Talk:Fake orgasm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Sexology and sexuality (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

These deletions seem a bit extreme[edit]

[1]

Maybe the reasons need to be tightened up but some basic itemization of reasons is a good idea; in particular, such information can help defuse a sensitive topic like this one.

WpZurp 03:15, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

As anyone would guess, I will say that this section of the article that I wrote should be left in... after all, I did write it. But putting my ego aside, the knowledge of how to distinguish real orgasms from fake orgasms is integral to the subject itself. I will wait a few weeks (say until... Mar 15th, 2005) for some input from other users, editors, and moderators before I make a move on this matter, but if by then nobody says anything then I'm putting it back where it was. Also, I thank Mr. 4.32.161.15 for making that vital addition to my work concerning "sex flush" (I can't believe I forgot to put that in myself). Sweetfreek 05:03, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Deleted as unreliable (Restored March 23, 2005) : Methods of distinguishing a fake orgasm[edit]

Hard as is to imagine it is possible (though perhaps not practical) to distinguish a real orgasm from a fake.

  • During orgasm in both males and females, there is a throbing action in the genitals that pulses at aproximately 0.8 seconds. Although this takes place internally in the female (primarily at the cervix), it is sometimes possible to observe this externally at the fourchette.
  • Some women exhibit a "sex flush", or a reddening of the skin through vasocongestion, during the later stages of arousal. The absence of "sex flush" could simply mean a woman who never experiences it, or a woman who is faking arousal.
  • lack of female ejaculate
Any suggestions like the above MUST have references to be considered reliable. People can be VERY different one from another. "I know you are faking!" "No I'm not." "Wikipedia says you are."
I'm not going to dig up the reference for this, but an animal's toleration of pain is increased during orgasm. (I read about this in a report on a study of the role of the vagus nerve in orgasm. The scientists cut the spinal cords of mice, diddled their cervixes to bring them to orgasm, then inflicted pain to determine whether the rodents were experiencing orgasm. They were, proving that the vagus nerve carries the orgasmic signal and that scientists are perverted sadists). -Willmcw 23:08, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the appearance of a rash on a woman is a common sign. --TheAznSensation 06:41, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Male orgasm[edit]

Umm...how, exactly, can a man fake an orgasm? They tend to be messy. --Morningstar2651 05:49, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Easy, use a condom to hide the lack of a mess.-- 82.45.0.44 20:53, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

For the thing at the end, the darkening of the nipples, I remember reading that that only happens in 30% of males.--68.74.30.182 17:43, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

As a male human that has experience innumerable orgasms/ejaculations, I am frankly puzzled as to how it is even possible for a male to fake one. And I really can't answer the part about the nipples, since I was paying them much attention. Sweetfreek 01:22, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

I recall reading that porn directors have a few tricks to simulate a male orgasm (aka "money shot") on film. One involves the performer holding a fluid in his palm then tossing it with a jerking motion. The other involves pumping the fluid into the penis, then squeezing it out. Neither of these would be particularly practical in real life, of course, but that's the magic of movie making. Nor can I recall where I read it, so unless someone has a source it's just talk page gossip. -Will Beback 08:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Another reason?[edit]

I had to fake one becuase my girlfriend said she was getting dehydrated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.69.238 (talkcontribs)

I have trouble getting off with a girl when I'm wth them for the first few times, get too nervous, or tense and can keep having sex for over two hours. Both sides can get sore. Is easier to fake it. And loosing the condom before she sees it works well too.

New sections needed for this article[edit]

The following sections should be added to make the article more complete:

  • Why and how woman fake orgasms (to complement the male sections).
  • Arguments for and against faking orgasms.

--Cab88 11:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you propose we use as a source for these additions? -Will Beback 18:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Female Reasons+Methods?[edit]

I really think we need a girl to complete this article... i am a girl and i say this is so nasty why do you need to talk abou tthis again?

  • Being a woman you have NO credibility whatsoever thus we dont need you to complete the article.

Men faking orgasms is impossible ... or is it?[edit]

Call me weird, but I think it is impossible for a man to fake an orgasm. The orgasm comes with ejaculation. Maybe the myth of men faking orgasms is invented by women to justify their own faking. Faking an orgasm must be done by women who do not masturbate, or by women who think that some man magically knows what to do to make her have one, like in the movies. (See Thelma & Louise). Or that she doesn't find the man attractive but he has lots of money. But I think we will always get "blame teh men!"

This is why God invented Ann Summers. For God's sake women, sort it out. :)

Its not impossible to fake - Ive done it and no of people of also have. Its not hard, you can just use a condom to to cover it up (added by anon)
Exactly. I doesn't take a genious to figure out that if you are using a condom, particularly a darkly coloured one and your partner is carefully observing your penis or likes to inspect condoms post intercourse it's resonably easy for a male to fake an orgasm. Sure it's more easily to detect but it's clearly not impossible and I'm surprised so many people seem to think it is. Have all these people never heard of condoms and safe sex? Nil Einne (talk) 12:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Some links in case there are still any doubters [2] [3]. The first one is of interest since the only one mentioned who said his partner had detected it was primarily because of his face! (I presume his haste to dispose of the condom beforehand didn't help of course). The second one definitely sounds like it was written by a male. It also indirectly highlights another issue. For one night stands (in which case you definitely should be using a condom) the female partner is unlikely to have any clue as to what the male normally does and she may be partially drunk anyway so it'll likely be even easier Nil Einne (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Other Media(Family Guy)[edit]

In "He's Too Sexy For His Fat" Stewie did a spoof of Meg Ryan's faked orgasm right down to Brian's "I'll have what he's having"

(LadySatine 08:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

References[edit]

This article now has four references. I think we can do better though; nearly everything that is on the page currently has been studied or described in writing somewhere; go out and find it! Let's make this a real article, because it's an important topic. Cazort (talk) 15:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Evolutionary perspective[edit]

This article doesn't explain why women/ men might fake an orgasm from an evolutionary perspective which may be an interesting addition. I'm in the process of putting together a bibliography with suitable references below.

Charlene L. Muehlenhard & Sheena K. Shippee (2010) Men's and Women's Reports of Pretending Orgasm, The Journal of Sex Research, 47:6, 552-567.

Kaighbadi, F.; Shackelfors, T. K.; Weekes-Shackelfors, V. (2012). "Do women pretend orgasm to retain a mate?". Archives of Sexual Behaviour 41 (5),1121–1125.

McCoy, M. G., Welling, L. L. M., & Shackleford, T.K. (2015) Development and Initial Psychometric Assessment of the Reasons for Pretending Orgasm Inventory. Evolutionary Psychology, 13 (1), 129-139. NicoleKPascoulis (talk) 13:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC) NicoleKPascoulis (talk) 13:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

As Nicole's partner in this project, I have also compiled a short reference list:
  1. Do Women Pretend Orgasm to Retain a Mate?[1]
  2. Human female orgasm and mate fluctuating asymmetry[2]
  3. Human sperm competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female orgasm[3]
  4. Is Female Orgasm a Covert Mate Choice Mechanism?[4]
  5. Human female orgasm as evolved signal: a test of two hypotheses.[5]

Phoebemarplehorvat (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I have fleshed out the evolutionary section - we will continue working on this section so it's quality will improve! Phoebemarplehorvat (talk) 16:19, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer review[edit]

The evolutionary perspective section is a brilliant addition. The main aspects of this section are covered well, and is nicely structured. Perhaps the paragraphs within this section could have sub-headings? The Gender section is also very clear and concise. I have made some minor copy-edits in the evolutionary perspective section, including adding missing words and shortening some sentences/cutting them in half. A further suggestion is to consider renaming the section of "Other factors". This title is very ambiguous (e.g. what 'other factors' are they referring to?). Maybe the information within this section should be separated based on topics and placed under different headings. Hope this helps! NC1328656 (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution! We are only working on the evolutionary perspective section, other sections (such as the "other factors" section were not written by us and are not to do with our topic so much. I have added some sub-headings for further clarity. Thanks again! Phoebemarplehorvat (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review II[edit]

The evolutionary perspective section is a great addition to this article! I just have a few feedback comments after reading it through:

  • Be sure to carefully check over additions before posting as there are a few words missing here and there, which makes the sentence difficult to understand. I have gone through the evolutionary perspective section and tried to copy-edit any such mistakes I found.
  • The evolutionary perspective section describes in detail as to why females fake orgasm, would it be possible to also add in reasons why males may fake orgasms? Although I see that this might be crossing over with the Gender Differences Section. - Could the evolutionary perspective section be separated into subheadings, for example having a gender differences within evolution section?
  • Also, for the gender differences section could the research about males faking orgasms be explained a little better? Possibly just go into more detail as to why faking an orgasm whilst using a condom is easier by expanding the sentence “since ejaculation usually accompanies orgasm in males”.

Hope these suggestions help! JS.Chester (talk) 12:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, thank you for your review! Our group is only working on the "evolutionary perspective" title as the rest of the page is not focused on evolutionary arguments. I will be considering adding the adaptive function of orgasm from a male perspective, just need to find some research and hypotheses to suggest adaptiveness! Thanks again. Phoebemarplehorvat (talk) 11:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review: Gender Differences (& introduction of new section)[edit]

As a whole the article is well written and summarizes key points, whilst also expanding on those more salient. The structure is very clear and the evidence is neutral and well balanced, not at all revealing of the author's own interpretation. A few changes could be made to expand upon the page and cover a wider bracket, detailed below;

Whilst the section on gender differences is an effective summary, it lends itself perfectly to the introduction of a section looking at homosexual relationships. An abundance of research is available on the topic and could prove a great addition to the article. For example, a poll-study found that lesbian women orgasm significantly more than hetero- and bisexual women, reporting numbers close to that of their male counterparts[6]. Similarly, women who engage in homosexual or bisexual sex report to orgasm more often, have sexual intercourse more frequently, and have a higher level of sexual satisfaction than their straight counterparts. [7]

I hope this is something you consider including as it would make a great addition to what is already a good article. We will be incorporating several aspects of this page into our own edit, in which we will discuss sexual attraction and hormones.

Update: I have made a few minor copyedits to aid with the flow of certain areas. --BigPapa1995 (talk) 11:13, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

BigPapa1995, regarding this edit you made, I changed it to this...for reasons noted in that edit summary. As for adding the "women in same-sex relationships have more orgasms than their heterosexual counterparts" aspect, it's already covered in the Lesbian sexual practices and Orgasm articles. And I think the Fake orgasm article should stay on the topic of fake orgasms. If you want to add research about women in same-sex relationships faking orgasms less than their heterosexual counterparts, I am fine with including that in the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

___

References

  1. ^ Kaighobadi, Farnaz; Shackelford, Todd K.; Weekes-Shackelford, Viviana A. (17 November 2011). "Do Women Pretend Orgasm to Retain a Mate?". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 41 (5): 1121–1125. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9874-6.
  2. ^ Thornhill, Randy; Gangestad, Steven W.; Comer, Randall (1995). "Human female orgasm and mate fluctuating asymmetry". Animal Behaviour. 50 (6): 1601–1615. doi:10.1016/0003-3472(95)80014-X.
  3. ^ Baker, R (November 1993). "Human sperm competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female orgasm". Animal Behaviour. 46 (5): 887–909. doi:10.1006/anbe.1993.1272.
  4. ^ Goetz, edited by Todd K. Shackelford, Aaron T. (2012). The Oxford handbook of sexual conflict in humans. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195396706.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
  5. ^ Ellsworth, Ryan M.; Bailey, Drew H. (12 July 2013). "Human Female Orgasm as Evolved Signal: A Test of Two Hypotheses". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 42 (8): 1545–1554. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0152-7.
  6. ^ http://jezebel.com/study-lesbians-have-more-orgasms-than-straight-women-1624092097. Missing or empty |title= (help)
  7. ^ Coleman, Emily (February, 1983). "Arousability and Sexual Satisfaction in Lesbian and Heterosexual Women". Journal of Sex Research. 19: 58-73. Check date values in: |date= (help)

Peer Review: Evolutionary reasons for faking orgasms[edit]

I think you really identified a gap in this article by adding the evolutionary reasons behind faking orgasms, and I think it makes it gives the reader a good reason to read up on fake orgasms in the first place, as without it, all you would have would be an article about something fairly self-explanatory. I made a few minor changes to the grammar (changed something from past to present tense because half the sentence was in past tense and the other half in the present tense), just to help the article flow a bit better. Overall, it is well-written though so I don't think there is that much more left to change on that front. Your first sentence requires a reference (this is the sentence referring to how females may fake orgasms for evolutionary reasons. For this, I recommend you could use the reference I found: [1]

Overall, I think you could elaborate more on the evolutionary reasons for fake orgasms, as this is something I believe there is actually an abundance of research on, and I think it is also something people who search this page would be really interested in! I do understand from having looked for some references to help you out that there doesn't seem to be much research on why, from an evolutionary perspective, men might have fake orgasms, however, it might just be worth mentioning that there is not very much research on male fake orgasms in your actual article, just so it is clear to the reader that this hasn't been forgotten/left out, seeing as the gender differences part of the article mentions that men do fake orgasms too! (Rmwillis5 (talk) 15:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC))

Hi there, thanks for the review. It has been raised that we should include evolutionary reasons for males faking orgasm, although I have been struggling to find research, that is a good idea (to suggest that there is limited research into it)! Appreciate the feedback. Phoebemarplehorvat (talk) 11:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
To further Phoebe's point, I have done some more research into why males would fake an orgasm and have currently found no research that states reason from an evolutionary perspective. I have used your suggestion and mentioned that there is a lack of research. Thank you for your contribution!

NicoleKPascoulis (talk) 11:15, 05 May 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Ellsworth, R.M. & Bailey, D.H. (2013). Human female orgasm as evolved signal: a test of two hypotheses. Archive of Sexual Behaviour, 42, 1545-1554.

Introduction[edit]

This page is looking good although I think the introduction could perhaps do with some improvement? I don't know if it is just me but grammatically it doesn't read very well and I don't think it gives the best overview of the topic. Maybe this could be expanded slightly to brush over some of the more main points in the whole article. I have changed one sentence slightly as the word 'apparent' was becoming a bit repetitive. Psunej (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your review! Our group is only focusing on the section 'Evolutionary perspective' therefore I will leave these edits for another user.

NicoleKPascoulis (talk) 11:23, 04 May 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review Human Sexuality[edit]

It looks like you have made some really good improvements so far and the article is taking nice shape! I will list a few suggested improvements that I thought about whilst reading through the article:

1. Possibly using some more subheadings under the 'Other Factors' title to break up the writing slightly and place the information into clear categories. 'Other Factors' is slightly unclear as to what is to follow and this would help to structure the information.

2.Again, I'm sure you are probably developing this but the section on 'Evolutionary perspectives' could be broken down into smaller sections to make it clearer.

3. Not sure if you guys added it, but the 'In the Media' section seems slightly out of place. Maybe think about moving this section to nearer the top of the article before you explain detailed scientific explanations? It just seems a little random at the end on its own!

Overall, a really nice article that looks like it will develop well :)

--86.142.67.170 (talk) 11:47, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for taking the time to review our contributions! We have taken on board your suggestion and included sub headings in the Evolutionary perspectives section and broken it down further. The other factors section hasn't been constructed by us as we are only focusing on fake orgasm from an evolutionary perspective.

NicoleKPascoulis (talk) 11:58, 04 May 2016 (UTC)

Human Sexuality Peer Review[edit]

This article seems to be coming along nicely. It is a very interesting topic and you have made a good start at providing a thorough and comprehensive review of the topic in your work so far. In particular the "Evolutionary Perspective' section includes extensive citations and sources to back up and enrich your explanations! Also, I love the use of an image to illustrate the research you have described in the text, it adds that little extra clarity to aid the readers understanding of the topic.

I have a few minor suggestions you could make to further improve the article:

  • Currently, this article is quite heteronormative as there is no mention of homosexual relationships. There are numerous studies within the literature which document differences between homosexual and heterosexual relationships and orgasms.
  • The "Other Factors" section is full of good content but it is a little unclear as to what the "other factors" are. Potentially you could add subheadings to break down this section and improve its organisation.
  • The "Evolutionary Perspective" section may also be able to be broken down into sub-sections, such as gender differences and research and literature on non human false copulation calls.

I have also made some small copy edit changes to amend slight grammatical errors.

EmmaOrton (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

EmmaOrton, with regard to heteronormativity, like I stated in the #Peer Review: Gender Differences (& introduction of new section) section above, differences in orgasms between same-sex couples (at least lesbian couples) are covered elsewhere. The Fake orgasm article should stay on the topic of fake orgasms. The Orgasm article is for the more general topic of orgasms. If you want to add research about people in same-sex relationships faking orgasms less or more than their heterosexual counterparts, I am fine with including that in the article.
As for subheadings, the "Other factors" and "Evolutionary perspective" sections are relatively small, and so I don't see that they need subheadings. See MOS:Paragraphs. I am against subheadings for a little bit of material, especially since they will make the article look bigger than it actually is from the table of contents. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:42, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review on Evolutionary basis[edit]

Really good article. Maybe there should be a citation after where it says it has been suggested that fake orgasms may be used as an attempt to imply commitment. Also, perhaps not refer to one study in particular for example where it says "the study indicates..." as Wikipedia prefers secondary sources so interpretation from a direct source might be seen as causing bias (but it's just a suggestion and might be wrong). Psundx (talk) 15:53, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

The "Evolutionary perspective" material[edit]

Currently, there is enough evolutionary perspective in the article. Per WP:Due weight, not much more should be added about these theories. This article should not be more about evolutionary theories than anything else. Care should also be taken not to frame these theories or other speculation on the topic of fake orgasm as fact. And WP:Editorializing should remain out of the article.

WP:Pinging the following WP:Student editors so that they get this message: Psunej, EmmaOrton, Phoebemarplehorvat and NicoleKPascoulis. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Also take care not to engage in WP:Synthesis. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:59, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Peer review[edit]

Hi, an extremely interesting and informative article, well done! A few suggestions I have:

  • Include any relevant images in the introduction section, I know this may be a bit difficult with a topic like this but if you find any, that would be interesting.
  • Define terms that may not be apparent to most people such as 'coitus'.
  • Although the structure does read well, it may also be useful to perhaps put the evolutionary section at the start so that we can get background information before we learn about gender differences and other factors.
  • The evolutionary perspective section is considerably longer than the other sections, which is completely fine but you may want to extend the section 'in the media' to give each section a more 'even' look.

Other than these suggestions,I am unable to think of any other improvements; the article is a very informative read! Rhearattan (talk) 11:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)