Yeah, You Heard Me, Vaginal Stimulation Hasn't Been Shown To Cause Orgasm: A Defense
*Updated 9/2/2024: I wrote this OVER a decade ago in 2012. It's all still completely relevant, and I stand by what it says - well worth the time to read in my opinion. However it doesn't specifically address a theory about 'vaginal orgasm' that has become incredibly popular since then. I recently wrote a post HERE that addresses this incorrect but widely touted idea that the inner part of the clit was discovered in 1998 (it wasn't) and that there is new evidence this inner part is the reason for vaginal orgasm (there isn't). This re-focus is just a continuation of the long and desperate cultural obsession with finding any way at all to physically defend the notion that women can orgasm from nothing more than a good bang. Up through the 70’s it was said the vaginal walls themselves could be stimulated to orgasm. Then in the 80s up through about when we made the movie Science, Sex, and the Ladies in 2014, it was supposedly the G-spot that made a vag-gasm possible. Then as the G-Spot started going out of vogue as an orgasm button in the vagina (and its part in female ejaculation was rightly becoming more discussed), the new ‘reason for vag-gasms’ shifted to the inner clitoral structure (you might have heard the phrase, “It’s all clitoral!”).
Problem is that, contrary to popular belief, stimulating any of those things; the vaginal walls, the g-spot, or the inner clitoral structures (stimulated through the walls of the vagina), has NEVER been shown to cause the rhythmic muscular markers of an orgasm in all of scientific literature. Ever. And in fact at times when it seems a study could or should have, they just choose not to record any pelvic muscular data or not to include the data they did capture (for instance the often cited studies HERE and HERE). All that to say, I don’t want people reading this or watching the movie and thinking that there has been some new surge in scientific knowledge about penetrative orgasms. THERE HAS NOT, but unfortunately, over the last 10 or so years, the cultural conversation about penetrative orgasms has rejuvenated itself to sound more hip and progressive by focusing on the inner clit, in the same baseless way it always has but with a new shine and a renewed ability to stunt actual orgasm equality progress.
AND ON TO THE MAIN ARTICE:
I'm going to address a common criticism of my writing; women telling me that the description of female orgasm I put forth doesn't describe their personal experience. I actually think that my way of discussing orgasm does include more women than it might seem at first glance; it's just that our language of orgasm is different, and I don't usually address that properly. The problem begins with the controversial and seemingly divisive statement I often throw out there; I often outright say that female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulative friction on the inside of the vagina. I stand by the statement, but I also understand why it's criticized. It seems to leave out women who say they have "vaginal" or "g-spot" orgasms.
I do stick to a particular definition of orgasm, and I do find that some claims about female orgasms are unsubstantiated through scientific investigation, but in order to explain fully, there is a lot of background that needs to accompany this, and there rarely seems to be enough time or space to include it. To clarify my statement and my meaning is exactly my intention here.
WHY I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION TO HAVE
A lot of people have told me, and probably will continue to tell me that I shouldn't be trying to tell women what is and is not an orgasm; I freely admit that I am trying to make the physical definition of an orgasm popular knowledge, but I am not telling women there is only one way to have an orgasm. I am simply trying to encourage the proper use of the word orgasm. When we speak about female orgasm, the word is thrown around to describe all kinds of things that are not orgasms; things like ejaculation, non-orgasmic physical pleasure, or spiritual/emotional highs associated with intercourse. I'm not saying these are undesirable or lesser, but I am saying they are not orgasms, and calling them or insinuating that they are orgasms confuses all the women out there who are trying to maneuver their way through a really confusing sexual culture. A willy nilly use of the word "orgasm" leads to the persistent misunderstandings of what an orgasm is and how a woman might get one, which I argue is ultimately harmful
There is a need for our culture to finally begin dealing with the female orgasm from a perspective of scientific knowledge; to be clear about what happens physically; to speak about it in realistic and fact based ways. We have too long been wishy washy about what an orgasm is and too all-accepting about any old idea any person has about how a woman might get one. I understand that I am walking a fine line here. I know by pushing a science-based definition on the female orgasm, there will be those who feel as if I am saying anyone who's experience doesn't fit into that definition isn't having a real experience, but I am unequivocally NOT saying that. I believe that having clear definitions does not also have to mean having clear exclusions. I think that the conversation about female orgasm has been so convoluted over the last 60 years that it cannot move forward unless we start discussing it in terms of facts and begin being specific in our language. Change hurts, but I believe this is a change that is necessary. I believe women and society as a whole are fully capable of engaging in this type of discussion; of being accepting while still understanding female orgasm in a scientific and structured way.
SO, WHAT IS THE DEFINTION OF AN ORGASM?
Pioneering scientists William Masters and Virginia Johnson (M&J) did one of the first and definitely most comprehensive observations of how male and female bodies react to sexual arousal and orgasm and released the book Human Sexual Response in 1966. Masters & Johnson's work is still a standard of physical orgasm research. M&J's physical orgasm and arousal findings have been consistently corroborated and built upon over the past 60 years as new pelvic muscular recording technology has emerged. The basic nature of their findings have not been invalidated even as it’s been updated and expanded upon, and I look forward to more research that expands and updates even further.
M&J showed that males and females have the same basic physical reactions. During arousal, the pelvic muscles begin to tense and blood begins to pool in the genital areas (this pooling causes males to get erections, and it causes women to begin emitting lubrication from our vaginal walls and causes swelling to occur in our visible vulva area and in our clitoral legs and vestibular bulbs, which are hidden deep in our pelvis; and btw women have as much blood pooling in their genitals as men, the male reaction is just - you know - easier to see).
Orgasm is the sudden release of the muscle tension and blood pooling that has built up during arousal. For both sexes, the pelvic muscles will release the tension with regular, involuntary spasms. It's very similar in all sexes. However, males also usually ejaculate at the same time they orgasm, and this ejaculation/orgasm at the same time thing is not a normal occurrence for females. This Masters and Johnson definition is a standard, evidence-based, scientifically uncontroversial physiological definition of an orgasm, and is what I refer to when I say orgasm.
WHAT IS NOT AN ORGASM: THE FOLLOWING THINGS ARE NOT WITHIN THE PHYSICAL DEFINITION OF ORGASM AND NOT WHAT I REFER TO WHEN I SAY ‘ORGASM’
A general pleasure during sex; or a physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual high that cannot be described by the description of physical orgasms set out by M&J. Orgasm and pleasure are not interchangeable. One can exists without the other. They can be interconnected, but they are quite simply not the same things. Pleasure without orgasm is absolutely something that can be valued in sexual interactions, but conflating the 2 with our language makes the advice, understanding, and research around either one muddied and confusing and ultimately useless. We don't confuse orgasm and non-orgasmic pleasure this casually for men, and we shouldn't for women either.
Arousal - In the same vein as above, arousal is not orgasm. One can have physical arousal without orgasm, but physical arousal (although maybe not necessarily mental arousal ) is a necessary precursor for orgasm. The amount of physical or mental things that might arouse a person is vast, but the final stimulation needed to push arousal into orgasm is much more likely to be physical and consistent - and based on past research it’s most likely going to be physical stimulation around the penis or clitoral glans area. Just think of it in terms of how you understand male orgasm. Yes, he could get insanely hard and aroused by watching a naked woman and having her kiss his chest and neck, but it would seem naive to assume that he would orgasm without his penis being touched at all; even if it's just a little touch, we would expect that he would need it to put him over the edge. It shouldn't be thought of much differently for women.
Ejaculation/Squirting - Female ejaculation does exist and some women who have them say they find it quite pleasurable, but it's not an orgasm. That’s not a value judgement, just a truth that they are physically different events in both males and in females; males just happen to usually ejaculate simultaneously at the time of orgasm and (most) females do not.
This is where that oh so revered G-Spot comes into this discussion. It is touted in women's magazines and pop culture as some kind of amazing, yet elusive, spot that causes earth shattering orgasms...for the lucky few. Unfortunately, that's just plain unsubstantiated. There is clearly physiological evidence of g-spot stimulation causing ejaculation and squirting in females (which also may be 2 different things in both males and females, but for now what we know is that there is way too little research on it, and they are both sexual emission of fluid through the urethra), but no physiological evidence of g-spot stimulation causing orgasms (there are plenty of survey's where women say they do have G-spot "orgasms," but I have never seen one where these claims are backed up with physiological evidence).
The only physical reaction to g-spot stimulation that has been recorded and observed is ejaculation/squirting. For both sexes, stimulating their G-spot/prostate or urethral meatus an cause ejaculation/squirting but not orgasm, and to be clear, the sudden release of muscle tension and blood congestion that is a marker of orgasm, is not a known quality of ejaculation. By all means, enjoy and seek ejaculation or squirting if you like it, but let's be clear about what it is and that it is physically different than orgasm. (If you want to look into this further, I suggest The G-Spot and Other Recent Discoveries About Human Sexuality. This book sort of "discovered" the G-spot in 1982. It wants badly to support the idea of a g-spot orgasm, but if you read it critically and look for physical evidence, it simply fails. The information in there about G-Spot induced ejaculation, however, is groundbreaking and continues to ring true these many years later.)
WHAT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO CAUSE ORGASM?
When I say female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulation on the inside of the vagina, the part about orgasms coming from clitoral stimulation is pretty uncontroversial. Any kind of stimulation of the clit can cause an orgasm. Masters and Johnson physically observed and documented this as well many researchers since, and it is important to note that all the orgasms they recorded exhibited the same basic physical reactions. There simply wasn't any evidence of a separate "type" of orgasm; no "vaginal," "G-spot," or "uterine" orgasm.
So the only really controversial part of that statement is me saying that I have not come across any physical evidence that penises or fingers or dildos stimulating the inside of the vagina have caused an orgasm. That is not to mean, however, that no orgasms can occur during the act of penetration.
Below I will list ways that can cause orgasm during acts of penetration.
Direct Clitoral Stimulation - That's right, simply getting your own or your partner's hands down there on the clitoral/vulva area during penetration works wonders. You could also get a vibrator, mouth or whatever floats your boat down there to work the clit area during intercourse.
Grinding - Grinding the clitoral glans area against something during the act of intercourse/penetration is another form of clitoral stimulation. It can be against pillows, bedding, teddy bears, your partners pelvis - whatever. As long as the clitoral glans/vulva area is being stimulated, it makes sense that an orgasm could occur in this intercourse situation. I'd also like to add that this seems to be a way that some women orgasm during intercourse without really realizing that it's due to the clit stimulation from their grinding. It can be unintentional (However, from my own experience, I'd say it won't be a very consistent way to orgasm unless the woman knows what she's going for and works for it)
M&J Rube Goldberg-esque Indirect Clitoral Stimulation The closest thing to the sought after no-additional-clitoral-stimulation intercourse orgasm, was documented and observed by M&J. So, there is evidence that a small amount of women can attain this intercourse orgasm, and M&J even found 2 women who had orgasms from nipple stimulation with no direct clitoral stimulation. Before you get too excited, though, I think it is important to understand what scientific investigation has told us about how these orgasms happen and how they compare to other orgasms these women have.
Both groups were aroused physically almost to the point of orgasm to start with - before the nipple stimulation or intercourse happened. For the first group (a group that was specifically sought out within the possible test population - since M&J held dear the idea that women should be having hands free orgasms during intercourse, even though their investigations clearly showed that female orgasms were caused by clitoral not vaginal stimulation), M&J hypothesized it was a Rube-Goldberg situation where the penis pulled on the highly aroused inner lips, which pulled on the clitoral hood, which rubbed against the clitoris. It was a small bit of stimulation, but enough to push them over the edge. The second group (2 women) started manipulating their nipples after they too were physically almost to the point of orgasm. The nipple stimulation was enough to put them over the edge to orgasm. Now, M&J didn't have any specific hypothesis for how the clitoris was stimulated in this situation, but they clearly stated that all the orgasms, whether they were from direct clit stimulation or these indirect intercourse/nipple ones, can be described the same way physically.
Before you start feeling unlucky because you aren't one of these rare women who can just come from a little touch to the nip or from the ol' in and out (someone like our lucky heroine from Fifty Shades of Grey), let me tell you this. Although the orgasms they had were physically similar to the ones these same women had during direct clitoral stimulation, they were also the weakest ones they had - both in terms of the physical intensity of the muscle spasms and in terms of the women's own subjective feelings. If we think of orgasms in terms of clitoral stimulation, it makes perfect sense that these would be weak orgasms - given that these were the orgasms caused by the most indirect stimulation of the clit. The orgasms they had as a result of masturbation (of the clitoral/vulva area) were the strongest, and orgasms as a result of a skilled partner's manual stimulation of the woman's vulva/clitoral area were the second most intense. (It seems that if our Fifty Shade's heroine was realistic in any way, those nipple and intercourse orgasms she had wouldn't have been so earth shattering, now would they?). Also, remember that even though these women did have an orgasm without specifically touching or grinding their clit, they did need to be physically on the edge of orgasm before they even started these non clit touching orgasm maneuvers. So it's not as if these women simply got banged and came...or got a little nip sucking and came. They put a lot of footwork (including direct clitoral stimulation) into getting to a point where the oh-so-coveted intercourse/nipple orgasm could even have a chance of occurring...and for their coveted orgasm status and hard work, what did they get? A rather weak orgasm, but an orgasm none the less.
*2024 update - I have some concerns now about M&J’s observations of female orgasm during intercourse and that Rube-Goldberg idea they put out there. In a 1968 Playboy interview Virginia Johnson said no person was ever able to orgasm only from the dildo machine, ‘cyclops,’ they created. It would move in and out of a woman’s vagina at a speed and depth of her liking. She could change and control it herself. The dildo was clear and had a camera inside that could record the happenings inside the vagina during arousal and orgasm even when it was in motion. Johnson said all the women had to also stimulate their clits to orgasm. The details of the specific recording processes for intercourse orgasm observations has always been some of the mushiest, vague pieces of their book, but I had always assumed that the ‘cyclops’ was where they observed the Rube-Goldberg effect, which now I know obviously was not. And funny thing - Johnson actually destroyed all their raw data many years later, after they divorced, and we can never know for sure now, but I feel skeptical about it, and am planning to write something up on this in the near future. It makes me wonder where and how they even observed and verified the small amount of intercourse orgasms they reported on. It makes me wonder if it could be assumed that the cause was more related to stimulation of the clit area against the partners body or something. Anyway, it was a wild revelation to find in a Playboy interview.
WOMEN WHO HAVE THE FOLLOWING EXPERIENCES FIT FULLY INTO MY STATEMENT ABOUT ORGASM, EVEN IF WE HAVE SEMANTIC DIFFERENCES
have orgasms only through direct clitoral/vulva stimulation
have orgasms during intercourse due to some kind of additional or even unintentional stimulation like grinding against your partner or the bedding
ejaculate or squirt due to inner vaginal stimulation - that you may call "orgasms"
ejaculate or squirt due to inner vaginal stimulation at the same time you are having orgasms due to clitoral stimulation ('cause you're messing with the clit and the G-spot/vagina at the same time) and call that whole thing a different kind of "orgasm"
have something you call "orgasms" that are based in deep feelings of physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual pleasure or arousal...yet, this something could not be defined as an orgasm in the M&J physiological definition (rhythmic, involuntary pelvic muscle contractions).
have the occasional orgasm that occurs during intercourse or nipple stimulation but after being intensely aroused (probably partially by direct clitoral stimulation) to almost the point of orgasm; with that orgasm physically feeling like a weak version of the orgasms you get during direct clitoral stimulation
WOMEN WHO HAVE THE FOLLOWING EXPERIENCES DO NOT FIT INTO MY STATEMENT ABOUT ORGASM
Women who have physically observable orgasms (rhythmic, involuntary pelvic muscle contractions) from nothing but stimulation to the inside of the vagina - the ol’ in and out without any clitoral grinding or stimulation. Female characters like this fill our books, tv, movies, and porn. If this is you in real life, then frankly, I see your experience all over media, but can't find your situation in the research. I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm just saying your experience has not been studied or at least studied with pelvic muscle recordings. I know someone will come back at me with a study here or there where women say on a survey that they do orgasm this way, but I promise I have looked at a lot, and I have never seen a study where these claims are backed up by physical observations showing there was in fact a physiologic orgasmic reaction. And there’s been a lot of research with the aim of proving this ability exists in women. I'm always open to learning new things about the female orgasm through solid investigation, though, so if you are one of these women, I hope you are part of a good orgasm study someday. There truly is too little good scientific investigation about female sexual release that involve recording of muscle contractions.
CONCLUSION
I know the exclusion I make may seem harsh, but I do think it is important to let women know that this is the reality of our scientific knowledge right now. Every time a woman says she orgasms easily from the ol' in and out, but she's actually orgasming from grinding her clit, or she's actually ejaculating, or she's actually talking about something in a more spiritual way, or she's actually talking about a really weak Rube-Goldberg orgasm she has had only a hand-full of times in her whole sexual life, then the world of lady-gasm understanding, advice, and research gets a little more muddied and confusing. I believe that confusion ultimately brings harm to females and to our sexual culture.
I honestly don't think there are women out there intentionally trying to make other women feel inferior or misrepresenting their experiences. Truthfully, the way our culture teaches, depicts, and discusses female orgasm is so confusing that none of us really know how to talk about our experiences. We just do the best we can with what we've been able to figure out. We need a better way, though. We need to understand what scientific investigation can tell us about what a physical orgasm is and how it can be sought, which can also help in understanding and seeking other types of sexual experiences if one so chooses. We need to start using plain and physical terms to speak about our experiences with orgasm and sexual pleasure so that we can learn from the realities of our fellow females.
We also need to be accepting. I know my emphasis on the clitoris and on the physical definition of orgasm makes some feel as though I will be encouraging the type of "my orgasms/sexual experiences are better than yours" situation that happened during Freud's time and that is happening now with the emphasis of mind-shattering effortless Fifty Shades type intercourse-only orgasms. However, I think much of the worry and envy and lack that women have felt about their orgasm has a lot to do with the state of confusion that the female orgasm, and thus the people dealing with female orgasm have existed in. I believe females are craving the chance to be grounded in reality when it comes to orgasms, and I think we are mature enough to deal with our diversity. There should be nothing wrong with enjoying the emotional high that comes with your sessions of intercourse, even if there is no physical orgasm involved; or in enjoying your ejaculation. Also, a woman who says she fits into my second grouping should be taken seriously. Even if she is part of a small minority that hasn't been studied well, these are her experiences, and we should work to document those experiences as part of the female reality. We do need to understand and make these distinctions though.
So, when I say that female orgasms arise from clitoral stimulation, and not from stimulation to the inside of the vagina, please know that I'm not just trying to be exclusive, mean or divisive. I honestly feel like I'm doing this for the opposite reasons, and I hope that is eventually how most others will feel also. I truly hope to move the language and the understanding of female orgasm towards a clearer, more realistic, more fact-based place. I believe that clarity can provide the opportunity to understand and make informed choices about how to approach one’s own sexual encounters and how to work towards whatever the desired outcome of that experience. I don’t believe we can really have that choice when we don’t fully understand how to interpret or speak about the menu.
***Since this article was written in 2012, I have written more that addresses some questions people may have about research linking the inner clitoral legs to the G-spot and/or vaginal orgasm. As of yet I still haven't found any research showing orgasm can be caused by stimulation inside the vagina. However, there has definitely been some recent and often cited studies claiming to show that 'vaginal orgasms' can be caused by stimulation of the clitoral legs through the vaginal walls. Those studies don't actually show that. THIS post in part discusses those studies and should help put those popular studies into perspective. Also, for deeper info, HERE is a list of my summaries for some relevant journal articles. *****or as I updated at the top, please read THIS post about the incorrect, but widely touted idea that the inner part of the clit was discovered in 1998 (it wasn't) and that there is new evidence this inner part is the reason for vaginal orgasm (there isn't). - 3/8/2021*****
****HERE is the documentary this blog was meant to expand upon. It does not go into as much detail as some of the posts here, but it does give a better overview of the cultural problems with our understanding of female orgasm than any one post here can do.