Do all orgasms feel alike? Study – Evaluating a two-dimensional model of the orgasm experience across gender and sexual context

Do all orgasm feel alike (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476242/)? To assume all orgasms feel alike assumes that orgasms of people across their sessions throughout their lifespans and the orgasms of many peoples with diverse histories, cultures, and backgrounds experience orgasms alike. Alike how? Sensationally? Neurochemically? Psychologically? Endocrinologically? Are these orgasms of the same type? How ought an orgasm of a particular type be categorized? Can you categorize orgasms into types? Is an orgasm an orgasm an orgasm?

Researchers Kenneth Mah and Yitzchak M Binik, who have both researched orgasm extensively (See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Mah+K&cauthor_id=12476242   and  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Binik+YM&cauthor_id=12476242 for a list of their publications) used a two-dimensional model of the orgasm experience across gender and sexual context.

HIGHLIGHTS OF STUDY

• “There is currently no universally accepted measure of the potentially wide range of subjective qualities making up the orgasm experience” (p. 104)  

• “Research efforts to systematize the variability in orgasm experiences, primarily female orgasm, have resulted in several anatomically based typologies of female orgasm…. However, there are several problems with these reductionistic typologies. First, the evidence for anatomically based typologies is based mainly on uncontrolled self-reports (see Mah & Binik, 2001). Second, the typologies suggest that the female orgasm experience is solely dependent upon genitopelvic stimulation and do not take into account other possible biopsychosocial influences (Levin, 1992; Mah & Binik, 2001), including variation at the psychological level (e.g., Fisher, 1973; Levin, 1981). Third,the typologies confound description with causal explanation by emphasizing how orgasm is triggered. Fourth, the typologies identify variations in orgasm but do not describe the core phenomenological characteristics that define orgasm and which all orgasm experiences share” (p. 104)

• “Two other problems are apparent of orgasm focuses on female orgasm appears to reflect the assumption that female orgasm is psychologically more complex than male orgasm (Mah & Binik, 2001). In contrast, an enormous body of literature exists on the physiology of ejaculation in which “male orgasm” and “ejaculation” are typically interchangeable. However, the limited empirical evidence available suggests that male and female orgasm may bear more similarities than differences (see Mah & Binik, 2001, for review). In one controlled study by Vance and Wagner (1976), independent raters could not differentiate written descriptions of male versus female orgasm experiences” (p. 104)

• “[O]rgasmic pleasure (cognitive dimension) maybe determined more by the physical sensations of orgasm (sensory dimension) during masturbation or a casual sexual encounter but by the emotional aspects (affective dimension) during sex with an emotionally intimate partner” (p. 111)

• “[M]ale orgasm encompasses experiences beyond the sensations of ejaculation and bears more similarities than differences with female orgasm (e.g., Vance & Wagner, 1976). The only meaningfully large gender difference involved the higher ratings of shooting sensations by men,which presumably reflects the male capacity for ejaculation” (p. 112)  

PROBLEMS WITH STUDY

I am critical of studying such a complex phenomenon with a circle-the-adjective-of-best-fit form (https://www.reddit.com/r/MultipleOs/comments/100sjbb/complexity_of_orgasm_from_an_ecological/). Studying orgasm in this reductionistic way may help to learn more about a piece of the puzzle, but often fails to be inclusive and representative of the complexity and interdependencies of the phenomenon.

Both researchers are aware of orgasm’s complexity and mention the reductionistic view of orgasm for penis and clitoris-owners, yet they choose reductionistic methodologies repeatedly in their studies. Just because the model is “multi-dimensional,” meaning that the adjectives are grouped into subthemes and then bifurcated into two groups (cognitive affective and sensory), does not mean it’s a complexity model. This habit of using reductionism to study and conceptualize complex concepts is reflective of a broader trend in scientific research of using reductionistic methodologies in following the scientific method and root-cause analysis to address problems (https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/28/1/73/576131).

A problem with retrospective studies in orgasmology is biases toward remembering the experience differently than how it was experienced in the moment. A problem with adjective-based questionnaires is that people may tend to describe orgasm is a way that fits their cultural expectations of orgasm or fit gender roles. Each adjective can also mean something different for each participant. Another flaw is only including positive adjectives (incredible, powerful, fulfilling, satisfying, intense, wild, euphotic, pleasurable), which eliminates opportunities for participants to express neutral (okay, sneeze-like, boring), anorgasmia experiences (like nothing, numb, irresponsive, dead), non-positive sensations (unpleasant, painful, uncomfortable, seizure-inducing, unsafe, unusual, nauseous, dizzy, afraid, sad, melancholic, guilty, remorseful, depressed, angry, violated, retraumatized). Also see https://www.reddit.com/r/MultipleOs/comments/105rjfj/why_do_we_assume_all_orgasm_experiences_to_be/

DISCUSSION 

Do you think your orgasms feel alike?

If there are differences, what are they? 

ABSTRACT 

The characteristics common to all human orgasm experiences and potential gender and contextual factors affecting these experiences were investigated in two studies. A two-dimensional descriptive model of the orgasm experience was evaluated by testing hypotheses concerning (a) fit of the model to adjective-ratings data describing male and female orgasm experiences, and(b) sexual context effects on the importance of model components. In the first model-evaluation study, 888 university students (523 women) provided adjective ratings to convey orgasm experiences attained through both solitary masturbation and sex with a partner. In a cross-validation study, 798 university students (503women) provided similar ratings to convey orgasm experiences attained either through solitary masturbation or through sex with a partner. Overall, findings supported the utility of a two-dimensional model of the orgasm experience, an adjective-rating approach in comparing male and female orgasm, and the importance of examining sexual context effects on the orgasm experience.