I just read this: A man should always give a woman an orgasm before he lets her please him. Nice sentiment, but it bothers the hell out of me.
There are plenty of things about that sentence that make me uncomfortable, but I’m especially hung up on this word “give.” I don’t think orgasms can be given. Maybe other people feel differently, but to me, they’re more alchemy than entity.
I think that sentence bothers me because it puts the responsibility on men to make that orgasm happen, to “give” it (and it suggests that it’s theirs to give), when it’s also a matter of being physically sensitive, responsive, and receptive as a woman. It makes me think of the men I’ve been with who seemed so stressed at the prospect of sex; they approached my pussy like they were defusing a bomb. I think we tend to do that generally, as a culture, teach men to think that our pussies are dormant and dependent on their fingerwork and/or cockplay to come alive. Which I don’t want to downplay — my sexual world revolves around those cocks and those hands, and wrists and forearms, and… mm. But I imagine that we shift the responsibility to men because we encourage women to be sheltered from sexual knowledge, something I strongly disagree with. It does nothing for communication between the sexes when one is supposed to know everything and the other is supposed to remain ignorant.
My first orgasm was great and certainly memorable, but I didn’t really come, not really, not in the epic mind-blowing sense, until I’d fucked and masturbated and combined the two, and a lot. I guess it was like learning an instrument, in that it all came together very suddenly, and it’s been easy and natural ever since. And that wasn’t the doing of any one man, or men. It was mostly me, as I learned how my body worked, how it worked with men, and, eventually, how it worked with men who make me feel uncomfortably vulnerable.
Another thing I don’t like about that sentence up there? The idea that sex is just a sequence of acts or, worse, a bartering system where perfectly good sex acts are reduced to tit for tat (unless you’re doing some hot secretary/boss roleplay). The best sex I’ve had has never been a sequence of anything. Just a deeply satisfying, bruising blur of motion.
But hey, what do I know…
*
I’ve got a question for you. I’ve been getting mail from some really great people, male and female, all of whom seem to be very sexual (by the way, bear with me with my response time). Some are experienced, some inexperienced, some curious, some very clear on what they want and need. I’m tempted to do some matchmaking back here, through my inbox, but I’m wondering if I should just hire a developer to throw together a space where some of you likeminded hedonists can meet and mix and perhaps go forth to have a productive, sexually gratifying connection, since I’m kind of a shitty matchmaker and I’m generally better and happier as a facilitator. If that’s something you’d like, let me know. In my mind, I’m visualizing a simple, free site, and I’d do some light vetting to keep the douche quotient low.
I would think you could pretty easily add a forum here or for free elsewhere. Sounds like fun :)
Oh Debauchette I like you so much. While I totally get what motivated the “she comes first” movement (previously it was more like “she comes at all? eww!” so it was a *big* step up) I don’t think I became a really good lover till I let that go. For exactly the reasons you talk about. I mean, who the fuck did I think I was? Just look at that language too “give her something” before you “let her” please you. I mean, sure, it’s nicer than, say, “give her 50 bucks before you let her…” or “give her a ring before you let her…” but it’s kind of *fucking transactional* that way.
I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with transactional sex, but it’s kind of gotta be an agreement from *both* parties, and that “give her an orgasm before letting her pleasure you” sounds awfully unilateral. Not to mention all about him. Which would be fine if he was a fucking *customer,* or if women really were supposed to be up there on pedestals passively waiting for men to bring them stuff but… sheesh, you’d think sex was a lot more intimate than, say, car-pooling but I don’t really remember anyone saying “you give a carpool buddy a ride before you let them give you one.” And it’s because with something like car-pooling you’re really being *partners* — you’re taking care of *each other.*
Funny, I wouldn’t have thought I felt so strongly about it.
Cool post anyway.
figleaf
p.s. a match-making service could be kind of interesting. If you’re not into setting it up yourself you might try looking into a “friends finder” service to sponsor you. (Sort of like Pepper Schwartz is a face for PerfectMatch.com) Who knows?
I second Katie’s suggestion: a forum would be great and most important of all, it’s FREE. I’m ure it would be no trouble to install it at all, but if it is, feel free to email me: I do these in my free time.
i think you should do it behind the scenes. the gross people will find out in no time. keep it exclusive.
Oh Debauchette. That advice was not for the sexually aware, the sensual, the pleasure seekers and hedonists.
That advice was meant for the almost-brain dead.
I am sure that a forum will be fun, as long as everyone plays naughty. Good luck.
That sounds great. I’ve been silently following your blog for a long while, but never felt I had anything to contribute to the (generally very insightful) discussion. I’d appreciate the opportunity to get to know some of the others reading this.
I think it adding a forum where your readers and fans could interact is a great idea. I can think of a few posters I am already interested in… But I agree with Scott – it has to be somewhat exclusive so only your true fans & loyal readers can access it somehow. I don’t know how to do it, but I’d bet someone here knows how.
To your first point, I find that “her first” thing to be irritating in principle, but I understand the roots of it. Any girl who has had the misfortune of messing around with an immature high school boy knows that sometimes when his pleasure is achieved, game over. I think you’re approaching this from the perspective of a more enlightened sex participant. I’d like to think I’m one of those more enlightened participants, who finds the act to be something spontaneous and free flowing, and free from arbitrary goals and milestones. But you and I are the exception, not the rule; sex in our culture is predominantly a structured, predictable act. Most sex that is had by the masses is vanilla, missionary, and with the exception of the orgasm relatively unsatisfying. It happens in a bed. At night. It’s not an organic expression, but a predictable act. Or you know, I’m a jaded bitch and I have little faith in mankind.
As to your second point, I think a message board (as others have suggested) is a good solution so long as it was private, and you exercised a reasonable amount of discretion and control over the membership. Unfortunately even private message boards require some amount of moderation, so it might be more time consuming an endeavor than you want to get into – assuming you couldn’t find someone to volunteer their moderating services.
Wow, that quote calls to mind two of my least favorite people– B.F. Skinner and John Calvin. If free will, and thus spontaneity, don’t exist while fucking and sucking, is life even worth living? That’s not to say that the woman who gives me a long gulpy blowjob won’t be thankfully remembered (and in due course the attentions reciprocated), or that I’d be happy if my own “selfless” ministrations were just taken for granted, but the situational quid pro quo-ism of the quoted piece is . . . irksome.
I think you would be a GREAT matchmaker. That’s why I (I gather among others) asked you to do it. But if you go the forum route instead, then as long as it is invite-only, I will be glad to pimp myself out, notwithstanding my general deep suspicion of all forms of internet dating and hooking up. If the participants come with your nihil obstat and imprimatur, it could be a really fucking cool place to meet amazing people.
She is pleasing me by letting me lavish my attention on her, otherwise why do it? It’s not a tit for tat thing (to coin an expression). I’m touching her like that for her pleasure, BECAUSE her pleasure is my pleasure. Not because it’s a favor I’m going to call in later.
D. I think it be great to be able to meet some of your fans, esp. while traveling, e.g. to London. Personally I always think parties and dinners are easier on people when meeting than 1-1’s, so much pressure and expectation.
But yeah, sounds wonderful and I second the idea of some kind of screening or anti-idiot gizmo.
Am really enjoying that you’re writing more frequently this week.
Couldn’t agree more. Playing the “whose turn is it?” or “now you owe me mine” game takes all the spontaneity and fun out of sex. It shouldn’t be about responsibilties…the getting pleasure through giving pleasure through getting pleasure feedback loop is what makes it magic….
Max
I think one reason the author wrote that statement is that far more women are capable of multiple orgasms than men. Once the man ejaculates, he goes into remission and generally cannot respond sexually for at least a few minutes, if not hours. But a multiply-orgasmic woman can cum, then enjoy another orgasm when her man cums, if not several more in between.
The issue you raised, though, leads to a conundrum that a commenter left me with on my blog, and which I am still pondering: is there anything “wrong” with having sex just to please yourself, not caring whether your partner gets off too?
Ideally the two lovers are so into each other that they really don’t care who cums first, but I’m sure differing opinions on this subject still cause a lot of relationship friction.
P.S.–I’m new here, but I think anything you might do to facilitate getting people together to make love is a good thing.
Where did you read “girls go first” and what was the context?
Jon – I read it on a site offering sex advice to men. But it’s also something I hear repeated fairly often.
As for this social space (forum or otherwise), I’m glad there’s interest. And I agree on the importance of keeping the space, whatever it is, protected and exclusive. I’ll look into some options.
I think you’d probably to a better job of matchmaking than a traditional dating site. The douche quotient is always high on dating sites. I should know, I’m on about a dozen sites.
Crap, I think I just called myself a douche.
I don’t know if it will actually work as a matchmaking service, judging from similar initiatives we both know about… But it is still an intriguing idea nonetheless. I haven’t been commenting or active since my life became insanely busy lately, but I am still here.
Just a comment on the idea of the free hedonist connection site – for my two cents, as soon as you put up a free site like that, it gets overrun by douchebags. That is what I, just as miss North Carolina, personally believe.
I do not mean that Debauchette should spend her time matchmaking, that decision is hers and I don’t really feel strongly about it one way or another, just reflecting upon the nature of the internet…
Maybe if it was a community which was only accessible by invitation, from Debauchette, it would have a higher chance of working.
Sorry, just read the comments above and realise that others have hit the nail on the head before me.
Love your writing. It has certainly stirred something in myself.
I’d be curious as to what other people are thinking…and if there are people who think/write/fuck like you do, out here in the midwest….
It appears that learning, truly taking in, the ability to lay back and receive without guilt or keeping score, is a lifelong process. I’m still only so-so at it (why ARE Americans so puritanical?) The whole ’should’ thing- she ’should’ come first, we ’should’ come together, I ’shouldn’t’ be selfish- is huge and if I could, I’d carve it out of my psyche and give it the toss.
So I challenge all of you, myself included, to lay back this weekend and let yourself be pleasured. Tell your lover what you want and go for bliss.
“A man should always give a woman an orgasm before he lets her please him.”
I was hung up on the word “lets”. The whole sentence has the air of a manners and etiquette lesson from the 50’s. Can’t you hear the cheesy voice over on grainy black & white film?
Hi Debauchette,
I totally agree with you about the “give”, “orgasm” and “sequence” thingies. “Should” should be banished, too :-D
A forum would be nice, but the choice of those accessing it should be done only by you if you want to avoid trolls and lurkers.
Day
the forum or matchmaking option is intriguing. The douche factor could be worked through, but it will take some gatekeeping.
A space where people could meet and chit chat would be awesome. Matchmaking is awfully hard to pull off…
Like Wallflower, I was most offended by “before he LETS her please him.” That kind of sentence should only be uttered in conjunction with some very strict roleplaying scenario.
As for the matchmaking, do most of the readers emailing you live in the same area? And is it too late for me to jump on the bandwagon and ask to get involved too?
“Couldn’t agree more. Playing the “whose turn is it?” or “now you owe me mine” game takes all the spontaneity and fun out of sex.”
this combined with his tendency to plan our sexploits in advance, NOT tell me what he had imagined and then be disappointed by whatever i was doing?
killed my last relationship
killed it dead
I feel kind of awkward and inexperienced against your background, ’cause no matter how I try I can’t get an orgasm. I don’t blame men, ’cause I like sex as it is and I like when they come, this feeling of power and satisfaction. But… nevertheless, I feel that there’s something missing. And they feel it too… Well, I don’t know the way out yet, ’cause I don’t like masturbation, but better with a man, though it’s kind of weird.
Well, whatever :) Thank you for your nice blog and sincerity.
A man should always give a woman an orgasm before he lets her please him.
When I read that sentence, the individual words didn’t pop out at me, “should” or “give” or “lets.” Instead, I feel that the statement could be interpreted as implying a sentiment of giving rather than taking.
I’m a big believer in being cognizant of people and things around you, being mindful of others and receptive to their needs, wants and desires. The sentence could be viewed as an instruction that a man should not consider only his own pleasure. Instead, a man should be mindful of his partner and try to give in addition to receive.
Yes, this interpretation plays into societal stereotypes and does not suggest anything mind-blowing or unobvious, but some guys need to be told. Plus, it does appear to tie into the wording you observe since the statement seems to place the man in a position of power over the woman. However, notwithstanding these, one could view the sentence as an attempt to impart genuinely good advice. A relatively poor attempt, perhaps, but an attempt nonetheless.
Assuming you go ahead with the website, portal or forum, be sure to toss in some disclaimers and the like. Liability is a bitch. (I went to law school. Sometimes I see things in shades of liability.)
I agree the intentions are probably good, but how it’s written sounds weird ,outdated and, I don’t know, dutiful in a misplaced way. Sexy.
I love the idea of a debauchette forum, with mods to keep trolls to a minimum.
The commandmant that debauchette quoted is horribly paternalistic. the lordly man should deign to give his lowly female an orgasm before he allows the woman to pleasure him.
While this commandmant has the word “give” it is completely missing the sense of equality and sharing that great sex requies (though there are certainly many exceptions). Equality does not mean that one person is not dominant or submissive, but rather that all partners should be equally focussed on what each other needs.
I would greatly enjoy a debauchette forum. I have been a long time lurker. I hope that there would be allowances for lurkers such as myself to join in a probationary manner.
As another long-time lurker, could I also request some kind of probationary manner? Because I think the forum is an awesome idea. I’d prefer that to an match-making site, but that could be because I’ve never really contributed anything to make me noticeable!
Also, re the orgasm — that does sound a bit strange. Kind of reminds me of middle school sex ed class, except that we never covered the ‘mechanics’. My first time having sex I had no idea what I was doing, and I’m rather grateful towards the guy I was with. He was very focused on me the whole evening.
As that relationship progressed though, it was much more equal. But never in a a+b = c kind of way. More in a ‘I enjoy what makes you happy’ and vice-versa. I don’t think sex should have a checklist!
Then again, could be a fun form of ‘to-do’ list.
1. Buy milk
2. Laundry
3. Try ___ position. Posssibly on the laundry machine?
Oh, consider this my vote for the rutting forum.
I’m usually on the excluded side of exclusive. Gated communities, hermetic social circles, Porsches and Bentleys flooding the roads, models and harlots too beautiful to talk to, maybe even to look at. The blinding glitter of the midday desert sun. Poison ivy, poison envy, poison empty.
Sorry, I got sidetracked. I just don’t like the idea of an exclusive debauchette club because I’ll be left out for one reason or another…
I vote for the forum.
I vote for a forum, too. And sure, mods would be great, but I’m pretty confident that we’d even manage to spot the douchebags on our own – after all, unfortunately that’s kind of what we’re all doing all day anyway. You know, out there in the real world. Where they live.
An exclusive thing where all of us would actually be on the same page sounds a lot better, of course. But I think that’s always going to be a utopian idea – it’s tough to draw a line that makes sense, you risk shutting out the wrong people and ending up with just a tiny group. And realistically, once you’re down to small numbers, you’d practically have to limit it to a local forum if people are interested in meeting up. So better be overinclusive and let us discriminate based on everyone’s posts…
I don’t agree with merlin17’s assumption that the advice-giver is thinking of women and their multiple orgasms, or that it is better if he is thinking in these terms. This line of thinking is still too goal-driven. Having to make that goal happen does rob the spontaneity, as others have said, which can make orgasm ever more elusive. Maybe some women are all about the orgasm, but I can have one in a couple of minutes by myself. For me, sex is about the connection and the variation in each experience with a new person or the same person. The original quote demonstrates a gross simplification of what sex can be.
I think a message board would be a lovely addition to your blog. Of course, I’m always preaching about how message boards don’t work. However, I think yours can do well and it’s a novel idea.
On orgasms, God, where do I start? I had a boyfriend that told me, very loudly and arrogantly that women are responsible for their own orgasms. It totally turned me off. But he is arrogant and obnoxious. uhhg.
I started masturbating very early. When I started having sex, in my late teens, it was very difficult to have an orgasm. I didn’t come to a guy until I was eighteen. It seems to be much more difficult to come with a man I have emotional feelings for than it is with a casual encounter. But only in the beginning of a relationship. It’s as if my emotions shut down my clitoris. I have found that what I need from a man is patience. If a man whispers, “I’ll keep at it if it takes all night”, I’ll come in a second. It’s the pressure and emotions that can take me awhile. Also, I do not masturbate with vibrators very often. Actually, I try not to masturbate very often at all because it does tend to desensitize my clitoris. Once, I laid off of masturbating completely and could come smoothly and easily while making love (penetration only). I wish I was multiple like some ladies I’ve met, but my limit is five on a veeery good day. Usually one or two really big ones a day keeps me a happy little girl.
I didn’t address who comes first. It’s OK if he comes first, I work it out one way or the other. When I’m sensitive and turned on I come pretty easily and intensely which turns them on and causes them to follow closely behind. The only reason I like it to happen for me first is because, when I’m having an orgasm, it’s most intense during penetration while he’s still very hard. ;-)
I’m always more ready and willing to please a man than I am to let him take a turn with me. I don’t necessarily believe that this is due to my embracing of the traditional man-gets-pleasure mindset. Rather, making my lover feel good makes me feel good. It’s foreplay for me as much as it is for him.
I do think that the advice that men please their women first is a good suggestion for men who come more quickly than they would like. It’s certainly effective for distracting a woman from noting the time length of the physical sex.
“I wouldn’t want to be a part of any club that would have me as a member…”
but I’m paraphrasing. The forum/matchmaking/etc. idea sounds very nice, but I think could only exist in some kind of utopia.
Count me in as interested. Thanks :)
It’s definitely time to start a new site. Drop me a line, D, and let’s talk about it!
oxoxoxox
Everyone has pretty clearly expressed how I feel on the “she comes first” matter. It should be a joyful exchange, no clear idea of give and take, so long as everyone leaves the encounter satisfied.
I’ve always had an incredibly difficult time reaching orgasm with another person, though I can on occasion. When I do cum with my present partner, we both feel such a sense of accomplishment. It’s an achievement for each of us- a shared effort. Usually, though, we both have our fun without order. I don’t have to reach any sort of “finish line” to feel thoroughly fucked- when I used to feel like I absolutely had to orgasm, I set myself up for failure. Orgasm isn’t the be-all end-all to sex.
As for the forum/matchmaking service/hedonistic wonderland, that sounds absolutely fantastic. For casual encounters and lasting partnerships, I don’t doubt that Debauchette could pair her faithfuls off perfectly.
Long time lurker, first time poster, distracting myself from election news…. I want to thank you for mentioning the men you’ve been with who are stressed about sex because of statements like that one. Count me among that number. It seems so much of the message given about what women want (from the mass entertainment media to the self-media of personals and blogs) is a man who can satisfy them, and if he can’t he’s tossed out with the dirty linen. Add to that the consistent line that women expect their man to be confident – which for me is completely shot by the idea that I have to measure up somehow…
That your writing consistently has real humanity is a treasure, D.