KAT GOT YOUR TONGUE : ” GUSHING ” ?

Image

Hello there faithful Kat readers!

Today’s topic is, without a doubt, one for the books. Whether it could be characterised as fact or be read as fiction will depend on the documentation — its origin and its time period.

So here’s the deal : despite a multiplicity of preferences and interpretations of truths, the question remains : “can women ejaculate ?”

This question has been frequently asked in history, yet still lacks even a minimal yes or no. Medical professionals in every field have investigated female ejaculation. You figure that with a surplus of “researchers,” someone would have a concrete answer. Instead, I have found loads of compiled data that suspiciously mimics the pornographic depiction of “gushing.”

For the confused among you, “gushing,” in medical terms relates to coital incontinence. Think of it as pissing yourself while screwing, minus the urine.

The consistency of the gush resembles abundant release of a diluted saline. Personally, I neither embrace or dismiss the concept of “gushing,” but I’m most definitely pro-orgasm in any form. Regardless of texture, whether it be scant and gelantinous or profuse and concongealed I’m for it, supportive of each viscosity.

Being rewarded with a release comparable to what our our male counterparts get, alongside us, is a concept reassuring enough. Come on now, there aren’t to many situations that justify the use of your “Oh-Face,” except for ejaculation ! So to get back on track, I’ve read research dating from the 16th Century to right now. Oddly enough, there’s much fascination about the speculated paradox and origins of the passion envoking secretions. Still, for all the passing centuries, the question of female ejaculation has generated few concrete answers. Hypotheses, however, are many.

The majority of these hypotheses actually run parallel. Each study describes the “gush” to be an accumulation of vaginal discharge happening both before orgasm and after. Thankfully, one Alexander Skene came along to clarify the issue. He advanced anatomical principles in his account of how para-urethral glands operate. Para-urethrals are glands surrounding the urethra; appropriately, they’re called “the Skene’s Glands.”

However, as with all great discoveries, there’s always the few who wish to one up the other. Obstetricians and gynaecologists writing after Skene had done his research, disputed Skene’s Glands theory. Their counter argument suggested that the urethra had its own para-urethral ducts and glands rather than there being independently operating glands surrounding the urethra.

Analysis of the fluids released following the hypothesis’ revealed insignificant amounts of urine traces. Which contradicted both Skene’s theory and its opponents — but raised yet another riddle : the fluid specimens collected contained a protein similar to that found in semen !

Despite the laboratory data depicting to this mysterious seepage, I’m sure you readers are curious about the frequency of its occurrence. Or so I hope — otherwise this blog is rendered pointless. But you, my readers, have more confidence in me than that, right ?

According to a survey of 200 women done in 1994 by Kratochvil. only 6 % of women reported an experience similar to ejaculation. Another 60% reported a release of fluid without a “gush” (classified as a fluid volume of 1 to 5 ml). Could it be possible, on such statistics and studies, that female ejaculation may be a fantasy occurring only in pornos ? It’s bad enough that Planned Parenthood reports that 30% of women have trouble reaching orgasm and 70% can’t orgasm on penetration alone ! These aren’t encouraging statistics, are they ? Completely unmotivating !

So let’s say, hypothetically, guys, that you’ve acquired the rare skills to pleasure that 6% who experience a sex result debated for centuries….kudos to you. Nothing is more congratulating than a women who likes you enough to practice what may or may not be “urophilia.” Even so, my findings are neither here nor there, and I myself couldn’t reach any hard-core answers. I guess the importance isn’t whether you can “gush,” or “ejaculate”; it’s whether you can actually orgasm.

In any case, generating three to 15 involuntary and pulsating contractions of the vagina far outweighs the over hyped squirts of Jenna Jameson — anyway you parse it.
So what do YOU think?!?

— Kat Gottlich / Kat Got your Tongue

Author: hereandsphere

Here and Sphere is an online journal of news, opinion, reviews, advice, & bits n' pieces of everything else - from HERE to SPHERE...... Co-founded by Michael Freedberg, a long-time Boston Phoenix journalist, and Heather Cornell, a South Coast Massachusetts columnist and editor.

2 thoughts on “KAT GOT YOUR TONGUE : ” GUSHING ” ?”

  1. From what I have read from years back any woman is capable of gushing. I have dated one girl who did. There are techniques for making it happen. I’ll try to provide a link when I get a chance. However here is where the catch is. For most women an orgasm isn’t always purely physical. There are a lot of contributing factors that play into the situation. A combination of mental and physical therapy so to speak. My best advice for any woman is find a man (or woman) you are extremely comfortable with and practice the techniques together and just have fun. And if you’re pleased without it, don’t over think it and just enjoy what you have. Trying too hard for anything can sometimes ruin it.

    1. Ty shawn for your feedback. I greatly appreciate any link you leave. I combed through numerous medical accounts from credible sites w/minimal definitive answers or explanations. & you’re right. Compatibility is key:)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s