Talk:Anorgasmia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance assessment scale

Contents

[edit] Role of masturbation

I've once again removed the false claim that anorgasmia is caused by Doug's disfavored masturbation style. Please don't re-add it without citing an appropriate medical source for this unsupported health claim. - Nunh-huh 23:21, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)


There are now several articles that support the idea that prone masturbation is a cause of anorgasmia in men. Besides "Traumatic Masturbatory Syndrome" by Sank, there is now also a 2001 article by two physicians, BA Bartlik and MZ Goldstein, in Psychiatric Services 52:291-306 (2001) which states that patients with delayed ejaculation "often have atypical masturbatory styles, such as the face-down position, treatment may also involve masturbatory retraining." There is also an online article by another physician, Scott Gilbert, who says that an atypical masturbatory style is also a cause of sexual dysfunction. So, there is no active dispute over this point in the medical/psych. community. The only dispute comes from discontented Wikipedia editors. Doug22123 17:58, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

It's difficult to respond to someone who misrepresents his source material. Doug, you may not understand that utility in treatment does not indicate causality, though I've pointed it out to you elsewhere, or you may not care that you're injecting your own interpretation. You may not understand that the three articles (not studies) don't provide any empiric evidence for the suggestion you're making, only anecdotes and assertions. You may not care that Bartlik and Goldstein don't seem anxious to support your interpretation of their paper, but Wikipedia should. There is no consensus in the medical community that "improper masturbation" causes anorgasmia. -Nunh-huh 20:02, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


When case studies are properly crafted, as Sank's were, they constitute empirical evidence, not anecdotes. I must have missed the article about Bartlik & Goldstein denouncing my citation of them. Three or four articles is actually not a small amount of work on a topic. AIDS was established as a disease based on a case study of three people. I repeat that an atypical (esp. prone) masturbatory style is not a point of dispute in the health community. Doug22123 20:31, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
You can claim it, but it doesn't make it so. And it's utter nonsense to say that AIDS was established as a disease based on three case studies. - Nunh-huh 20:38, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
I think that due to the lifestyle constraints of spending so much time editing Wikipedia, some people here are considerably experienced wankers who may be biasing this article with their own POV (I speak from experience). Therefore it is perhaps even more important than ever that any claims made here be backed up by adequate sources. -Ok, joking aside now-

It seems that there actually is a school of thought which maintains masturbatory technique as a factor, in relation to associative psychology, in achieving orgasm through intercourse. So surely the correct way for this to be included in this entry is to present it as a theory rather than an established and untontested fact. --JamesTheNumberless 10:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Erectile dysfunction?

The Primary Anorgasmia section mentions a partner who has primary or secondary difficulty in achieving an erection. Should this be a link to Erectile Dysfunction? I had guessed so, but I don't see any reference in that article to primary v. secondary, and this isn't an area in which I claim any knowledge. Hv 23:00, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SSRI Misinformation

I've removed two unsubstantiated claims from this page: first, the claim that anorgasmia dissipates for SSRI-users over time, and, second, the claim that anorgasmia can persist permanently after SSRI use has stopped. Unless a reputable source can be found backing these claims, they shouldn't be here. My psychiatrist directly contradicted them when I talked to her about these issues, dispelling them as common misconceptions about the SSRI drugs. Please do not add them back to this page unless a reputable source can be found to support them.

I've taken SSRIs for about 10 years, and I cannot live without them, but it still takes me about 10 minutes MINIMUM to ejaculate while masturbation (with a woman, my record short time is about 45 minutes of intercourse.) It can take up to 2 hours and 45 minutes to masturbate, and over three hours with a woman.
Well, I can say from experience 2 things... First off, time doesn't diminsh the symptoms in me, and I've never seen any proof that it does for many, if not anyone. Second, I went off the drugs once to change from one to another, and it took me about 30 seconds to masturbate (I was a virgin back then). Well, I can say that discontinuing the drug does give you back what you lost, and as far as I know, that's supposedly a pretty common fact. I will try to get you a ref. I'm sure for some people, the drug's effect does diminish over time, but I don't think it's common. But we should ref all medical facts, and they are easy to ref anyhow. ReignMan (talk) 09:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hypnosis Cures all Physical Cuases of Anorgasmia?

"In many contexts, anorgasmia whatever the physical factor can be solved through a mental process of conditioning, and as such hypnosis is a common and effective treatment for anorgasmia."

Um, I'm sorry, but radical removal of the clitorus (in females) and prostate (in males) are shown to cause a complete removal of the ability to orgasm. I've revised this to be more equivocal than appearing that Hypnosis is a cure-all.

[edit] SSRIs

I have used Prozac (SSRI) a few of months. I had strong anorgasmia , with my girlfriend i had no orgasm. It was difficult , i tried a lot of things etc. , but no help. Now , i use no Prozac and i have worse problem , i have orgasmus in few of seconds. (Sorry , my english is bad , i come from Czech Republic).

[edit] Difference between primary and secondary?!!

Hi, I'm not sure exactly what the difference between primary and secondary anorgasmia is, even less so after reading this article. What is the difference between "a condition where one cannot physically orgasm" and "the loss of the ability to have orgasms." Those are the two proferred definitions, and the contrast is not readily apparent. Considering the examples, several hypotheses as to what might be the difference are shot down. For example, is primary anorgasmia something you're born with, whereas secondary is acquired? No, because genital mutilation is on there. Is primary anorgasmia concerned with psychological vs. physical causes? No, again because of mutilation being an example of it. I am very confused. Are all of the examples in the right category? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.69.31.46 (talk) 08:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

Additionally confusing is the article states two types have been defined, and goes on to discuss four types: primary, secondary, situational and random. Keesiewonder talk 01:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
The two vs. four probably is something that was missed during an edit adding situation and random.
As for what the difference is, I actually believe the distinction is primary anorgasmic is pre-orgasmic, and secondary orgasmic is post-orgasmic. --Puellanivis 05:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I would think that primary inorgasmia is caused directly by some physiological cause, whereas secondary inorgasmia is the result of some other problem, such as depression. Speaking of "other problems", wouldn't a simple lack of attraction qualify as a secondary cause? --MQDuck 12:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed text

Given the social climate where males are just expected to be able to orgasm, it is possible that they feel ashamed, and refuse to discuss it, or distance themselves sexually. Either way, primary anorgasmia is largely considered a "female only" condition, which can be extremely frustrating to males who are left feeling alone by an affliction that few people acknowledge.

Given all the ads on TV about erectile dysfunction lately, this doesn't seem accurate. In any case, it's referenced, and doesn't specify which part of the world it's talking about. -- Beland 15:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Anorgasmia and erectile dysfunction are two different things. Someone can maintain an erection but not be able to reach orgasm. I agree that most of the anorgasmia article seems to assume that nearly everyone with this problem is female, which as far as I can tell from what I've been reading in the last few weeks, is not the case. Anorgasmia in men and women is an established side effect of SSRIs. Since long-term use of SSRIs also causes movement disorders, like parkinson's, it makes sense that it might affect the nerves and muscles involved in orgasm.
Anorgasmia is quite distinct from both erectile dysfunction, and even ejaculatory response. Anorgasmia specifically refers to the condition where a person is fully sexually functional, however is unable to reach orgasm. While SSRIs are becoming more common, and thus more men are exposed to the "sexual side-effects" of them (anorgasmia) they are still generally the only males who have anorgasmia. Meanwhile, depression is more common in females, and alternate causes of anorgasmia are by far more common in females. SSRIs are more likely to cause difficulty reaching orgasm in males more than total anorgasmia itself in males. Thus, you have less than 50% of the people taking SSRIs who are male, then less than that of males who have total loss of orgasmic response, and then added to this relatively large number one has the majority of those who have had a radical prostatectomy. This number still pales in comparison to the number of females with anorgasmia. It's simply a matter of perspective, every 1 in 5 patients of breast cancer are males, but you never hear about them. No matter how common anorgasmia may be in men, it's still not socially considered to be existant. --Puellanivis 23:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tone needs revision?

Having just read through the anorgasmia and dyspareunia pages, I have to say that I'm a bit uncomfortable about the level of condescension on these pages. I recognize that this may be reflective of the medical profession's attitude towards women's sexuality, but these pages are written from the perspective of anorgasmia/dyspareunia as psychological defects of the woman and verge into being a bit creepy when they discuss how women can be made sexually normal. Consider these gems:

Therapy can be aimed at helping them give up the need to keep their sexual feelings under control at all times. [anorgasmia] Relationship problems are generally the result of chronic frustration, disappointment, and depression associated with the condition. [dyspareunia]

I realize Wikipedia articles are meant to be objective, but “objective” doesn’t equal “harsh.” These could be rewritten with a more sympathetic tone while being made equally or more informative. Arkaaito 03:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I think most women would agree that anargasmia is a defect, if "defect" is defined as a harmful abnormality. And anyhow, this word doesn't use the word "defect" and medical science doesn't use that word either - the term would be "dysfunction". And almost any woman would recognize it as an unfortunate dysfunction. In fact, NOT recognizing it as a real problem (as has very often been the case in history) is a lot more sexist than assuming it is one.
Second, I'm not sure what you consider "harsh" about what you quoted. You seem to be saying that stating facts is contradictory to sensitivity (a point I don't necessarily concede). I don't want or mean to attack you, but I fear you're assuming that women need more sensitivity than men (who can handle the straight facts) do. Anyhow, I don't see how it could (or should) be more sympathetic without being less informational, but if you have a way, by all means, share it. --MQDuck 12:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Gladipudendal reflexes"

What say? Tomertalk 20:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)