This is a double question. Why in relation to limitations in our understanding of the brain and orgasms? Why in relation to the Pharma companies producing/researching this? On the second why I am very confused. Because these companies chose what they developed based on what will sell, zero regard to what society needs. Perhaps this a touchy issue because conceptually it seems like a narcotic? The reason this is a not a good point though is because some people suffer from a disorder called anorgasmia where, usally a woman, cant cum. Mostly this is caused by anxiety but many other medical conditions that affect the nerves in or going to the pelvis can also cause this. So they have a right to this drug, if it exists, because, in the US, you have a right to persue happiness and liberty or something like that.
Anyway any help, preferably biological, would help. Only serious stuff please.
Thanks Geez, it will take me a while to look into that stuff. As for the heroin and e these (especially heroin) can induce orgasm but not instant orgasms and they are not demonstrations of our understanding of cumming and creating a drug to induce it. They are like hacking at you brain with a knife and letting the dopamines spill out.
Someone recently told me of a nitrous oxide type solvent that engorges the clitoris. This has potential. The offer of flowers and chocolate is still open for someone who knows of a drug.
From the manufacturing point of view, I'm not so sure this is possible either. I'm sure you'd be willing to skip the genital contractions and secretions, both for the sake of your poor little muscles and glands, and for the sake of your laundry. So we want to stop some acetylcholinergic activities, and perhaps prevent some of the secretion of oxytocin. I'm not a pharmacist, a biologist or a psychiatrist*, but getting these effects focused on the lower part of your body while still getting all the desired affects mentally sounds near impossible to me.
Besides - think about all the effects on the social level...
There is much in tantric and kundalini tradition to suggest that unleashing these energies without proper care and discipline is unwise, and possibly hazardous to one's health and mental well-being. That would be the bad news.
The good news is that, with devoted study and practice, one can experience orgasm (as distinct from ejaculation and lower abdomen effects mentioned by Geez in all sexes and genders) as more of a full body experience, or localized to one or more of the upper chakras.
My sense from what most people report about their sexual experience is that most orgasms experienced by non-tantra-practicing folk tend to be centered in the lower one or two chakras. Margo Anand's The Art of Sexual Magic is one of the better places to start for a general introduction to tantric principles.
Gina Ogden's book, Women Who Love Sex gives a clear case example of a woman with very good control and abilities to reach orgasm with no apparent physical stimulation ("thinking off" she calls it) but while describing chakric orgasms very clearly, Ogden's book fails to discuss the specifics of what the chakras are, or the fact that they have specific, consistent locations along and near the spinal column. It's also possible the woman profiled in that section simply discovered how to work her chakric energies without ever coming across tantra, and therefore did not know to mention to Ogden just what she was doing, or at least did not have the language of tantra and kundalini to make it clearer how this can in fact be learned.
It can also be learned by men, though most tantric sourcebooks suggest that it is often more difficult for at least many men to approach this particular knowledge than it is for many women.
print (...there probably wouldn't be a need for tantra and other such things...perhaps more reason to question to their validity (note that I merely play devil's advocate; I am a sex god)...)
printable version chaos
Everything2 Help