Achieving complete Sexual Fulfillment

==================== ====================

THE MALE SEX ORGANS

:THE FEMALE SEX ORGANS

INTERCOURSE

:FOREPLAY

:
POSITIONS FOR COITUS

:COITAL MOVEMENTS

:
PROLONGING THE SEXUAL ACT

:TYPES OF ORGASM

THE WOMAN'S ROLE IN INTERCOURSE

:
ORAL AND ANAL SEXUALITY


Intercourse


The Case Against Sexual Abstinence

Today, the idea that sexual abstinence is "good for the soul" has pretty well given way to the attitude that sexual relations are a healthy and important part of human life. One might even go as far as to say that sexual abstinence in a normally constituted person is pathogenic. We have been given external sex organs to use them, and when they are not used various psychosomatic symptoms are very often the result.

In my practice as a gynaecologist, I have treated women for a variety of illnesses which were due to nothing else but celibacy. Chlorosis (a form of anaemia) cramps of all sorts, insomnia, 'nervousness," "neurasthenia," "hysteria" are almost invariably the direct result of nothing else than enforced continence.

The cure, needless to say, does not lie in suddenly devoting yourself to a lot of intercourse, worst of all with a person you don't love. But genuine
love for a person you admire, respect, and feel desire for, is just about the best cure there is in this entire world for the bulk of all but wholly somatic male and female diseases. It is wonderful to behold, time and time again, what a genuine passion can do for health. The person looks rejuvenated. Every one of the body's organs work better. The eyes look bright. Headaches are gone. Insomnia vanishes overnight. Nearly everyone of the so-called "diseases of civilization," the psychosomatic diseases, disappears as though by magic. If more people were more deeply in love, many physicians and even more psychiatrists could shut their sexual practices .

You might even say that a lack of
sexual fulfillment is in part responsible for the terrible insecurity of our whole society, in the self-destruction revealed in excessive drinking, smoking and drug addiction, the high rate of divorce and suicide, the inability to live at peace with our neighbors at home and abroad, the inability to treat the Negro as a person neither better nor worse than anyone else, the resultant ferocity of the Negro in the unending racial riots that threaten to turn into a second civil war, our own growing hostility toward him and our competitors abroad, our terrified fear of communism, our guilt and shame if we don't follow an aggressive foreign policy- as though we had so little self-confidence that we constantly feel obliged to prove our courage and virility by threatening to go to war. All this points to sexual repression and sexual frustration.

Imagine what would happen to our sanity if we had surrounded eating with the same kind of taboos with which we have encumbered sexual intercourse. We would then be have encumbered sexual intercourse. We would then be hemmed in from dawn to dusk by moral slogans like these; "Eating is dirty," "Eating is a nasty thing to do," "Don't do it in public," "I don't think it's proper that schools should give lessons in eating sex education," "The only reason for eating is to propagate the species. You should never eat to enjoy yourself,' "When you go out on a date with a boy, don't eat more than half of a meal. It's immoral to go the limit," "All men are beasts. All they want to do is eat," "Women must guard their virtue. They mustn't eat till they're married," "No man will ever marry a woman if she has been eating food before her
marriage," and so on, and so forth.

Imagine bits of dialogue like this in a doctor's consulting room: "What shall I do about my husband, doctor? He always wants to eat. Must I let him?" "My wife seemed such seemed such an attractive woman when I was dating her. she had such a good appetite, doctor. But since we've been married, she's never let me eat. What's wrong with her?"

This is grotesque, of course, but hardly more grotesque than what we say and do all day long. Very few of us have ever had the courage to think these things through from the start and reach conclusion of our own. I cannot for the life of me accept the weird theory that the sole reason we show interest in the other sex is to make us propagate. The analogy drawn from the animal kingdom doesn't hold water. For if we were to model ourselves on our animal ancestors ("The only reason they have intercourse is to multiply. Ergo the sole reason why human beings cohabit is to make babies"), we might as well model ourselves on them in every other way and scrap civilization entirely.

If, on the other hand, as I think, the mutation that separates us from our animal ancestors was so basic and so profound that it altered us into an entirely new species, then we must also accept the fact that our sexual hidden desires and their methods of satisfaction partake of a mutation and constitute something wholly unprecedented among other mammals. What's more, from a woman's standpoint the theory that we have sexual intercourse solely to propagate the species is particularly objectionable because it entails the logic that women are by nature inferior and shall forever remain so.

For the male can only impregnate when he is aroused. He have knowledge of sexual organs do not operate unless he already feels intense pleasure, not merely desire. his penis only grows stiff when he is sexually aroused, and his ejaculation only happens when he has a climax. But a woman can conceive without feeling anything. Not only can she be impregnated without feeling an orgasm; she can even be impregnated when she feels positive aversion towards the male. If we accept the theory that we copulate solely to produce
children, we say thereby that man's climax is a necessity while a woman's orgasm is a luxury.

This by itself should make us pause. But there are many other reasons why the procreation theory is highly implausible. Nature put a high penalty on the omission of all things which she deems essential. The urgency of these things can be gauged by the seriousness of the penalty. Where nature is adamant that we do certain things, she punishes the omission by death. We die if we stop eating. We die if we submit to extreme cold or extreme heat. We die if we stop breathing. But we don't die if we stop having intercourse. We suffer both physically and mentally. But we don't die. The reason we cohabit must therefore lie elsewhere than in the mere procreation of the species. Countless reasons have been elicited over the centuries, but only two of them seem to make sense. First, to bring human beings together and form a community; secondly, to help each other in regaining the confidence and tranquility which we cannot obtain in any other manner.

Rightly or wrongly, I therefore consider intercourse as a form of mutual aid between the sexes. It is a view which liberates us from the painful and immortal logic that woman gets her continuous orgasm as a kind of bonus for producing a baby- a commercial transaction that corresponds to getting a free tube of toothpaste when all you want to buy is a vacuum cleaner.

Preparing for Intercourse