Re: Ask The Mineshaft: Angle of Incidence Edition

1

If you want the answer in general, presumably pubmed or something similar has it.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:35 PM
horizontal rule
2

Since the waning years could begin at any old age in particular cases; I'm sure there are some people for whom they began in their twenties (countdown to the obvious jokes at my expense begins now) and some for whom they don't begin until quite late.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:36 PM
horizontal rule
3

Your mom gives me all the assistance I need.


Posted by: zadfrack | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:37 PM
horizontal rule
4

So what you're saying is that uncontrollable erections in public places are abnormal for someone who is, for example, 28.


Posted by: Adam Kotsko | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:40 PM
horizontal rule
5

Becks' mom is a pharmacist.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:41 PM
horizontal rule
6

It depends on local leash laws, Adam.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:43 PM
horizontal rule
7

I'm 25 and so far haven't noticed any decline in the ability to achieve/maintain an erection, but what I have noticed in the past four years or so is a steep, steep escalation of my refractory period. In my youthier days, 10-15 minutes was all that was necessary for me to be ready to get at it again; now, if I expect to maintain the erection and reach a second orgasm, I need more like forty-five minutes. These and other minor indications of onsetting mortality are setting the stage for my humorless, untimely death from cholera at 53.


Posted by: James K. Polk | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:45 PM
horizontal rule
8

Actually, the post title contains the answer to the post's question, albeit obliquely.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:46 PM
horizontal rule
9

4 made me laugh.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:46 PM
horizontal rule
10

I dunno, James, that sounds kind of funny.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:50 PM
horizontal rule
11

4 made me laugh h- oh never mind, I'm going to sleep.


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:51 PM
horizontal rule
12

7: I'm 25 and so far haven't noticed any decline in the ability to achieve/maintain an erection

That's not what my Mom says.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:52 PM
horizontal rule
13

I have researched this problem as thoroughly as I can and find that age may have something to do with it in individuals, but it's unpredictable as a function of age. One much older dude seemed to have an erectile problem, but then he got off the psych meds and all was well.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 8:58 PM
horizontal rule
14

Always happy to practice my PubMedding. Not that I hope this stems the flow of presidential revelations.

NEJM, 12/13/07:

Erectile dysfunction is defined as the consistent inability to attain or maintain a penile erection of sufficient quality to permit satisfactory sexual intercourse. The prevalence of this condition increases with age. In a large cross-sectional, community-based study, among men between the ages of 40 and 49 years, the prevalence of complete or severe erectile dysfunction was 5%, and the prevalence of moderate erectile dysfunction was 17%; among men between the ages of 70 and 79 years, these rates were 15% and 34%, respectively.
Note that the MMAS study, from which these numbers were taken, was conducted only on males age 40-70, so looking deeper there won't tell you what to expect in your 30s (though of course it's reasonable to extrapolate back and conclude that even moderate ED is probably pretty rare in thirtysomethings).

Since that 2007 NEJM article is still citing the MMAS study, I'm going to guess it's still considered the best data on ED prevalence out there, and thus I won't search any further.

One more thing: These folks report that the MMAS study found that "ED is highly correlated with such vascular diseases as hypertension, heart disease and diabetes."


Posted by: Otto von Bisquick | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:07 PM
horizontal rule
15

Adam's Dad is well over 50. Some times he can be slow to the start, but once the hand cuffs and ladies panties are on him,
he does very well for himself. Of course, it took us weeks to figure out the panties part.


Posted by: Betsy Ross | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:10 PM
horizontal rule
16

14: A self-administered sexual activity questionnaire was used to characterize erectile potency

Holy fracking christ in a cracker, Science!


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:15 PM
horizontal rule
17

My query regards the conversation that led to this question: If I have never engaged with my fellow dudes in a frank discussion of my erection, is that a sign of horrible repression?


Posted by: Otto von Bisquick | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:18 PM
horizontal rule
18

17: Yes.


Posted by: mrh | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:22 PM
horizontal rule
19

.... equals the angle of the refractory period.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:24 PM
horizontal rule
20

If I have never engaged with my fellow dudes in a frank discussion of my erection

That's not what my Dad says.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:25 PM
horizontal rule
21

I try to figure this out constantly. Basically, I never have reliable erections if sex is a special occasion that I've been looking forward to for a while. This makes it frustrating to be in a long-distance relationship, because it means that sex is always a special occasion that I've been looking forward to for a while.

On the other hand, I find it hard to convince myself that intercourse is preferable to cunnilingus in any way from the woman's point of view, and the obligatory condom makes the experience suboptimal from my point of view as well, so I don't try my hardest to get an erection anyway. If it appears, it appears. If it doesn't, it doesn't. She never seems very disappointed. If I was with a different woman, the situation would be different.

As for when they appear unbidden during the day...I think age 17 was roughly the high point. It's probably been decreasing ever since then (now age 25). Certain situations bring it on (sitting in a car for a long time...sitting in a classroom without moving), and I don't do either of those things much anymore, making the decrease in spontaneous erections even more striking. I prefer to think that it's because for the last two years there's been no woman around to use it on 98% of the time, and if at some point in the near future that changes, I'll be back to how I was 5 years ago.

What was the question again?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:25 PM
horizontal rule
22

8: Actually, the post title contains the answer to the post's question, albeit obliquely. How? at the arcsin of the ratio of the refractive indices times the sin of the angle of transmission?


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
23

Also, I found that erections became a lot more reliable when I started doing at least 30 minutes of cardio at least once a week, instead of none at all.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
24

Snell's law -> Schnell law.


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
25

What is an "erection"?


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:29 PM
horizontal rule
26

21: so I don't try my hardest to get an erection anyway

No comment.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:29 PM
horizontal rule
27

getting and keeping it up without assistance?

Define assistance. Encouraging partner? Imagination? Visual aids?

Define keeping it up for that matter? Long enough to achieve orgasm? Long enough for the partner to achieve orgasm? Ron Jeremy?

I've had it go down to take a piss, and back up in less than 5 minutes in the course of a 3 hour session.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:29 PM
horizontal rule
28

19 is what I was referring to in 8. Thanks for ruining it, Cala.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:30 PM
horizontal rule
29

21.1: Quite normal.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:30 PM
horizontal rule
30

And if bob can go 3 hours, Obama can go 7 hours!


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:31 PM
horizontal rule
31

30:Well that also depends on the amount and kind of stimulation. I am not Ron Jeremy.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:33 PM
horizontal rule
32

21/29 use it or lose it, laydeeez


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:35 PM
horizontal rule
33

"Not tonight, I have my refractory period."


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:37 PM
horizontal rule
34

I have a refractory exclamation point.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:38 PM
horizontal rule
35

If I'm the only person who's going to be serious in this thread, can someone delete the whole thing?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:40 PM
horizontal rule
36

I was serious, CN!


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:41 PM
horizontal rule
37

Hey, I was serious about the long distance 'party dick' thing. But to Becks' question, I have no idea, not possessing the necessary bits.

(I really want to make another joke, but I will stop.)


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:41 PM
horizontal rule
38

One much older dude seemed to have an erectile problem, but then he got off the psych meds and all was well.

According to a friend, psych meds are the obliteration of the little death, so to speak.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:45 PM
horizontal rule
39

37: Why "party"?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:47 PM
horizontal rule
40

39: I took it to mean "whiskey dick", which, yeah, happens.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:49 PM
horizontal rule
41

OK. Am I the only lady in here who prefers intercourse to cunnilingus? Maybe this should be its own thread. I think I've had an orgasm maybe once or twice in my life from oral sex, and those times, fingers were also involved. There's just not enough friction from a tongue, sez I.


Posted by: doris | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:49 PM
horizontal rule
42

To be fair to the meds, I imagine the sexual situation was somewhat stressful for him, since I was his first new partner after his wife of ten years. After a month, he dropped the meds, stopped drinking as much, was in better shape generally, and wasn't nervous anymore.

I have noticed that older guys don't rush into the fucking the way a man in his 20's will, but that seems to be a combination of things, including patience, interest in pleasing, and possibly a less priapic state.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
43

39: Because your little CN, so to speak, is really, really happy, like he's going to a party and instead of cake, there will be a girlfriend!


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
44

Perhaps you're using the wrong kind of tongue?


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
45

41: Most of the time, I share that preference.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
46

41: I thought fingers were standard. Why not?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
47

41: different, ah, strokes, and all that


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
48

I suppose there's no need to go presidential with this: Could any Ladies of Unfogged talk about anti-depression/anti-anxiety medications' effect on sex? I've heard, from the party in question, that it means no orgasms, but she was unable (having been on them as long as she's been sexually active) to answer whether it decreases sexual pleasure generally, or just makes orgasms impossible.

Upon preview, 38 prompts rather than pwns my question.


Posted by: destroyer | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
49

Before someone else can do it I will provide doris with the obligatory link.

Mostly, I consider cunnilingus a nice gesture, but it's largely non-orgasmic for me, too. I've been with a few guys who were really into it for their own stimulation, which makes it more likely to be pleasurable for me.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:54 PM
horizontal rule
50

41: I've met several ladies who claimed to find intercourse more satisfying, but it could be that, like JP Stormcrow's mom, they were only saying it to make me feel better.


Posted by: James K. Polk | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:55 PM
horizontal rule
51

After a month, he dropped the meds, stopped drinking as much, was in better shape generally, and wasn't nervous anymore.

Getting back out there after ten years with the now ex, I can confirm that backing off the alcohol makes a huge difference.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:56 PM
horizontal rule
52

41: to be less flip about it, as far as I can see it seem to vary huge amounts person to person and even time to time. There are some real outliers too, but the sort of thing you're talking about seems a pretty common variant.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:56 PM
horizontal rule
53

for their own stimulation, which makes it more likely to be pleasurable for me

I think this makes a huge difference to lots of sexual activities.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
54

41: It's not intercourse in the traditional sense that I prefer to cunnilingus, but nope, not at all uncommon.

48: Could any Ladies of Unfogged talk about anti-depression/anti-anxiety medications' effect on sex? Varies widely based on the person and the medication in question, but widely reported to basically destroy it for an awful lot of people. I have personal-but-not-personal experience, and basically: it sucks, and if there aren't other grounds for trying to find a better medication/dosage/etc, it is not even close to worth it to try and fuck around with things. Although, if you're not entirely sure it's the meds, it could also very well be some kind of birth control. Or both.


Posted by: Lunar Rockette | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 9:59 PM
horizontal rule
55

48: Most of my knowledge is from guy friends on meds, but they either had difficulty getting aroused or difficulty finishing. Which was very frustrating. Women have mentioned that it makes getting interested harder. But in general I suspect it depends a lot on the person.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:00 PM
horizontal rule
56

54: Yeah, birth control made it difficult. I could have orgasms, but I didn't really get stimulated beforehand.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:01 PM
horizontal rule
57

What Rockette said about the pill, too.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:01 PM
horizontal rule
58

Thanks for the validation, all. Now I just have to get the BF to read this so he'll stop asking me if he's "letting me down." No end of explaining that it's perfectly nice for foreplay but isn't going to get the job done for me seems to have worked so far.


Posted by: doris | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
59

(I really want to make another joke, but I will stop.)

Why?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:03 PM
horizontal rule
60

55-57: Many's the couple who've been excited about dropping the condoms in favor of the pill .... until it turned out to suck


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:03 PM
horizontal rule
61

I've been with women who only come from oral sex and women who don't like oral sex and would rather have vaginal intercourse and women that want to receive oral sex until they orgasm and then want to be immediately mounted and women who orgasm and that's it, show's over.

Women; they come in different makes and models and there's no owner's manual. You'll have to do your own research. Keep an open mind and remember; reproducible results!

One long term relationship of mine went on meds for her bipolar midway through our relationship and it killed her (previously substantial) libido deader than the dinosaurs. Neither of us was very happy about it.


Posted by: NBarnes | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:03 PM
horizontal rule
62

Tell him that the best thing he can do for your orgasms is not to get all LOL PERSONALLY INVESTED in whether they happen or not.


Posted by: Lunar Rockette | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:04 PM
horizontal rule
63

If my gf came from intercourse and not cunnilingus (instead of the other way around) I would be a lot more annoyed by my situation. Just realized that.

I don't really get much physically from intercourse anyway. The orgasms are painful.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:04 PM
horizontal rule
64

I'd say that, IME, cunnilingus is orgasmic with about 50% of laydeez. It's a small n, but suggestive that you can't assume either way. I strongly suspect that it also varies greatly by partner - not just equipment or even technique, but also emotional attachment. The desire for face-to-face sexy time will depend in part on how much you want to spend face-to-face non-sexy time with Partner X.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:05 PM
horizontal rule
65

... and 61.1 doesn't even begin to cover the range


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:05 PM
horizontal rule
66

Speaking in my role as A Guy, I'm on Prozac and Welbutrin and it hasn't really affected my libido. Thank the Goddess.


Posted by: NBarnes | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:05 PM
horizontal rule
67

My gf is on Buspar. She's never blamed it for any libido issues. That's all I know.

If it indeed reduces her libido, anecdotal evidence suggests that marijuana abrogates that inhibition.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:06 PM
horizontal rule
68

as 63 points out that unsurprisingly there is lots of variability for men, too.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:07 PM
horizontal rule
69

On the original query, I'm 35 with no steep decline in prevalence or availability - certainly less than when I was 20, but not notably less so than 30.

Morning wood is no longer every single morning, but given that I'm awakened many mornings by the calling of my preschool daughter, I say, Thanks, penis, for settling down a bit.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:08 PM
horizontal rule
70

I was on an antidepressant for about a year, and there was a slight but noticeable increase in the difficulty of erections. After going off it recently, there's not much change. But I was 23 at the beginning; it might have happened anyway.


Posted by: Levi P. Morton | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
71

47, 65 & 68: 41: different, ah, strokes, and all that

Agreed. Not a knock on the anecdata, but reading these type of threads on Unfogged always make me think that everyone should at least go read the Kinsey Reports. YMMV for everything.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
72

Now I just have to get the BF to read this so he'll stop asking me if he's "letting me down."

For a long time, thoughts like this made me very anxious even thinking about giving oral sex. A little helpful feedback goes a long way -- "No, no honey. It's fine. I really... [yawn]... really like that," is less helpful.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:11 PM
horizontal rule
73

68: Well, it's not like I'm happy with that.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:21 PM
horizontal rule
74

71: besides, varying your mileage is fun.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:21 PM
horizontal rule
75

73: The point isn't being happy/unhappy with it so much as figuring out what works for you and them and doing that.

72: For a long time, thoughts like this made me very anxious

For a while I sort of assumed that these types of things just went away with youth and inexperience. Sex with a new partner is so much easier to dial in when you can just talk frankly about it. But I'm often surprised to find that people don't.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:24 PM
horizontal rule
76

In my experience, it's hard to talk about it during moments of passion, because it kills the mood. And it's hard to talk about it during moments of non-passion, because there's no way to illustrate what we're talking about.

So the best time to talk about it is directly after moments of passion. This can mean that sex is inevitably followed by a sort of post-mortem roundtable with the goal being to brainstorm suggestions for how things can be improved in the future. Which seems very...swpl.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:33 PM
horizontal rule
77

So the best time to talk about it is directly after moments of passion.

The cameras are still rolling at this point?


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:35 PM
horizontal rule
78

Wellbutrin's supposed to be less libido-killing than the SSRIs--if anything it's supposed to have the opposite effect (though doing its job for depression would presumably also be helpful there). And, I don't know, it seems like a pretty damned serious side effect, and there are more SSRIs than there used to be & it might vary from drug to drug. But obviously, whether it's worth the risk of switching depends, & I'm no professional. I've never used any of them myself, nor had a partner use them. This is just secondhand from friends and so forth.

I don't know what Buspar is, but I don't think it's an SSRI.

41: cunni-what now? Oh, right, that. Haven't done that in years. Yeah, intercourse is far preferable. I'm not sure I've even had an orgasm that way (and it is really, really easy to make me have one in general; basically if you bother trying it'll happen, though quality varies a great deal). It may be less the lack of friction than some silly "but someone's face is down there! that's weird!" hangup, but I think if I enjoyed it as much as many women seem to I'd have long since gotten past that.


Posted by: First Lady | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:35 PM
horizontal rule
79

it kills the mood

I've been consistently amazed by the resilience of the Mood; with the right person and the right style, suggestions and criticisms can be amusing rather than awkward. (I am thinking here of the time I called a then-ongoing hand-job "interesting," which would have killed the mood until it was parlayed into some mutual laughs at equivocation and the evasion of awkwardness.) This necessitates some good feelings, but I assume advice and criticisms are only being offered if the sex is going to keep on coming; upon preview, I suppose this advice is Be Charming, and worthless.

Anyway, look at me, not giving any more advice in a sex thread.


Posted by: destroyer | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
80

I guess it's been so long since I could rely on having an erection for the duration of such a discussion that I don't remember what it was like to have any sort of discussion at a time when my suggestions could actualyl be acted upon.

Can someone else besides me do some complaining here? kthx


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 10:57 PM
horizontal rule
81

I suppose "Angle of Incidence" is a better subtitle for this thread than "Angle of Repose".


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 11:13 PM
horizontal rule
82

Beginning in my early thirties, I could not count on an erection, but this had a lot to do with the fact that my wife and I had just begun to dismantle our marriage by means of fucking other people.

I wrote a song about it.

I think that the priapism of youth can overcome this effect, but at my age ones emotions have more say in matters of the fuck.


Posted by: Frankie Pierce | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 11:24 PM
horizontal rule
83

I had an uncontrollable erection just this morning, and I'm 35. And I haven't really noticed any difference from my younger years yet, except for a slightly longer refractory period.


Posted by: Garfield | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 11:43 PM
horizontal rule
84

Morning wood is no longer every single morning

I've found that an orgasm (or two) a day, keeps the morning wood away. Ok, sometimes three or four. By whatever methods.

How much exertion was involved in the first orgasm seems to define how quickly the second erection shows up. 30-60 minutes of screwing seems to need 15 minutes of rest. This is unlike when I was say, 16 (or 13, actually) when five orgasms in an hour (with basically no rest breaks) ... seemed like the thing to do. (As in: 'Damn! I'm still horny!')

I did notice when it became more or less impossible to have an orgasm with a condom on, since my knees would crap out after an hour.

A little helpful feedback goes a long way -- "No, no honey. It's fine. I really... [yawn]... really like that," is less helpful.

Setting: me, after being in bed entire day with flulike sickness. Ex- comes in after day at work; not ex- at that point. Various greetings.
Ex-: "So have you got everything you need?"
Me: "Yeah.... [woozy mumble] yeah, I'm fine. I got everything earlier."
Ex-: "So there's nothing I can get you?"
Me: "Well, I know you wanted to go out, so I don't want to keep you, but there is one thing..."
Ex-: "What?"
Me: "Um, [brightly] you could fuck me."
Ex-: "What?!?"
Me: "Well, I mean..."
Ex-: "You have THE FLU!"
Me: "You could sit on my face instead. In fact, that would be even better. I'm kinda tired."
Ex-: "You're ILL."
Me: "It's not contagious that way! And it would make me feel lots better!"
Ex-: "Sweetie, YOU HAVE THE FLU!"
Me: "Well...[woozy] I mean, yeah, I'm sick... but I'm not DEAD."
Ex-: "NO!"
Me: "[whingy] No tasty pussy?"
Ex-: "NO! It might make you sicker."
Me: "I might die, and then what? My last day on earth and I can't get my girlfriend to sit on my face?"
Ex-: "That's ridiculous. You're not going to die."
Me: [woozy pause] "But it would make me feel better."
Ex-: "You're CRAZY!"
Me: "Am not."
Ex-: "You're sick, you have the flu."
Me: [full whine] "But... but... I love it when you sit on my face!"
Ex-: "I am not going to do that."
Me: "{sigh} Life really sucks, man."
Ex-: "Well, suck it up."
Me: "I bet you say that to all the ill people."

max
['exeunt stage right, probably chased by bears']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 07-28-08 11:47 PM
horizontal rule
85

I've found that an orgasm (or two) a day, keeps the morning wood away

I remain of the impression that morning wood is induced by a need to pee.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:00 AM
horizontal rule
86

85 gets it right.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:06 AM
horizontal rule
87

85: That would be perverse, and probably disprove evolution. The hard-on piss is a delicate maneuver. Some of us have to install ceiling mounts, but do our HMOs reimburse us for it? No, they do not.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:07 AM
horizontal rule
88

I'm 29 going on 30, and IME, so far no problems with ED except when I was on Zoloft. And my main problem with the Zoloft was not with the quality of the erection, but with begin able to come, as it delayed orgasm considerably, sometimes so much that I would simply go without. I'd get started quickly enough, but would never be able to finish. Luckily, reducing my dose seems to have helped with that.

Like a few others have mentioned, the real issue is that my refractory period has gone from 5 minutes to 30 minutes since my teenage years. That's the real depressing part for me - of course, Mrs. Jackson is happy that it takes a while for me to recover before starting again. She likes the rest.


Posted by: Andrew Jackson | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:13 AM
horizontal rule
89

That would be perverse, and probably disprove evolution.

Back on the veldt, the mourning wood was a biological response to the need to reproduce, for one of the tribesmen had fallen.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:29 AM
horizontal rule
90

A few months out from 40, and I'll agree with several folks above: no problem getting or maintaining erections, but the down time required to get an additional one has increased.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:31 AM
horizontal rule
91

88: Yeah, I get this with Paxil. On the one hand, I can fuck for an hour. On the other, I have to fuck for an hour. I figure I'm eating male karma, so I hope you all appreciate it.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:49 AM
horizontal rule
92

In honor of this thread, I'll once again link to the greatest sports headline of all time.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 12:57 AM
horizontal rule
93

90: That was pretty much the pattern until I hit 60* or so. Then I'd get an erection okay but any distraction at all softened it. Viagra took care of that.

I was doing reasonably okay until the docs prescribed some new anti-hypertension meds last year. Those killed desire, performance, interest in living, and even the energy to kill myself. Bad stuff. Getting off the worst one was hell too, a few times I actually thought I was going to die.

I'm going to try getting off the second Rx as soon as I find out the proper taper technique for that shit. Living longer with those side effects simply isn't worth it.

* after about 45 years of a pack/day and a bacon cheeseburger with fries diet.


Posted by: President Biohazard | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 1:04 AM
horizontal rule
94

I remain of the impression that morning wood is induced by a need to pee.

Is it? Well, it went away it did. Perhaps that is prostrate-related.

On the one hand, I can fuck for an hour. On the other, I have to fuck for an hour.

One wonders if, in the end, the sweetspot between 'unable to get off' and 'way too fast' even exists.

max
['Blah.']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 1:13 AM
horizontal rule
95

92: Better than "Keegan Fills Schmiechel's Gap with Seaman"? Unlikely.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 1:19 AM
horizontal rule
96

One wonders if, in the end, the sweetspot between 'unable to get off' and 'way too fast' even exists.

Sure. It lasts about 18 months. Enjoy.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:23 AM
horizontal rule
97

Perhaps that is prostrate-related.

Lying prostrate with an erection is not advised.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:26 AM
horizontal rule
98

Morning wood indicates only the desire to pee?! Does that mean I can't/shouldn't initiate morning sex through fellatio with my next boyfriend?!

This thread is depressing me for many reasons. I really squandered my youthful peak with teenage chastity and then long term, long-distance monogamy. I also recall some Unfogged threads in which some men complained about women with greater sex drives than their own. It just gets worse as you get older, doesn't it. And I'm only 27!

Sigh. Right now, not much desire for sex/dating b/c of lingering achey breaky heart feelings, but apparently this is not the thread to go to for the comforting thought that the minute I'm ready I'll have hott sex with an awesome and interesting dude.


Posted by: Abigail Adams | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:33 AM
horizontal rule
99

Does that mean I can't/shouldn't initiate morning sex through fellatio with my next boyfriend?!

It most certainly does not mean that.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:36 AM
horizontal rule
100

Listen to Apo, woman.


Posted by: Kobe | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:36 AM
horizontal rule
101

That is comforting to hear inasmuch as it does not allow me to idealize and miss inconsolably the former Mr. X. I find that as I get older, it's not who comes/how many times/how long (all that performance stuff) that matters, but compatibility w/r/t frequency of sex, openness to spontaneity and your partner's desire, and that your partner won't refuse your advances, consider your appetite too much/too little or get mad at you for waking him up.


Posted by: Abigail Adams | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:44 AM
horizontal rule
102

Dang, I hope that W-lfs-n doesn't pick on me for all of those comma splices. Sorry!

Ok, I'm off to bed to snuggle up with a book. I hope that this thread triples and is chock full of presidential confesions by the time I return to it tomorrow morning.


Posted by: Abigail Adams | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 2:47 AM
horizontal rule
103

compatibility w/r/t frequency of sex, openness to spontaneity and your partner's desire, and that your partner won't refuse your advances, consider your appetite too much/too little or get mad at you for waking him up.

Yup. And it's not like anyone would warn you about these things when you first start going out, either, so you learn the hard way.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 5:59 AM
horizontal rule
104

Yup. And it's not like anyone would warn you about these things when you first start going out, either, so you learn the hard way.

Well, and it can change as times goes by.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:02 AM
horizontal rule
105

compatibility w/r/t frequency of sex, openness to spontaneity and your partner's desire, and that your partner won't refuse your advances, consider your appetite too much/too little or get mad at you for waking him up.

Sigh. I hate the above phrasing suggests that it's not okay to refuse your partner's advances. (Yes, I do recognize that this is my own personal issue and that most likely the comment is referring to the sort of situation where your partner is never open to your advances rather than suggesting an obligation to be always ready, willing and able.)

Also, I have no problem warning any potential suitors in advance that I will get mad at you if you wake me up for sex before, say, 5 a.m. I'm really kind of a bitch if I don't get my sleep.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:26 AM
horizontal rule
106

65 is a goddamn lie. I drew the Venn diagram and everything.

98: Lack of experience can be quickly made up by sleeping with men two at a time. Plus, it has many of the positive features of comparison shopping.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:26 AM
horizontal rule
107

Lack of experience can be quickly made up by sleeping with men two at a time. Plus, it has many of the positive features of comparison shopping.

Too difficult to control for synergistic effects. You need to isolate the variables, or else use much more advanced statistical techniques to get reliable results. Sleeping with two men in succession (while altering the sequence through multiple trials) would produce cleaner data.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:33 AM
horizontal rule
108

I hate the above phrasing suggests that it's not okay to refuse your partner's advances.

I thought it just suggested that one wants compatibility about those things, rather than that one thing is "better" than another. Sure, even people in LTRs can reject sexual advances. But it's a sign of a major incompatibility, not character failure, if one person does all the rejecting and the other does all the initiating.

And, of course, severe incompatibility in that area can be a sign that one is in an abusive relationship.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:34 AM
horizontal rule
109

Sleeping with two men at a time is more of an art than a science.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:35 AM
horizontal rule
110

That is, it makes one hate oneself to be either the always-rejected or the always-rejecting.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:35 AM
horizontal rule
111

There was a rumour over here that there was a game show on American TV where they got some woman to screw two men, separately, off camera, and then she explained to the viewers which one was better at it. It's a commentary on the global repuation of American TV, that this was widely believed.

Please tell me it wasn't true.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:36 AM
horizontal rule
112

111: I'm pretty sure that happens on I Love New York. I could be wrong. All the VH1 reality shows seem to allow for this possibility. But as the point of the show? No, I can't think of one.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:37 AM
horizontal rule
113

112. Thank god.

108. Frequent rejection can be down to something as simple as circadian rhythms. If a morning person pairs up with an evening person, then after the first fine flush there can be a lot of frustration and resentment on both sides, even when both people are still massively attracted to each other. I recommend after work and before dinner in this example.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:42 AM
horizontal rule
114

Please tell me it wasn't true.

Of course, the English have to answer for Denise van Outen, who had female contestants viewing the penises of a group of men and attempting to match a list of penis nicknames to the corresponding members.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:48 AM
horizontal rule
115

108, 110: Um, yeah... I think it's something along those lines that makes me cringe at the word "refuse." The request/refuse framing sets the idea up in my head as a competitive (for lack of a better word), one versus the other. As opposed to saying something like "a partner whose interest/desire is in sync." But I'm quibbling. 'Cause I got issues.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:52 AM
horizontal rule
116

We pretend she's Dutch.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:53 AM
horizontal rule
117

And for reference on the morning wood subject, for me not masturbating at night is the exception rather than the rule, and I only get a soldier in a tent when I've been unable to for a day or two (due to privacy issues).


Posted by: Levi P. Morton | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:54 AM
horizontal rule
118

If a morning person pairs up with an evening person, then after the first fine flush there can be a lot of frustration and resentment on both sides, even when both people are still massively attracted to each other.

This was Mrs. President's experience with her longtime SO - soon after we started having sex, she commented to me how glad she was that I wasn't a morning person like he was.

The punchline is that, over the years, we've probably had more morning sex than nighttime, but that's a function of children and end-of-day exhaustion (mostly hers, but I'm not complaining).


Posted by: Mr. President | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 6:59 AM
horizontal rule
119

Well you know, I never charted these things, so I can't swear to how it relates to other activities and so forth; all I know is that morning wood occurred 99% of the time through my 20s, and now probably less than half the time.

The need to urinate is definitely a factor, and, due to kids, I'm more likely to be awakened in the middle of the night and, while up, go pee, so that's definitely there. But relatively rarely has the need to pee been so great that I interrupted sexy wakeup sex to make a toilet run. So fellate away, Abigail.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:03 AM
horizontal rule
120

This thread, like so many others here, makes me marvel and rich rainbow tapestry of diverse penises represented at Unfogged.

At 33, no noticeable decline in on-demand availability, but markedly fewer spontaneous/unwanted.

To add an anecdata point to the morning discussion, both me and the missus have been known to push pause on morning-time activities for a quick pee, without a discernible impact on "teh mood."


Posted by: mrh | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:06 AM
horizontal rule
121

Well, fuck. Can we all pretend that instead of "and" in the first sentence I'd typed "at the"?


Posted by: mrh | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
122

I'm reminded of the joke about the penis being designed by a civil engineer -- having, as it does, a waste pipe running through a playground. (No offense to civil engineers intended.)


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
123

||

Hasbro's legal department just disappeared Scrabulous, and now I have no real use for Facebook. The last time I had any dealings with Hasbro was when they bought the game company my (now ex) wife worked for, then laid everybody off in time for Christmas.

I do not have good feelings for Hasbro.

|>


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:12 AM
horizontal rule
124

I do not have good feelings for HasbroFacebook. It's a bloody spambot, as far as I can see.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:32 AM
horizontal rule
125

123: Dude, did your wife work for Microprose or Avalon Hill? That would be awesome in the sense that, given either, I would definitely tap that. (WOTC joke).


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
126

Microprose.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
127

So, so awesome. Darklands was a thing of beauty, and the Hasbro buyout was one of history's great crimes.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
128

My personal experience of "morning" wood is that it generally seems to be associated with REM sleep/dreams (not necessarily with erotic content) as well as the need to pee, also have them when awakeining from a nap or a dream in the middle of the night if I have been dreaming. Mine also do not feel particularly sensitive/"sexual", if sexual activity follows there is some detumescence before a more standard erection gets going.


Posted by: Spiro Agnew | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
129

Also, I have no problem warning any potential suitors in advance that I will get mad at you if you wake me up for sex before, say, 5 a.m. I'm really kind of a bitch if I don't get my sleep.

Before 5 a.m. Eastern standard time?

At what point does it change from late evening sex to morning sex?

Is it ok to wake you up at 1 am so that you can have a little rest after your hard day?


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
130

Worse than morning or evening: midafternoon.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
131

I think late morning is my favorite, like 10am, but midafternoon is great.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
132

65 is a goddamn lie. I drew the Venn diagram and everything.

It really, really isn't.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:36 AM
horizontal rule
133

midafternoon is great

I think so too, but the people in HR are *such dicks* about it.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
134

133: I suspect it's always best policy not to screw with the people in HR.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:40 AM
horizontal rule
135

134: or if you do take them to dinner first.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
136

This thread is depressing me for many reasons. I really squandered my youthful peak with teenage chastity and then long term, long-distance monogamy. I also recall some Unfogged threads in which some men complained about women with greater sex drives than their own. It just gets worse as you get older, doesn't it. And I'm only 27!

I thought men had the youthful peak and women had the 30-something peak.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
137

I thought men had the youthful peak and women had the 30-something peak.

IMHO YMMV.


Posted by: Tripp | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:50 AM
horizontal rule
138

WTF IFYM.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
139

It just gets worse as you get older, doesn't it. And I'm only 27!

No sense crying over spilt milk. Or, in this case, not spilt. Concentrate on quality, not quantity...


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
140

128: Relevant, Dick Cavett once pointed out that "Spiro Agnew" anagrams to "Grow A Penis".


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
141

I should have clarified: worse in terms of trying to time sex with peak horniness is mid-afternoon.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
142

Cala:

Slacker. Millions of teenagers find a way to do it midafternoon while the parents are away.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
143

mid-afternoon sex breaks are excellent though. There should be more corporate support for the idea. Probably do wonders for productivity.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:07 AM
horizontal rule
144

Probably do wonders for productivity.

Morale, certainly, but not productivity. AB & I both work from home, so I speak from experience.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:26 AM
horizontal rule
145

mid-afternoon sex breaks are excellent though. There should be more corporate support for the idea. Probably do wonders for productivity.

I hear the really hip employers already offer desk chair massage, so it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to throw in a happy end.


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
146

"You have THE FLU!"

I find generally that stuff that makes you feel weak and faint but not too nauseated can improve sex. The flu for sure, opiate-related drugs, early morning tiredness, etc. It makes things more sensual somehow; the orgasms are fantastic.

As for the post question, I shall dare to answer it without presidential anonymity. If you define having trouble as no longer having happy spontaneous erections half the day long, no longer being instantly iron hard every time your partner vaguely hints about sex, etc. then things start declining in your early 20s; it's all just a gradual downhill slide from there. The only question is when you really start noticing it and whether you choose to define it as "a problem".

But that's the wrong way to define trouble, it's adolescent-o-centric. As you get older, the emotional dependence of sex comes more to the foreground. But that was always there, it was just buried under your testosterone overdose. You start to pay more attention to the whole-body arousal instead of being extremely gential-centric. But that helps you cultivate the long makeout sessions that are one of the best parts of sex anyway. Erections aren't always there instantly on demand (that starts early), but if you relax and go with the flow they will be there. And if you're uncomfortable with the unpredictability of that then there are a wide variety of helpful drugs with no harmful side effects; fuck judgementalism on that. (Although I find a little bit of those things goes a long way).

All of this is probably dependent on staying in decent physical shape generally. But isn't that true of everything in life past 35 or 40?

Now, the *real* annoyance is the refractory period. Past 30 men have to ration their orgasms in a way women just don't. I'm jealous of women for that.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:46 AM
horizontal rule
147

It just gets worse as you get older, doesn't it.

shorter 146: no, absolutely not, unless you define "better/worse" in Stakhanovite terms.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
148

Now, the *real* annoyance is the refractory period. Past 30 men have to ration their orgasms in a way women just don't. I'm jealous of women for that.

Only one data point and all, and maybe I'm just really in touch with my masculine side, but I have always had a refractory period myself. Is that really uncommon for women or just myth?


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
149

Hi, Di. I think women's sexuality varies a lot more than men's, just physically -- there's a sense in which nothing is all that uncommon or unusual for women. A refractory period is common enough, but it's also pretty common to be able to go for multiple orgasms in a night with a fairly short refractory period (say, 20-30 minutes), and then there's that subset who can set it off like strings of fireworks. That last inspiring envy and awe.

with experience, women sometimes end up moving from one box to another.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:04 AM
horizontal rule
150

that subset who can set it off like strings of fireworks

Envy and awe indeed.

with experience, women sometimes end up moving from one box to another.

I suppose there's really only one way to test that proposition...


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:08 AM
horizontal rule
151

women sometimes end up moving from one box to another

That doesn't excite PMP, though.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
152

In my experience, immediately after having an orgasm both women and men become completely uninteresed in sex for at least three or four hours. This seems to be unrepresentative, though.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:11 AM
horizontal rule
153

Shock and awe.


Posted by: Currence | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
154

Midafternoon or early evening sex is the best. I was trying for a while to get it in before dinner, once the cooking, dishes-doing, post-dinner tv-watching, post-tv-watching cigarette, post-cigarette ice cream, post-ice cream chat routine sets in, the likelihood of sex dwindles quickly.


Posted by: m. leblanc | Link to this comment | 07-29-08 10:36 AM
horizontal rule
155

lemme put in another post for dopaminergics. these rediculous refractory periods that pops needs are avoidable by drugsssss

refractory periods are from tooo much prolactin

still, do'nt get rid of it (refractory periods) entirely. there is a really great peace that comes from not wanting sex. its a singular feeling.


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 08- 1-08 11:08 PM
horizontal rule
156

To answer the original question, in my case things started going awry sometime early-to-mid-40-ish, as far as I can remember. Though it's hard to say how much of that was physiological vs. a psychological reaction to the other sexual frustrations going on in the relationship. I think it's at least partly physiological, since it does seem to respond to medication, but it's hard to sort out those two potential causes much further while staying within the boundaries of a single monogamous relationship.


Posted by: EDguy | Link to this comment | 08- 2-08 1:56 AM
horizontal rule