You actually believe those figures!!!!!
Oh my god.
That is preposterous.
Yeah, we all spoke to somebody, who spoke to somebody else who substantiated claims...
When you see something that looks so completely wrong, it usually is..
In this case I do not believe the figures you have quoted ...
Just a continuation of a myth....

Cagivagurl

 

[lustychimera]

No I wasn't....
Just like what you wrote. My opinion is my opinion and just as valid as yours.
I have experience working with victims of rape.
I have spoken to them. Consoled them. Helped them.
Can you say the same.
I do not believer that a woman having sex forced upon her will orgasm.
If the mind isn't connected to the physical. There can be no orgasm. No lubrication, no passion.
Merely physical interaction will not cause orgasm if the women is scared, angry, and had her trust removed.

Believe me, I have plenty of actual case notes to refer to.

Cagivagurl

If a woman does have an orgasm then it's not rape? Because if a woman who did have sex under dubious consent read that and she did orgasm or got wet, she'd be doubting the hell out of herself.

That's what's bothering me most about your opinion. You're not qualifying or with anything. Your saying you have some experience working with victim and some case studies, then you extrapolate that out to the world at large.

Also, the ability to have an opinion does not validate it. Validation comes from solid rationale, and you're taking a small sample pool as definitive proof.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I can't. As I said, I'm not a psychologist, nor am I a therapist. I don't know how it works.

Then why did you say this?

What that number tells us essentially is that circumstances are irrelevant and if we are touched in a certain right way we have no choice but to experience a reflexive climax. Pretty much all of us don't need a study to tell us that that's not true.

Yes. Which is exactly what I wrote in my initial reply to your opening post.

So you definitively know, yet you don't. Sounds good.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

Then why did you say this?



So you definitively know, yet you don't. Sounds good.

Okay, I don't know if you're just trolling at this point or if you're actually incapable of reading what I wrote.

I know that it happens, because that's what actual rape victims tell me. What I don't know is how it happens. The fact that I can't explain what goes on in their heads doesn't mean that I'm gonna assume they're lying. ESPECIALLY since, admitting something like this, is hard as hell and they know full well that there are people who will give them shit for it, even claiming they weren't really actually raped if they enjoyed it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Okay, I don't know if you're just trolling at this point or if you're actually incapable of reading what I wrote.

I know that it happens, because that's what actual rape victims tell me. What I don't know is how it happens. The fact that I can't explain what goes on in their heads doesn't mean that I'm gonna assume they're lying.

Which brings us back to here.

So the proof is in. Intimacy in a sexual context is meaningless. Love and affection in a sexual context is meaningless.

Yet you had to keep on arguing, if I'm a troll you're a blacker pot than I. I'm cool with that.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm sorry but we disagree.
I never said if they came it wasn't rape... That's your thought process not mine.
What I specifically said is.
I do not believe women will come from rape.

"Women don't come from rape" and "if a woman comes, it isn't rape" are logically equivalent statements. When you say one, you imply the other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition

We could all search the internet for supposedly realistic data to support what we clasim.
What I said was, and it is my opinion. Women cannot be forced to orgasm through rape.
Untyil you've interacted with and been involved with helping victims. You do not understand how harrowing and frightening it is...

You are not the only person in this thread who has interacted with and been involved with helping rape victims. But even when somebody like @OverconfidentSarcasm talks about their experience interacting with victims, you still reject that perspective, because you and you alone are qualified to speak on behalf of all rape victims everywhere. You own the entire topic of rape; you decide what experiences are valid and what are not.

And god help anybody whose experience falls outside what you can imagine as possible.

Under those circumstances. Orgasm would never happen...

So you say. And it remains merely you saying it.

I have been involved with literally hundreds of of women victims, and survivors, and a couple that didn't.

Good for you. Really.

But unless you questioned each and every one of them about whether they orgasmed - which would have been a creepy and inappropriate thing to do - it's not clear how that puts you in a position to confidently assert that none of them did.

By perpetuating the myth that women enjoy it. You increase the chances that it will continue to happen.

People have already pointed out in this very thread that "orgasm" and "enjoy it" are not the same thing. It's disgusting that you keep on pretending they're identical for the sake of smearing anybody whose experiences don't agree with yours.