Elusive Terms for the Elusive Phenomenon of Orgasm

As mentioned in other posts on r/MultipleOs (https://www.reddit.com/r/MultipleOs/comments/100sjbb/complexity_of_orgasm_from_an_ecological/), orgasm is a complex phenomenon that is very difficult to define. What occurs when one orgasms is also a challenge (See https://www.reddit.com/r/MultipleOs/comments/1036f9d/study_an_orgasm_is_who_defines_what_an_orgasm_is/).

Orgasm itself is described in various ways. People tend to fall into three groups.      

  • Group 1 prefers a more scientific description grounded in physiology, neurology, endocrinology, psychology, and other sciences (See Science of Orgasm by Komisaruk, Beyer-Flores, and Whipple).   Group 2 prefers, whether because of spiritual practice, lack of knowledge of more scientific descriptions, or lack of better lexicon, descriptions of orgasms from frameworks of Western-style and traditional tantra and Daoism, yoga, chi, and other spiritual practices (See https://www.mantakchia.com/quest-for-spiritual-orgasm/ or http://zgxkx.com/).   Group 3 uses both scientific and spiritual practices to describe not only the orgasm itself but their philosophically of orgasm and how this philosophy of orgasm.

Terminology must be understood within its source framework.

Elusive terms to group like “energy,””flow,” “channel,” and “chakras” cannot be understood outside the framework of the source philosophy or science. Energy in tantra, Daoism, and other spiritual practices have their nuances. In contrast, a physicist would hear the word “energy” and interpret it through a mathematical framework.

Are scientists ruining the beauty of orgasm by explaining it?

When Isaac Newton described the rainbow, poet John Keats felt that Isaac Newton had destroyed the beauty of the rainbow by explaining the science behind it, which he lamented in the poem Lamia. Ought we just use spiritual ways of describing orgasm? Should scientific terminology and the spiritual words both be used recruiting many frameworks simultaneously?

TO WOO OR NOT TO WOO
Greydancer of Kinkacademy.com brings an interesting point to the topic of orgasm in a entitled “To Woo or Not to Woo” (https://www.kinkacademy.com/2014/10/to-woo-or-not-spirituality-and-kink/). No matter what one may believe in terms how orgasm ought to be described and explored, one may want to incorporate spiritual practice into play.

Greydancer writes:

“‘Energy’ is another of those words that skeptics argue have very little meaning outside of “magical thinking”, especially in terms of kink. One way to understand the word without thinking of it as being spiritual is to understand that “energy” could mean “focused attention.” There are well-documented neurochemical changes that take place when a person enters a state of either focusing or being focused upon” (para. 6).

One person might believe, and the other person might not, but they may compromise to create a good scene.

Greydancer concludes that

“There are legitimate scientific studies trying to understand the connection between kink and these spiritual states of mind. Neuropsychologists have used kinksters as part of their research and it’s possible that terms such as “energy” and “woo” will eventually have enough empirical evidence that even the most skeptical will be satisfied. In the meantime, it’s enough for those who want the woo that they can enjoy all the energetic play they want right alongside those who enjoy the purely physical pleasures of being kinky” (para. 9)

DISCUSSION

What might the the yogic, Daoism and tantric practitioners have an inkling of that scientific communities does not?What are your thoughts on using terms from non-scientific sources to describe orgasm?Has anyone incorporated eastern practice or new age elements into play?

Leave a comment