3 to 13 minutes = optimal sex time!

[GiantSteps]

So here is the news of the study:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080402/ap_on_re_us/sex_survey;_ylt=AtkfzQy1AldJ1ghJl7jCZY2s0NUE
3 to 13 minutes for optimal sex! Unbelieveable! Empathios would not even go out with me until I could produce testimony that I could go for 30 minutes minimum. RayneeDeigh told me last year not even to come to Canada unless I was prepared for a two hour work out! She informed me that Canadians require the first 60 minutes to defrost, the next 30 minutes to get through both the Canadian and U.S. National Anthems, the next 15 minutes for some bizaare sounding foreplay involving 100% pure Canadian maple syrup, and the final 15 minutes for the good stuff! I was already to go until RayneeDeigh told me no pancakes or waffles could be had with the maple syrup, so I remained back in the U.S.! What can I say, I have been been conditioned to have pancakes or waffles with my syrup!

So how many of you are just bragging or lying when it comes to sex times?

How would any of you like to be the student working on this study? When you came to your graduate school interviews, you could get up after 13 minutes ans say "Well, it has been 13 minutes. Read my study. Staying here any longer is pointless."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

So here is the news of the study:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080402/ap_on_re_us/sex_survey;_ylt=AtkfzQy1AldJ1ghJl7jCZY2s0NUE
3 to 13 minutes for optimal sex! Unbelieveable! Empathios would not even go out with me until I could produce testimony that I could go for 30 minutes minimum. RayneeDeigh told me last year not even to come to Canada unless I was prepared for a two hour work out! She informed me that Canadians require the first 60 minutes to defrost, the next 30 minutes to get through both the Canadian and U.S. National Anthems, the next 15 minutes for some bizaare sounding foreplay involving 100% pure Canadian maple syrup, and the final 15 minutes for the good stuff! I was already to go until RayneeDeigh told me no pancakes or waffles could be had with the maple syrup, so I remained back in the U.S.! What can I say, I have been been conditioned to have pancakes or waffles with my syrup!

So how many of you are just bragging or lying when it comes to sex times?

How would any of you like to be the student working on this study? When you came to your graduate school interviews, you could get up after 13 minutes ans say "Well, it has been 13 minutes. Read my study. Staying here any longer is pointless."

Ill be the first bold person to comment on this thread. Unfortunately, don't think I'm comfortable going into detail in this area on a public forum. Lets just say I think my girlfriend would be VERY angry with me if we stuck to that time limit.... Being a RA for this study would be nice break from looking at structural MRIs of demented old ladies.

 

[Ollie123]

How would any of you like to be the student working on this study? When you came to your graduate school interviews, you could get up after 13 minutes ans say "Well, it has been 13 minutes. Read my study. Staying here any longer is pointless."

Wow. You'd be f***ed!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[JackD]

3 minutes? Don't we have names for disorders if you only last that long? What about the psychological impact of being totally embarrassed?

I have heard the optimal benefit, at least physically, is 8-12 minutes.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

There is nothing I can post in this thread that would be a good idea, so I'll just pull up a chair and watch.

*pulls up chair*

 

[deleted176373]

3 minutes? Don't we have names for disorders if you only last that long? What about the psychological impact of being totally embarrassed?

I have heard the optimal benefit, at least physically, is 8-12 minutes.

Physical activity isn't even exercise until well past 30 mins... I think that even the elderly like myself (41) put up better numbers than that! In defense of the study, if I had that creepy old guy timing me, I'd get it over quickly... and worse yet, If I were his spouse I would not exceed 7.5 mins under any circumstances... 13 mins would have been a xmas present!

"People who read this will say, 'I last five minutes or my partner lasts 8 minutes,' and say, 'That's OK,'" he said. "They will relax a little bit." <--- Ummm, NO, It's NOT ok... Trust me!

Mark

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I believe it was Masters and Johnson who did one of the classic sex studies where they hooked up the participants to varies machines and had then do their thing, and they had cameras, guys in lap coats, and various instruments to track excitation, orgasm, refractory period, etc.

 

[JackD]

Physical activity isn't even exercise until well past 30 mins

Well we are venturing into more of a medical area than psychology but i will try to keep up. From what i understand, the problems that are involved going beyond 12 minutes (or 13 according to this study) is not physical problems related to what can your legs or your arms or your back can take. Instead it is what can "other areas" withstand and this is me just repeating what i heard, while it is a problem for both men and women, it is a bigger concern for women. Use your imagination to understand that last point. There is also another concern is with a person's heart, especially for older people. Having sex for 45 minutes may be a serious issue for someone with cardiac problems.

So according to the medical folks, you are more or less safe if you keep your late night activities to around ten minutes, which is probably long enough to keep yourself from incurring mental distress about performance.

 

[positivepsych]

C'mon, let's be good scientists and critique the methodology. ;-)

This was subjective self-report of "sex therapists." Who the heck are these folks? Even if they're legit, I'm curious what the self-report is of the actual couples doing the f***ing. Does it match up to what the 'experts' say?

I don't think there's any 'danger' or worthlessness if you('re able to) go longer. The benefit of the study is to make people feel less insecure if they're not romping forever. To normalize the sexual experience in lieu of silly rumors that cause performance anxiety and reduced self-esteem in a lot of men.

How many times do you hear the expression "we made love all night?" Seriously, in what romance novel fantasy world that does that exist?

After a reasonable time, it's all about quality, not quantity anyway.

 

[deleted176373]

After a reasonable time, it's all about quality, not quantity anyway.

Not if you look at current consumer trends.

Mark

 

[MaddieMay]

There's sometimes an odd choice some women or men have to make. Should the man remain fully engaged in the moment, and feeling everything he is feeling, and therefore, reaches orgasm quickly, this is advantageous because the male is totally focused on the female's hotness and not on trying to subtract 6 from 6,000 over and over or thinking of "Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day! Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day!!" (Austin Powers)

Depending on the gentleman's age, you may have to choose between:

1. A gentleman who is fully focused on what he is physically feeling (which can be very sexy to some women,) although, alas, it may bring the act to a premature conclusion for the lady.

2. A gentleman who is analyzing baseball averages in order to disengage himself from what his body is feeling so that he can last longer and please a woman.

But is the really pleasing her, if he is mentally absent?

I guess it's up to each couple individually and is something each couple should discuss.

Maybe the gentleman can switch back and forth?

What works for you gentlemen?

 

[erg923]

I don't have to any serial seven subtractions.... I guess I'm just good....

 

[Thrak]

Depending on the gentleman's age, you may have to choose between:

1. A gentleman who is fully focused on what he is physically feeling (which can be very sexy to some women,) although, alas, it may bring the act to a premature conclusion for the lady.

2. A gentleman who is analyzing baseball averages in order to disengage himself from what his body is feeling so that he can last longer and please a woman.

There are a lot of factors that affect lasting time. From a man's perspective, age is obviously one. Frequently, the older you are, the longer you can last before orgasm. But, typically, it also means a longer refractory period. Medication is another factor. Anti-depressants may result in anorgasmia, which, if you still have a libido, will make you last for quite a while.

Position, obviously, matters a lot. Some speed up or slow down the process more than others.

And if "too quick" is a problem, there are always devices which can slow the man down (and potentially speed the woman up).

I've never been able to think about anything at all during sex. A great deal of sensual input tends to short-circuit my cognitive abilities.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

I would just like to point out that I don't ACTUALLY proposition people for sex online.

 

[deleted176373]

I would just like to point out that I don't ACTUALLY proposition people for sex online.

No, you let them do all the work... I won't analyze this any further LOL.

 

[BorntoRun]

I'd be interested in how this fits in with med side effects

 

[paramour]

I would just like to point out that I don't ACTUALLY proposition people for sex online.

No, you let them do all the work... I won't analyze this any further LOL.

RD, he's apparently heard about our online escort service.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

RD, he's apparently heard about our online escort service.

If I really did run an escort service that would solve all my problems in life.

 

[JackD]

Nothing like reading the conversations of sexually repressed grad students. You poor bastards.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

We're repressed? Now there's something I've never been called before!

 

[BorntoRun]

Nothing like reading the conversations of sexually repressed grad students. You poor bastards.

I think there's quite a difference between "sexually repressed" and "deprived-of-sex-because-we're-just-so-damned-tired-all-the-time". An important one!

 

[GiantSteps]

http://www.reuniting.info/science/coolidge_effect

Don't forget the Coolidge Effect (named after the former President)! Sorry ladies, but you fail to stimulates us males after time. What we need is a new female to arouse us due to conditioning principles working at various levels!

 

[Quynh2007]

many grad students are married

 

[JackD]

many grad students are married

Proof that grad students don't have sex.

 

[ClinicalGal]

C'mon, let's be good scientists and critique the methodology. ;-)=

I agree with positivepsych... i really question this study's methodology, but for an entirely different reason. Considering women don't always have an orgasm, or at least, for many it takes a lot longer than men. This study seemed to measure "satisfaction" in male terms. They did not measure how long it took for both women and men achieve orgasm, but measured orgasm in terms of male ejaculation. Giving a woman a stopwatches and asking her to clock how long it takes her partner to orgasm, does not in any way mean she was left "satisfied."

Now show me a sex study that uses female orgasm as a benchmark instead of the default "penis in vagina, male ejaculation" sex we've been seeing and i'll be very interested in the results.

(Sorry GiantSteps but you know the feminist in me will always critique this sort of thing...)

 

[ClinicalGal]

oh and plus, women consider foreplay as part of the sexual experience which was not taken into account in this study which looked at sex in male terms...
K...
/Rant

 

[deleted176373]

Considering women don't always have an orgasm, or at least, for many it takes a lot longer than men.

For which there is really no excuse, so to speak, except maybe unskilled or inconsiderate partners and those experiencing genuine sexual dysfunction and a lack of creativity. That said, there are men who have the same problem, where sex often does not end in orgasm and they take much longer than women, although granted more often than not the reverse is true.

Back to your statement, I believe a good portion of the above is also social conditioning and education as well. There is a difference in time that it takes for many women to experience orgasm in the real world, but this difference is certainly not exclusively biologically driven and can be manipulated. I will concede that a great deal of individual variation exists, some women are capable of achieving orgasm within seconds and others may take a great deal of time. This is actually a VERY complex can of worms really and crosses many aspects of psychological and biological functioning.

Mark

 

[KillerDiller]

"People who read this will say, 'I last five minutes or my partner lasts 8 minutes,' and say, 'That's OK,'" he said. "They will relax a little bit." <--- Ummm, NO, It's NOT ok... Trust me!
Mark

It really is ok, though. It can be exhausting and frustrating to be with someone who takes a really long time. Give me the guy who takes five minutes over the guy who lasts two hours any day. At least I know the former is excited to be there.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

Now show me a sex study that uses female orgasm as a benchmark instead of the default "penis in vagina, male ejaculation" sex we've been seeing and i'll be very interested in the results.

Excellent point!

Everybody, I think we should all quit our current research and dedicate the rest of our time to studying the female orgasm. Getting the studies through ethics would sure be fun.

It really is ok, though. It can be exhausting and frustrating to be with someone who takes a really long time. Give me the guy who takes five minutes over the guy who lasts two hours any day. At least I know the former is excited to be there.

Haha I'll second this. Although, at least the latter guy provides a convenient time to balance my chequebook in my head...

 

[GiantSteps]

Now show me a sex study that uses female orgasm as a benchmark instead of the default "penis in vagina, male ejaculation" sex we've been seeing and i'll be very interested in the results.

(Sorry GiantSteps but you know the feminist in me will always critique this sort of thing...)

I am glad that my sex Thread brought ClinicalGal back to SDN! What can I say? I always make sure the women are satisfied first!

oh and plus, women consider foreplay as part of the sexual experience which was not taken into account in this study which looked at sex in male terms...
K...
/Rant

You really are caught up in this feminist angle. Of course, if in fact males and females tend to reach sexual climax at different times, and orgasm is all that matters in terms of sexual satisfaction, then perhaps homosexual sexual relations would get higher satisfaction numbers, statistically, over heterosexual relations, since the timing factor is a better fit.

However, I think ClinicalGal and the other females need to be more concerned with the Coolidge effect, of which I already posted. An in regards toi what I was writing above, this also might mean that homosexual (sorry if I used the wrong term - I mean male/ male sexual parteners) relations may have lower long term satisfaction than Lesbian relations.

Finally, isn't there some sexual philosophy, Karma Sutra, which maintains that it increases dramatically increases the amount of time for sexual orgasm?

 

[FrdLcnKln]

It seems that we're still trying to answer Freud's famous question. What does a woman want?

 

[GiantSteps]

Excellent point!

Everybody, I think we should all quit our current research and dedicate the rest of our time to studying the female orgasm. Getting the studies through ethics would sure be fun...

Well, alright, but I think the study should be conducted by men since too many of the women would be biased due to penis envy! Definitely, RayneeDeigh and ClinicalGal!

"Do you know about penis envy?"..."Penis envy...yes, I am one of the few males who suffers from it." - Woody Allen in Annie Hall


Wait, I just realized something that I have never received a straight answer on and this thread is the perfect place to ask it. Many men, especially if they have not had an ejaculation recently through either sex or masturbation, experience nocturnal emissions (wet dreams). Is there some female correlary to a male nocturnal emission? I do not mean in terms of a discharge but in terms of a dream induced orgasm.

 

[RayneeDeigh]

Wait, I just realized something that I have never received a straight answer on and this thread is the perfect place to ask it. Many men, especially if they have not had an ejaculation recently through either sex or masturbation, experience nocturnal emissions (wet dreams). Is there some female correlary to a male nocturnal emission? I do not mean in terms of a discharge but in terms of a dream induced orgasm.

Yes of course, biology isn't gonna shortchange women in the dream induced orgasm department!

But please never use the word "discharge" again since I think it's one of the grossest English words ever.

 

[MaddieMay]

http://www.reuniting.info/science/coolidge_effect

Don't forget the Coolidge Effect (named after the former President)! Sorry ladies, but you fail to stimulates us males after time. What we need is a new female to arouse us due to conditioning principles working at various levels!

You can't seriously be making the jump from animal behavior to human without a second thought. The only mention of human behavior is from Glenn Wilson, who, according to my research is "a psychologist" (actual degree unspecified) and whose conclusions are based on God knows what, since nothing was cited.

Further, the original study was done on 17 couples. Bzzzt.

 

[GiantSteps]

Yes of course, biology isn't gonna shortchange women in the dream induced orgasm department!

But please never use the word "discharge" again since I think it's one of the grossest English words ever.

But how do women know? Men have physical proof from the excretion (is that word better?) Or there is the famous textbook way of testing to see if a man has had a physiological dream - put stamps around the penis before sleep and see if the stamps are broken when the man wakes up. However, stamp prices are about to go up and I think this method is considered very kinky at a philatelist convention. In any case, what is the proof that women have non-self-induced nocturnal orgasms?

 

[GiantSteps]

You can't seriously be making the jump from animal behavior to human without a second thought. The only mention of human behavior is from Glenn Wilson, who, according to my research is "a psychologist" (actual degree unspecified) and whose conclusions are based on God knows what, since nothing was cited.

Further, the original study was done on 17 couples. Bzzzt.

I thought the literature says that the effect has been observed to varying degrees in all mammals. Actually, females too! Which would kill my other post of male/male sexual relationships having lower satisfaction rates than femal/female.

Besides we can learn a lot about humans from animals. They are not so different. Here is proof: RayneeDeigh's nose is cold and wet!

 

[RayneeDeigh]

But how do women know? Men have physical proof from the excretion (is that word better?) Or there is the famous textbook way of testing to see if a man has had a physiological dream - put stamps around the penis before sleep and see if the stamps are broken when the man wakes up. However, stamp prices are about to go up and I think this method is considered very kinky at a philatelist convention. In any case, what is the proof that women have non-self-induced nocturnal orgasms?

Haha because sometimes you wake up?

Excretion is much better, thank you.

I'm totally doing a lit search on this when I get home. There must be a scientific way someone has proven that women have dream induced orgasms.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Further, the original study was done on 17 couples. Bzzzt.

Maybe there is an outside chance of having that be a large enough N (I didn't look at the study design), though I often think people over-state their numbers to try and impress others. Go figure.

 

[MaddieMay]

I thought the literature says that the effect has been observed to varying degrees in all mammals. Actually, females too! Which would kill my other post of male/male sexual relationships having lower satisfaction rates than femal/female.

Alas, no. He mentiones rats, "animals," chickens, and "all mammals that have been tested," which could be anywhere from two species on up, but he doesn't say.

Also, the literature is a newsletter, and cites a paragraph from a book which also cites nothing. It's interesting to ponder, but that's about it.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I believe Kinsey and Masters & Johnson both touched on the topic of female orgasms. I wish I still had my human sexuality notes (they are printed out somewhere buried in a binder), as I know we covered this in a bit of detail.

 

[Ollie123]

If I may derail this thread for a moment to discuss research methodology...

I don't know the literature on sexual behavior at all, but n = 17 could actually be perfectly legitimate provided there aren't selection issues. That's why you can get away with n= 5 or 6 in many neuroimaging studies, and I've even seen some legitimate n = 2 work in visual cognition land.

Its a common mistake to assume that you need a high n for it to be legitimate, but depending on the context it can actually mean just the opposite. If a study has an n of 5000, that may just mean they have such a miniscule effect size that its of no actual clinical significance, and only emerges when looking at an unholy number of people. Of course, depending on the context that can be very meaningful - epidemiologists obviously have a great need for samples that large to look at disease base rates, time courses, etc. It depends entirely on the factors involved in the study - obviously case studies are ALWAYS questionable and you need to take it with a grain of salt, but an n of 17 by itself is not necessarily a cause for concern. It could mean the effects are extremely robust. As long as there was random selection (which is why case studies always need to have a HUGE question mark), the n is more to drive your power, not the generalizeability.

Just wanted to throw that out there since its a mistake a LOT of people seem to make, and it drives me nuts when I hear about reviewers making it.

 

[MaddieMay]

Very good points. I'll give this guy mad props... once he replicates the study.

Also, is it significant that 1/3 of the participants bailed? Is that about average for an average study?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Very good points. I'll give this guy mad props... once he replicates the study.

Also, is it significant that 1/3 of the participants bailed? Is that about average for an average study?

It can vary greatly. Depending on the study, losses of 50%+ can happen...while others have great retention. The population, design, and resources all can have a huge impact on retention rates.

 

[deleted176373]

Haha because sometimes you wake up?

Excretion is much better, thank you.

I'm totally doing a lit search on this when I get home. There must be a scientific way someone has proven that women have dream induced orgasms.

Yes, all you would have to do is look for the tell-tale 8-13 Hz contraction (IIRC) of the sphincter combined with a PET scan or fMRI to confirm it.


http://members.home.nl/al.ru.i.n/Ruud/reprints/vanNetten2006ASB.pdf

Don't ask, I know things I probably shouldn't admit to knowing! LOL, but I am great fun at parties!

Mark