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


So we meet again, dear Kat readers !!

For those reading Kat for the first time, I’d like to inform everyone that all content here was derived from reputable sources. You are NOT reading pseudoscience !

Now that I’ve disclaimer-ed you to death, my topic and question is, “Does penis size matter when finding a mate?”

Although, this topic arouses a banquet of controversy, even my own curiosity was piqued here. How exactly does one tackle this age-old question, one so perverted and distorted by stereotypes? I’ll tell you how! Science!

People have been obsessed with penis size since Eve first discovered Adam eventually had an additional bone for her. Considering all variables surrounding my topic, I chose a source that remained most objective : research and experiments from the University of Ottawa and from the Australian National University appeared most suitable as to the methods used to obtain and reinforce the data I will be using here. (Ummm, thanks Canada for your unsung obsession with male genitalia. A double thanks to Australia for supporting the findings of our frigid northern friends!)

Both universities performed experiments using computer generated naked male images to gauge sexual attractiveness. To paint a better visual picture, those artificial images gave no relevance to facial features or hair. Giving ugly bald guys out there a fair chance. These life sized pictures varied in height, physique, and complete with flaccid penises. All women participating in the experiment were instructed to rate the images by sexual attraction.

Each image’s starting length was a 3-inch pinch, and as the images progressed, so did penis length. Interestingly enough, with the growth of penis size so did the image’s polarity ranking. As an image’s penis size continued to increase, its appeal slowly decreased when compared to proceeding images.

Yet another plus one for men lesser endowed! Please don’t get discouraged, gentlemen, this data could be a manifestation of evolutionary principles embedded in the female subconscious. Penis size once was a primeval indicator of a male’s ability to sire genetically desirable offspring. Which would explain why the human penis has evolved at an accelerating rate in comparison to other primates.

Turns out, though, that the experiments in research of penis size only had relevance when considered in tandem with body type : taller images with smaller penises scored higher than shorter images with larger penises, and shorter images with smaller penises ranked the least favorable. The image ranking highest in scores seemed to be the tallest image with the largest penis trumping over all other images. Both the tall and short images scoring the best all shared the same mesomorphic qualities. ( “Mesomorph” is just a fancy way of saying a body type with broad shoulders, wide chest, and narrow hips. ) According to the data gathered, penis size is nowhere near as important as a nice body. Which doesn’t surprise me considering men don’t wear their penis outside their pants while on the dating scene. First we gals must be seduced by what we see on the surface. Only after can we experience any sexual gratification or disappointment.

A penis will not find you a mate; but it will definitely help you keep her. Best way to find a mate, guys? A Macy’s credit card & gym membership! And even if you’re not well-endowed, fear not Vienna sausage packing dudes! Learn to speak in tongues to better communicate with the whispering eye.

Conveniently enough, a woman’s cervix is between three and five inches long. It only expands slightly upon arousal to accommodate a man’s penis. So what’s all the commotion in the ocean ? There are plenty of fish in the sea that’ll take your bait no matter what size. Uh, ladies not everyone fishing wants a large mouth bass hanging off their poles. Kegels…Google it, or just wait for my next blog.

— Kat Gottlich / Kat Got your Tongue



Sat, May 18, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Hello, dear Kat people !

Today’s topic is one that we often ignore. Hint: we do it all day and don’t realize it. It’s a subconscious, involuntary, and oblivious action we fixate ourselves on daily.

Is your curiosity aroused? Do I have your full attention? Drum roll please!

The hot topic of discussion is “PERCEPTIONS”. Ta-dah! Perceptions are how we interpret everything around us. Although simple in theory my topic is rather complex in its dynamics. Everything we encounter is actively being analyzed on an extroverted level. The complexity of perceptions is unique to each individual. For example, how we view ourselves is usually inconsistent with those around us. Perceptions tend to be exclusive in the sense, that no two people identify an object identically.

If you have read this far I feel it’s safe to say, “Get a mirror”.

I apologize for engaging you, my readers, in so cruel a manner, but remember : there’s a point to be made, so let’s get to it, OK ?

Hair colors obviously unnatural and artsy hair styles have been resurrected; but so has misconception. News Flash: It doesn’t look good on everyone! If I somehow managed to offend some people by saying that, I place complete blame on the media. Everyday we’re bombarded with perception-altering ideals and images. More ladies should reflect their own perceptions inwards prior to dyeing their hair electric red — and please drop the Wahl clippers! You are not replicating a Rihanna/ Miley Cyrus hybrid. Instead you resemble a strung out Ronald McDonald suffering from ringworm of the scalp.

Personally, I hold perceptions to the same standards as I apply to drugs. Perceptions alter judgment and hinder responsible decision making. And so I conclude, if perceptions are a drug, some people are higher on them than the ceiling in Charlie Sheen’s private opium den.

—- Kat Gottlich / “Kat Got your Tongue”