Blog

Increasing complaints of the inadequacy of human sexual function, it would seem that the potpourri of cultures that influence the behavior of so many might designate some area less vital to the quality of living than the sexual expression to receive and to bear the burden of the social ills of human existence.

The potential for orgasmic dysfunction: highlighted in the psychosocial-sexual histories of those women in marital units referred to the Foundation can be described in a composite profile.

Professionals many times look for a specific influence or conditioning that predetermines sexual failure, and in most instances, it can be identified if the delving goes deep enough.

While the multiplicity of etiological influences is acknowledged, the factor of religious orthodoxy remains of major import in primary orgasmic dysfunction as in almost every form of human sexual inadequacy.

To be diagnosed as having primary orgasmic dysfunction, a woman must report a lack of orgasmic attainment during her entire lifespan. There is no definition of male sexual dysfunction that parallels this severity of exclusion.

Random orgasmic inadequacy is illustrated in the history below. With but two episodes of orgasmic attainment in her life, Mrs. H provides a history of one manipulative and one coital effort to orgasmic release. Her two highlighted sexual experiences were as much of a surprise to her when they occurred as they were to her husband.

Both contributing positively or negatively to any state of sexual responsivity but having no biological demand to function in a complementary manner. With the reminder that finite analysis of male sexual capacity and physiological response also has attracted little scientific interest in the past.

For many women, one of the most frequent causes for orgasmic dysfunction, either primary or situational, is a lack of complete identification with the marital partner.