Supplement
Kinsey's Myth of Female Sexuality
by Edmund Bergler
(Excerpt. Edmund Bergler and William S. Kroger. Kinsey's myth of female sexuality: the medical facts. Grune & Stratoton, New York, 1954)
Kinsey adheres to what the psychiatric co-author [Edmund Bergler], in Neurotic Counterfeit-Sex, characterized as “the vagueness theory.” In this theory, there is a refusal to differentiate between vaginal and clitoridean orgasm. Its arguments are, first, that orgasm “involves the whole nervous system,” and second, that the vagina is poorly supplied with nerves. Both arguments are specious; they avoid the real issue.
The first argument bypasses the fact that female orgasm concentrates the individual’s entire nervous energy, for a few seconds, on one specific area: the pelvic and perineal muscles. These muscles contract involuntarily in vaginal orgasm, and the contractions are felt in coitus by both partners. The woman of course feels them directly; the man feels them with that part of his penis most deeply inserted.
The second argument gratuitously disregards the fact that orgasm is not locally but centrally regulated (“orgasm reflex”). This confusion between vagina proper and the muscles surrounding it (can anyone claim that they, too, suffer from a paucity of nerves?) should not happen to a biologist. Every medical student could also have explained the reason for the situation which baffles Kinsey—the alleged limited number of nerves in the vagina. If every gynecologist attempted to biopsy the vaginal walls without anaesthesia, he would have a hostile ex-patient. We doubt if Kinsey has ever cauterized the cervix, and let the cautery accidentally slip and touch the wall of the vagina. The patient would jump off the table. We also know of few operations, as Kinsey claims, that are performed on the interior of the vagina without anesthesia.
Kinsey contradicts himself by admitting that 20 per cent of his volunteers reported that they had sometimes used vaginal insertions in connection with their masturbation. (Vol. II, p. 161) On the next page, he admits that these women actually derived erotic satisfaction from deep vaginal penetration. “Such females may have nerve ends in the vaginal walls.” (Our italics.) Kinsey resorts here to mental acrobatics; he conveniently disregards that which does not fit into his theories.
Kinsey uses the comparative absence of vaginal nerves to prove that woman cannot experience vaginal orgasm. Interestingly enough, Kinsey seems to assign to the vagina a purely passive-receptive biological function: that of a canal for the deposition of semen. As far as pleasure, or even sensations, are concerned, the vagina seems to he eliminated from consideration. Thus, Kinsey arrives at his truly comical concept of “pubic area intercourse” (a term suggested by the psychiatric co-author [Edmund Bergler] in Neurotic Counterfeit-Sex). Kinsey has the floor:
“It is certain that most of the physical stimulation which the female receives from actual coitus comes from contact of the external areas of the vulva, of the areas immediately inside of the outer edges of the labia, and of the clitoris, with the pubic area of the male during genital union.” (Vol. I, p. 576; our italics.)
Reformulated, this means that the vagina does not even feel the presence of the penis; what the woman feels is contact of the “pubic area” of the man. Since man’s pubic area is surrounded by hair, Kinsey is in effect saying that the really exciting organs in sex for women are man’s pubic hair and skin above the penis. Other mortals, in their naiveté, have always assumed that the penis is the male sex organ. Kinsey’s contribution is the discovery of the dispossession of the penis, and the elevation of hair and skin of the pubic areas to its new pleasure-giving glory.
What Kinsey describes as normal is the well-known picture of the neurotic, vaginally frigid woman. In his biological partiality, Kinsey completely disregards medical facts: he denies that woman feels the penis in the vagina during intercourse. It is to his credit that he does not blame man for this misfortune, as Professor G. L. Kelly, an anatomist who also disbelieves in vaginal orgasm, has done. It is Kelly’s opinion that the upper surface of the penis has a specialized function in coitus: that of stimulating the clitoris “to some degree.” The correct technique of intercourse, Kelly holds, should involve a direct contact with the clitoris; therefore the man should “lie well forward” when in the “man-above position.” If this simple expedient is not enough, the finger should be used to massage the clitoris as intercourse continues:
“It is true that some women cannot reach the orgasm in normal intercourse, no matter how long or how vigorously continued, but many such women can reach a climax from one to five times within an hour and a half or two hours by patient massage of the clitoris.” (Our italics)
Kelly warns that some women, regardless of their partner’s efforts on their behalf, will still not reach orgasm, but estimates that the average woman requires manipulation of the clitoris for “from one to several minutes” in order to reach a state of stimulation sufficient to produce orgasm. “Ride ’em high,” he counsels, quoting the advice given by an unnamed professor of physiology to his students.
Kinsey is more merciful; he does not ask man to shoulder the blame. Obviously, he believes that man’s burden of trouble—including among other items “normal” premature ejaculation—is heavy enough.
Behind Kinsey’s findings on the “normal” prevalence of pubic area intercourse lies a callous disregard for woman’s pleasure. The implication is that woman need only fulfill her biological function.
Kinsey’s opposition to the concept of vaginal orgasm is so fantastic that he confesses in Volume II his ignorance as to what the term denotes (p. 582). Thus he adduces an argument which is singular in its medical and psychological naiveté: 879 women were “stimulated” by 5 gynecologists (2 of them female) at different parts of their sexual anatomy only to prove the unresponsiveness of the vagina: “The tests of tactile responsiveness were made with a glass, metal, or cotton-tipped probe with which the indicated areas were gently stroked.” (Vol. II, p. 577) Now, the confusion between a “stimulation” test in the gynecologist’s office, and the actual emotional situation in intercourse, is so self evident that it need only be pointed out. Still, Kinsey is aware how senseless his “test” is, since he notes: “. . . awareness of tactile stimulation or of pressure does not demonstrate the capacity to be aroused erotically by similar stimuli; but it seems probable that any area which is not responsive to tactile stimulation or pressure cannot be involved in erotic response.” (Vol. II, p. 577) Once more, Kinsey overlooks that orgasm is produced by a central reflex transmitted to the involuntary pelvic and perineal muscles—a process felt in the vagina. Moreover, the vagina proper assumes a very specific additional role in orgasm.
Kegel* has described in detail the functional anatomy of the pubococcygeus muscle and its relation to vaginal orgasm. His research on sexual physiology of the vagina brought to light clinical evidence of highly specialized proprioceptor nerve endings, situated in the musculature surrounding the middle third of the vagina, and enabling the woman to perceive and localize deep sensations during coitus. In connection with this finding, Kegel described a diagnostic syndrome of “awareness (or lack of awareness) of sexual function of the pubococcygeus muscle,” indicating that vaginal sensations are related to conditioning of sexual reflexes which may be established during the various phases of a woman’s life. This differs from Kinsey’s assumption that the vagina is relatively insensitive because its superficial tissues contain few if any sensory nerves. Kegel points out that in this respect Kinsey’s observations are contradictory, namely, that some women do derive satisfaction from vaginal penetration either during masturbation or coitus, and that deep penetration of the rectum sometimes brings satisfaction comparable to deep vaginal insertion.
* Kegel, A. H.: Sexual Functions of the Pubococcygeus Muscle. West. J. Surg., Ohst. & Gynec., 60: 521-524, Oct., 1952.
Through use of the perineometer as an aid in muscle re-education and resistive exercise, Kegel was able to improve tone, strength and contractile ability of the neuromuscular structure of the pubococcygeus. Concomitantly, sexual appreciation was enhanced. The results were most dramatic in women with an initially weak pubococcygeus muscle and a flabby vagina. Before treatment, coitus in these women was lacking in gratifying sensations or was outright disagreeable. After a few weeks of muscle education and resistive exercise, patients noted marked changes, which they expressed in statements like “I can feel more”; “anything felt in clitoris or labia is ‘child’s play’ compared to what I now feel in the vagina”; “I used to feel my climax outside, now I feel it inside”; “I am having climaxes nearly every time, whereas I had them rarely before”; “I don’t like clitoral stimulation any more; it makes me nervous and irritable.” More outspoken patients said: “My husband says I am not dead any more”; “my husband used to complain that I did not like intercourse; now he complains I am wearing him out.”
According to Kegel, such findings indicate that vaginal and clitoric or vulval orgasm are two distinct phenomena. Vaginal orgasm depends on movement—motionless objects (pessary, diaphragm, tampax, perineometer, etc.) producing no sensation even in a conditioned vagina. Following active exercise of the pubococcygeus muscle, many post-menopausal and elderly patients derived sexual satisfaction through vaginal orgasm, even though sexual response had been absent in both clitoric and vaginal regions for many years. As further proof of vaginal orgasm, Kegel refers to Huffman, who found that various gynecologic operations, including removal of the clitoris, did not interfere with sexual activity in mature females. Huffman* states: “This study would tend to bear out the assumption that the vagina becomes the center of normal sexual activity in the mature female. . . . Sexual stimulation increases engorgement of the genitals; as a result of physical contact vaginal sensory organs are stimulated. These stimuli produce vaginal contractions and spasmodic muscular movements which culminate in a phenomenon comparable to the male orgasm, but without the discharge of retained secretions.” Kegel** observes that it is worthy of note that Kinsey quotes this paper by Huffman, but uses it only in the context of castration—one of the many instances throughout Kinsey’s book, in which concentration upon the clitoris blinded him to other concepts.
* Huffman, J. W.; Effect of Gynecologic Surgery on Sexual Reactions. Am. J. Ohst. & Gynec. 59; 915-917, April 1950. (Quoted by Kegel, A. H.)
** Kegel, A. H.: Personal Communication.
Kegel makes the surprising observation that in 22 women with unilateral injury of the pubococcygeus muscle, vaginal orgasm was reached when the husband was advised to penetrate gently and direct his thrust toward the intact side of the pubococcygeus; when the approach was directed toward the impaired side, disagreeable sensations were engendered which made sexual appreciation impossible.
Kegel’s work on exercise of the pubococcygeus, as a means of re-educating and strengthening the muscle for the relief of urinary stress incontinence and anal sphincter control, has been widely accepted and marks a distinct progress in that field. We doubt, however, whether Kegel’s reeducation of the pubococcygeus muscle can substitute for psychoanalytic therapy of frigidity. The reasons are: First, the fact that the pubococcygeus can be re-educated indicates that the motor innervation of this muscle is voluntary. Second, the question must be asked how it can be explained that psychotherapy is able to bring the patient to the point of experiencing vaginal orgasm without specific muscle exercises.
We believe that vaginal orgasm in a normal woman represents the psychological and physiological participation of the female’s total personality in the sex act. It is the culmination of the noblest of human emotions—the spiritual merger of one personality into the other—real love. But it is possible that failure to use* the pubococcygeus muscle during coitus is psychological. The mere fact that advice is given by Kegel to concentrate upon the use of the vaginal muscles is interpreted by the unconscious as permission. Hence the taboo of “don’t touch and don’t use it” is diminished. Also, the feeling of guilt often associated with sex activity is reduced through the permissive attitude of the physician.
* Kegel would say: “failure to learn to use the pubococcygeus.”
In effect, Kegel’s re-education of the pubococcygeus muscle is also probably mostly a suggestive measure, though not intended as such. And suggestive therapy is not identical with deep psychotherapy.
Bellak* also points out that “Kinsey stresses vaginal insensitivity—which as far as the mucous membrane is concerned may be right; but he overlooks the importance of proprioception in the muscles of the vaginal walls upon being stretched during introitus. The increase and decrease of this muscular tension during copulatory movement is a typical example of the pleasurable aspects of tension-relaxation sequences of the muscles.”
* Beliak, L.: Personal communication.
The fact that woman has two sex organs, clitoris and vagina, which under normal conditions are psychologically connected and under neurotic conditions disconnected, has out of necessity given rise to two types of theories concerning her orgasmic capacity. These are the clitoridean and vaginal theories of orgasm.
The late justice of the Supreme Court, Louis D. Brandeis, once said in another connection: “Behind every argument is someone’s ignorance.” Every dogma must have its field-day, and the clitoric theory has long been the dominant one. Two different factors have constituted the foundation for this state of affairs. The first comes from woman; perspicaciously, she has been unwilling to testify against herself, although she always knew what man should not hear from woman, namely, that “there is no comparison between the two (types of orgasm), vaginal orgasm being the only full release.” (The dictum quoted is that of a female patient.) The second factor comes from man; it is his general ignorance of matters sexual.
Freud, in his grandiose pioneer elucidation of the psychosexual development of human beings, traced the sexual development of the woman in detail. In 1905 he explained that the little girl assigns to her clitoris the role of penis and is always hoping that its size will increase. In puberty, however, there must be a decisive change in this attitude. Part of the active psychic energy (cathexis) of the clitoris must be shifted to the passive investment of the vagina. If this “Passivitaetsschub” (no adequate English translation for this term exists; its approximate meaning is “push of passivity”) does not take place, the penalty is frigidity.
This accounts for the most superficial (“hysterical”) of the many forms of frigidity. More profound regressions have a more complicated origin.
In 1933, the psychiatric co-author [Edmund Bergler], in collaboration with Dr. Edward Hitschmann, postulated the following theory in Frigidity in Women:
“Under frigidity we understand the incapacity of woman to have a vaginal orgasm during intercourse. It is of no matter whether the woman is aroused during coitus or remains cold, whether excitement is weak or strong, whether it breaks off at the beginning or end, slowly or suddenly, whether it is dissipated in preliminary acts, or has been lacking from the beginning. The sole criterion of frigidity is absence of vaginal orgasm.”
This definition, which became known as the Bergler-Hitschmann theory of frigidity, also contains the claim that there is only one certain and objective sign which can indicate whether or not a woman experiences vaginal orgasm:
“Involuntary contractions of the pelvic and perineal muscles at the end of the act; these strong contractions are felt by the penis at the point of deepest penetration. Since these contractions are involuntary, they cannot be simulated, unlike the contractions involving the entrance muscles of the vagina. Contractions of the muscles at the entrance to the vagina can be produced at will; these are felt by the part of the penis least inserted.”
Recently the gynecological co-author corroborated this statement by means of a clinical experiment:
“Miss G. C., a prostitute, age 34, stated that she was able to deceive all her “clients” by her ability to contract her pelvic and perineal muscles. A Kegel perinometer was used to demonstrate the validity of her assertions. She was voluntarily able to force the needle up 30 to 40 points at will. During a bimanual vaginal examination the patient was asked to contract her pelvic and perineal muscles. She was able to do this only on the part of the fingers least inserted into the vagina. She had no ability to contract the deeper vaginal muscles. However, though coitus was usually connected with vaginal lubrication, she was quite frigid.”
Lubrication, emanating mostly from Bartholin’s glands, has sometimes been considered another certain and objective sign of vaginal orgasm. The sign is reliable, however, only when lubrication is absent; the converse is not true. A woman may produce lubricating fluid, and still suffer from frigidity.
The proponents of the clitoric theory invariably maneuver themselves into a maze of hopeless contradictions when pressed. It is hard to pin them down.
If one were to ask for example, whether a woman is “emotionally satisfied” if her orgasm is experienced, not during coitus, but after coitus, via her partner’s massage of her clitoris, the reply would be that where and when the sexual tension is released is of no importance as long as it is released. If the questioning is continued, one learns that the defenders of the clitoric theory either have no precise conception of woman’s vaginal capacity for orgasm, or deny that she has any such capacity; their opinion (though they do not come out with it in so many words) is that only the clitoris is sexually sensitive, that women are satisfied with “general excitation” and need no orgasm-like release. The defenders of the theory may even bolster their point of view with biological arguments. They will remind their opponents that masturbation, performed alone or with the help of the man, is clitoric, and that even the healthy woman requires preliminary stimulation because her “excitement curve” mounts more slowly than that of a man.
It is hard to see why the backers of the clitoric theory speak of coitus as the basis of normal sexual behavior; their description of the sexual “norm” is a description of masturbation à deux. Masturbation, it goes without saying, is the infantile, and coitus the adult form of sexual satisfaction. The chronic adult masturbationist is deeply neurotic; he may find more conscious pleasure in masturbation than in coitus, or his sex life may be divided between unsatisfying coitus and satisfying, though guilt-laden, masturbation.
The essential unreality of the clitoric theory becomes obvious when one applies its standards to the following situations: A masochistic patient allows herself to be beaten by a sadistic man, and attains orgasm through cunnilinguus alone. A patient performs fellatio on a man who is lying on his back; he slaps her with all of his force on her buttocks during this procedure; she then masturbates for half an hour to achieve clitoridean orgasm. Using the formula, “orgasm is orgasm,” these pathologic cases must be passed as “normal.” When the basic formula is utterly wrong, no amount of theory can cover the clinical facts.
The proponents of the clitoric theory either negate the very existence of vaginal orgasm, or fail to differentiate between clitoridean and vaginal orgasm, establishing a mythical unity between them. Or as a last resort, they shift their ground, and blame it all on man’s “faulty technique.”
The heyday of the clitoric theory is now over. Specialists, in increasing numbers, are accepting the vaginal theory of orgasm. Those analysts and dynamic psychiatrists who have committed themselves and expressed their views in writing, mostly accept the vaginal theory. For example, Karl Menninger:
“Impotence and frigidity may be regarded as strictly comparable with an hysterical paralysis of the leg from shell-shock.” (p. 341) The author subsumes frigidity under self-mutilation: “The genitalia, while not sacrificed in substance are treated as if not existent.” (p. 340) Finally, Menninger refers to the studies of the psychiatric co-author [Edmund Bergler] as “authoritative” which obviously implies agreement: “Many articles in the psychoanalytic literature deal with this subject. Recent and authoritative is Bergler, Edmund: Die Psychische Impotenz des Mannes, Berne, Hans Huber, 1937; also, by the same author and E. Hitschmann: Frigidity in Women, Washington, D. C. Nervous and Mental Diseases Publishing Company, 1936.” (Man Against Himself, p. 349 n. Harcourt, Brace, N. Y., 1938).
Robert Knight, in “Functional Disturbances in the Sexual Life of Women: Frigidity and Related Disorders” (Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, Vol. 7, No. 1, Jan., 1943), refers to Hitschmann and Bergler’s Frigidity in Women as “their valuable monograph,” and fully accepts their definition of frigidity. He quotes both their definition and their description of the nine different varieties of frigidity.
Sandor Rado: “Orgasm in the male is attendant upon production and delivery of sperm; in the female upon receiving of the sperm. This fact of reproductive anatomy helps to explain the clinical observation that the orgastic requirement of the sexually strong healthy female by far exceeds that of the sexually strong healthy male.” (Psychosexual Development, p. 166)
This author specifically mentions vaginal orgasm in his “standard coital pattern” (p. 164):
“Rise of desire to be penetrated—intramural stimulation by pelvic thrust—this reflexly evokes orgastic peristalsis of genital structures.”
Fritz Wittels: “It is true that the muscles of the pelvis, the voluntary muscles as well as the involuntary of the womb and its region, have something to do with feminine orgasm.” (The Habits of American Women, Eton Books, 1951; p. 95)
Gustav Bychowski: “As a manifestation of feminine sexuality the difference between vaginal and clitoral orgasm is of paramount importance.” (Psychosexual Development, p. 200)
M. R. Sapirstein: “The girl’s original genital sensations are probably almost exclusively derived from the clitoris, and in adult life have to be transferred to the vagina.” (Emotional Security, p. 133)
Marynia Farnham and Ferdinand Lundberg: “There is another aspect of the sexual situation which is very common. This is the frequent occurrence in women today of an inability to obtain sexual gratification only with manipulation of the clitoris. ... This leaves them with a lack of inner involvement, bespeaking a very definite lack of acceptance of femininity.” (Modem Woman: The Lost Sex, Harpers, 1947; p.
The proponents of the clitoric theory received an unexpected lift from Kinsey’s statistics, as presented in Volume I. Whether or not they welcomed this ally is doubtful; Kinsey’s theory of “pubic area intercourse” must have made his corroboration hard to take. Kinsey did not even assign the clitoris the central place in woman’s genital set-up; the clitoris is merely also mentioned:
“It is certain that most of the physical stimulation which the female receives from actual coitus comes from contact of the external areas of the vulva, of the areas immediately inside of the outer edges of the labia, and of the clitoris, with the pubic area of the male during genital union.” (Vol. I, p. 576; our italics.)
In Volume II, Kinsey to some extent shifts the emphasis to the clitoris, although he maintains the pubic area theory: “Certainly there are no structures in the female which are more sensitive than the clitoris, the labia minora, and the extension of the labia into the vestibule of the vagina.” (p. 575) “In coitus, the male sees to it that the clitoris makes contact with his pubic area, the base of the penis, or some other part of his body.” (p. 576). Kinsey does not elaborate on this strange statement by specifying what “other part of man’s body” he has in mind. He then accuses analysts of ignoring anatomic data, minimizing the importance of the clitoris while insisting on the pre-eminence of the vagina. This is misunderstanding. Preliminary acts are performed on the clitoris; then comes a moment when woman wishes discontinuation of clitoris stimulation, requesting insertion because her end-pleasure is in the vagina. This is not the case with vaginally frigid women.
In Kinsey’s judgment, the center of stimulation is the woman’s external genitalia, when they are in contact with man’s “pubic area.” Adherents of the clitoric theory have always had to contend with the difficulty of explaining away the fact that in the typical coital position, the penis does not come in contact with the clitoris, making clitoral orgasm an impossibility without digital manipulation. Such manipulation, of course, brings clitoral orgasm into the orbit of masturbation, an unpleasant thought. Kinsey provided the “clitorideanists” with an argument. He dispossessed the age-old “myth” of the importance of the penis, by assigning the major role in the production of sexual pleasure in woman to man’s pubic hair and skin.
There are now three theories on female orgasm: the vaginal, the clitoric, and Kinsey’s brand-new one, “pubic area” orgasm. We claim that the second and third of these theories are not only wrong, but misleading. Their proponents have simply been taken in by the rationalizations of frigid women—obviously not the purpose or aim of scientific research. We also claim that in both these theories, neurosis is confused with health. Both theories assert that vaginally frigid women are healthy; in so doing, the investigators prove that they do not understand (or are unfamiliar with) the fact that frigidity is not an isolated problem, but only a symptom and sign of neurosis.
To unravel the maze of confusion which has been so enormously increased by Kinsey, it is necessary, first, to describe the different forms of frigidity encountered:
1. Total frigidity with vaginal anesthesia. In this form, the woman experiences no sexual excitement during intercourse. Her feelings are repulsion, disgust, and the desire to have it all done with “in a hurry.” No lubrication occurs, nor are there sensations in either vagina or clitoris during preliminary sexual play. The highest degree of this form of frigidity is vaginismus; fear and active defense, as well as cramp of the sphincter making intercourse impossible, are then present.
2. Total frigidity with vaginal hypoesthesia. At the beginning of intercourse there is limited excitement, which does not increase in intensity during coitus. The clitoris is slightly sensitive, and there is sparse glandular secretion. There are no involuntary muscular contractions.
3. Relative frigidity with vaginal hypoesthesia. Excitement before the event is relatively strong; the thought of coitus, and expectation of it, are stimulating. Desire ceases when actual intercourse is imminent. The other conditions are as in Form 2.
4. Relative frigidity with vaginal sensitivity but sudden cessation of excitement before orgasm. Excitement is comparatively strong and vaginal sensitivity hardly disturbed. Excitement rises during coitus, but suddenly (rarely gradually) vanishes just before the involuntary muscular contraction should begin. Orgasm is not achieved.
5. Clitoridean orgasm with vaginal hypoesthesia. After coitus a clitoridean orgasm is achieved by means of the man’s manipulation of the clitoris. Manipulation must sometimes be continued for fifteen minutes or even half an hour. There is no vaginal orgasm. Excitement and lubrication are both fully in evidence.
6. Frigidity of the nymphomaniac type. Excitement is strong to begin with, and mounts repeatedly, but orgasm is not achieved. Women of this type are both insatiable and promiscuous.
7. Obligatory and facultative frigidity. Obligatory frigidity describes a woman who consistently suffers from one of these forms of frigidity, regardless of her partner. Facultative frigidity describes women who are usually frigid, but do experience normal orgasm with certain men under specific neurotic conditions.
8. Pseudo-frigidity as distinguished from true frigidity. The disorders described above constitute true frigidity, and should be distinguished from pseudo-frigidity, which is due to ignorance, belief in false sexual theories, incorrect techniques, etc.
The problem of frigidity is replete with both popular and scientific misconceptions. To clarify the preliminaries, it seems advisable to enumerate the most typical of these misconceptions, and to check to what degree Kinsey’s investigations have dispelled or perpetuated them.
• Terminology. The popular conception classifies a woman as frigid if she habitually either rejects the sex act, or, in submitting to it, experiences nothing but disgust. Thus, sexual coldness and frigidity are identified. This is very different from the scientific suggestion that the term “frigidity” be reserved for absence of vaginal orgasm.
Kinsey contributes to the confusion on this score: first, he confesses his “dislike” for the term “frigidity” (Vol. II, p. 373) and claims that “it is probable that all females are physiologically capable of responding and of responding to the point of orgasm” (p. 374). Unfortunately, physiological functions are frequently neurotically inhibited, something which Kinsey does not see since he only blames external factors (social taboos) for lack of “response.”
• Origin. Outdated popular and scientific theories credit frigidity to inherited qualities.
Today, it is clear that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, frigidity has a psychogenic origin, and can be removed by analysis of the unconscious tributaries. Since frigidity is not in itself an illness, but a symptom of neurosis, its cure must be a part of a more generalized therapy. No symptom can be permanently removed without destruction of the underlying neurosis.
• Fear of Impregnation. Given the usual precautions (chemical contraceptives, diaphragm, etc., following the insecure “rhythm” theory, or a combination of methods), there is no more objective reason for fearing pregnancy than there is for fearing that a brick will fall from the cornice of a building and hit a passer-by on the head. The possibility certainly does exist—no contraceptive is one hundred per cent safe—but not-too-neurotic wives learn to live with this minimum of uncertainty.
The situation is quite different with women who suffer from neurotic fear of impregnation. In these cases, the pseudo-rational fear is merely a pseudo-rational hitching post for irrational unconscious fears which have no connection with pregnancy per se.
Proof that neurosis is frequently involved in fear of pregnancy is offered by many women who, for religious reasons, reject contraceptives and approve of large families. Fear of impregnation exists even in them.
• Disgust. The misconceptions which classify the sex act as “dirty,” “beastly,” “undignified,” and so on, are all remnants of infantile repressed fantasies in which sex is identified with anal functions. In all such cases, without exception, neurosis is involved.
It cannot be reiterated often enough that in normal women of our culture, sex is never an isolated function, but is always coupled with tender love. A normal woman invariably refuses sexual performance without love. Only neurotic women, incapable of tender love, adhere to the practice of sex for the sake of “releasing tension.” Nothing is more characteristic of the real state of affairs in normality than the action of a certain woman; propositioned by a “wolf,” she opened her purse and offered the gentleman a ten dollar bill, saying: “Buy yourself a few minutes working time from a prostitute.”
The misconception of sex as “disgusting” is not the reason for frigidity but its result.
The attitude “sex is dirty” is by no means reserved to women. When Chesterton said of the sex act: “The position is ridiculous, the pleasure momentary, the expense damnable,” he was contending with exactly the inner attitude described above.
• Resignation. Stendhal’s first reaction to the sex act was; “Quoi, n’est-ce que ga?”—“Is that all there is to it?” Many women ask the identical question for years until—still ignorant of the existence of neurosis, which manifests itself in lack of sexual enjoyment as well as in other sectors— they resign themselves fatalistically to the situation.
The rationalizations vary; some are personal—“I’m just that way,” or “My silly upbringing accounts for it all”; while some are generalized, and the buck is passed: “Pleasure in sex is a man’s prerogative,” or “Nature wanted it that way.”
These erroneous conclusions are fostered by man’s attitude. If a woman does not openly show disgust, man automatically assumes that she “enjoys it.” The reasons for this fantastic oversight are:
First, there is the average man’s exaggerated narcissism; he does not look for evidence, but automatically assumes that the woman is experiencing sexual pleasure.
Second, there is the unconscious wish to ignore a painful fact. Man’s psychic scotoma for woman’s frigidity certainly spares him conscious unpleasantness, though unconsciously it spares him nothing: his blindness tends to mobilize the woman’s hatred. Not the least painful aspect of a woman’s frigidity is the repeated experience of witnessing the satisfied pleasure of a partner who is entirely unaware of her own frustration.
Third, there is the man’s peculiar reaction to the realization that his wife is frigid. He blames himself; he cannot, in his ignorance, point out that frigidity is a typical symptom of neurosis. Tragicomically, he shoulders the responsibility for his wife’s frigidity, and his wife, in order to appease her own feeling of guilt, often maintains this myth. Someone is almost always blamed, neurosis almost never, since so few know of its existence.
Women are less naive than men in this respect; their ability to play-act successfully is proof. They, too, have their private misconceptions. Perhaps the most widespread is resignation, “that’s all there is to it.” Less typical attitudes shift the blame to the man, or optimistically expect more pleasure in the future.
• Blame-Shifting and Scapegoat Theory. The neurotic woman, suffering from the inability to experience vaginal orgasm, finds a typical scapegoat: man. Ignorant of the fact that her own neurotic difficulty is responsible for her frigidity, she places the blame on man’s technique. It is of course true that many men are clumsy, insecure, fidgety in sex; that many suffer from premature ejaculation or other forms of potency disturbance. Still, even a healthy and experienced man is helpless when confronted with a frigid woman.
The frigid woman’s scapegoat theory is by no means harmless. It poisons a marriage, and frequently leads to extramarital affairs, and divorce.
Kinsey added to the prevailing bewilderment on this point. In pronouncing premature ejaculation “normal” he might have deprived frigid women of one of their arguments, but he did not, for those who heard of his judgment refused to believe it. In pronouncing vaginal frigidity “normal”, he might have achieved “peace of mind” for the victims of frigidity, if only the neurosis and the host of psychosomatic symptoms produced by it could be cured by statements appearing in books.
Here is a further complication. The “pubic area intercourse” postulated by Kinsey in Volume I does not correspond to clinical reality, and the clitoris is still the central point of excitement for vaginally frigid women. Typical intercourse, for many couples, consists of this sequence: The man starts preparatory acts, usually digital manipulation of the clitoris; after a short time, he interrupts these acts to insert the penis into the vagina—if he did not, his always threatening prematurity might lead to extra-vaginal emission; woman is left “hanging in the air,” since she is vaginally dead and contact with the clitoris was discontinued when intercourse proper took place. Here the roads part. Some women, after the man has ejaculated, request continuation of clitoris massage. This is irritating to the orgastically satisfied male, especially since the massage must be continued for from ten to thirty minutes. Some women are shy in their demands (and some men are obtuse); for these women “nothing happens”; the sex act leaves them dissatisfied and angry.
When a vaginally frigid woman pretends to her husband that she has experienced an orgasm, she is the victim of her own hoax—she thus deprives herself of the possibility of receiving clitoris massage after her husband has ejaculated. Many such women resign themselves; many masturbate after their husbands have fallen asleep. Some, also try extramarital affairs.
This is a standard complaint on the part of dissatisfied wives: “The whole thing is over before it really gets started,” and accounts for the old saw: “This won’t hurt, did it?” The parallel complaint from the men is: “More work (on the clitoris) than pleasure.” Which proves that the clitoris is not the central sex organ for normal women, and prematurity not normal for men, despite Kinsey’s assumption.
Since the clitoris is the sex organ of the vaginally frigid woman, some women try to create artificial penis-clitoris contact. In the typical dorso-ventral position, the penis does not touch the clitoris. “Anatomy is Fate,” as Freud said. Some women, therefore, request that the position be reversed; man below, woman on top. This in turn leads to exaggeration of neurotic difficulties in many men; they are frequently impotent in this position. Especially the unconsciously passive-feminine man (the hysterical type), who is perpetually fighting off his own inner passivity through the assumption of the He-Man attitude, fails in this situation.
In short, neurotic misery is inexhaustible.
One of the most fantastic tales the female volunteers told Kinsey (who believed it), was that of multiple orgasm. Allegedly, 14 per cent of these women claimed to experience it; this “interestingly enough, was true not only of females who responded every time they had coitus, but also of some of the females who had responded to orgasm only part of the time. In either event the female may have had two or three or even as many as a dozen or more orgasms in a relationship in which her husband ejaculated only once.” (II, pp. 375-6)
Multiple orgasm is an exceptional experience. The 14 per cent of Kinsey’s volunteers—all vaginally frigid—belonged obviously to the nymphomanic type of frigidity where excitement mounts repeatedly without reaching a climax; the sex of these women consists of a continuous “almost reached it.” Not being familiar with this medical fact (nymphomania is not even listed in the index!), Kinsey was taken in by the near-misses which these women represented as multiple orgasm. This is visible from the description: “if she (the female) is capable of multiple orgasm and is not yet satisfied. ...” (p. 376) Clinical experience proves that even those exceptional women who are capable of multiple orgasm consider this a “plus,” not a necessity. More likely is the other part of the sentence: “If a female has not yet reached orgasm, or if she is capable of multiple orgasm and is not yet satisfied sexually, the male who is incapable of proceeding may leave his wife much disturbed.” (p. 376) Still, Kinsey-declared premature ejaculation normal!
The identical female prevarication dished out to Kinsey is the story of women who “always” reach an orgasm. Briefly, such women don’t exist.
• The “Trick’'’-Theory. A widespread misconception is the assumption that man must be in possession of specific trick-techniques in order to arouse woman. There is no truth in this assumption at all. Love, tenderness, mutual respect, normal potency and some experience are the best guides. The fallacious theory has given rise to many fruitless experiments on the part of women who have entered upon affairs with roués and “wolves” in the belief that the “professional” is better equipped than the amateur.
Under normal conditions, every woman requires massage of the clitoris as a preliminary to intercourse. (It goes without saying that a mood of loving tenderness is an equally essential prerequisite.) The manipulation of the clitoris is important, not only because it is the starting point for sexual stimulation, but because the clitoris always retains some of its infantile erogeneity. (In childhood, the clitoris is the sex-organ of the girl.) After puberty, some portions of its active deposits become passive (Freud’s “passivity push”), and shift to vaginal receptivity and the subsequent psychosexual reflex of vaginal orgasm.
Under pathologic conditions, what is normal as a preparatory act often becomes the main—and indeed only—event. The passivity push may be present but virtually invisible because of neurotic inhibitions; in these cases the women resents as an “interruption” any move to abandon clitoris stimulation and proceed to intercourse proper, since she expects nothing from the second phase. If the woman plays the usual comedy, and pretends to have vaginal orgasm, she cannot ask for continuation of clitoris stimulation after the man’s orgasm, and is left with resentment, anger, or depression. If she is less reticent, "and asks for extended clitoris massage before intercourse (sometimes half an hour of manipulation), another problem must be dealt with—the man’s inability to maintain his erection or hold on to his sperm. This may seem like a problem in timing; in real life it is marital tragedy.
The result is compromise—unsatisfactory to both partners.
The preparatory acts requested are not always as simple as massage of the clitoris. Complicated and sometimes peculiar prerequisites are devised. Here is an example: One woman required that her husband scratch her back, or her anal region, for half an hour. In the meantime her husband had to maintain his erection, for his wife was not yet “ready.” In some cases there is interest only in having the nipples massaged, or there is predilection for oral acts. In cases where the man, because of his neurosis, insists exclusively on oral acts, there is refusal of precisely these acts. These brief references represent only a small sector of the prevailing sexual maladjustment.
A normal woman, after a few minutes of clitoris massage, wants vaginal insertion. A frigid woman resents interruption of clitoris massage and does not want vaginal insertion. When a patient declares that “she doesn’t care for that,” her reply indicates vaginal frigidity.
As previously noted, frigid women often simulate vaginal enjoyment in a conscious effort to conceal their frigidity.
Rarely, the frigid woman rejects clitoris massage and wants only insertion. There are two reasons for this. She may have neurotic pain in the clitoris which makes even preparatory acts unpleasant; her aim, then, is to shorten a disagreeable experience. Or she may unconsciously identify the clitoris with the nipple of the pre-Oedipal mother. The clitoris is then so burdened with unconscious conflict that even the recollection is resented, and penetration is apathetically accepted as masochistically perceived “piercing.”
Normally the mind does not wander during intercourse. When fantasies occur—not occasionally, but consistently—they represent a neurotic sign. It is not rare for frigid women to have fantasies of masochistic tortures, or romantic love scenes with an imaginary hero, during intercourse.
The normal mood after intercourse is a combination of tender approval of the man, contentment, gratitude, release of tension, and desire to sleep. Intercourse leaves the frigid woman with resentment, fury, a long list of complaints, or a reaction of sullen silence. Later, she is sleepless, or wishes to masturbate. These are descriptions of the two extremes; there are also women who feel only detachment.
Freud has said that sexual satisfaction is the best sleeping potion. The opposite extreme is sleeplessness; it is encountered in some frigid women.
The woman who has experienced sexual satisfaction arises with a cheerful, optimistic attitude. She does her work more efficiently than usual. The frigid and sexually frustrated woman is “tired”, bitter, quarrelsome, pessimistic.
Sex, though biologically present in every human being, goes through complicated (not simple) transformations before maturity is reached. Kinsey overlooks the complex mechanisms of inner—unconscious —conscience; these are fastened to external prohibitions, whatever they may be. A culture without taboos does not exist; all anthropologists attest to this universal rule. Unless one understands the punitive role of the superego, and the psychic masochistic defense of the unconscious ego, it is hopeless to attempt to understand human actions and reactions.
The elder Huxley defined science as “a beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact.” Kinsey’s theory is not even “beautiful”—it is too one-dimensional for that. The “theory” behind his statistics is no more than a conglomeration of superficialities: “since people have sex organs for sex and mouths for speech, and an interviewer has a mouth to ask questions with, here is a basis for us to do business on.” This highly naive hypothesis is punctured and killed by the “ugly fact” that the unconscious exists, and plays a considerable part in dictating the replies of Kinsey’s volunteers. These answers and the motives behind them, had to be interpreted; the fact that only a select, full or half-neurotic, full or half-consciously dissimulating group was willing to be interviewed had also to be reckoned with. It is evident that the replies were neither interpreted nor in any way discounted, and in this way a completely distorted picture was produced. Unfortunately, too many naive people have taken the picture at face value.
H. L. Mencken is responsible for this telling aphorism: “There is a solution to every human problem: neat, plausible and—wrong.” Kinsey followed precisely the sequence outlined by the satirist. His solutions are over-dimensional simplifications; his test objects were unreliable witnesses—their answers and dissimulations were naively “checked,” and then naively swallowed whole, and grossly schematized; where he encountered contradictions, he declared the problem nonexistent; last but not least, the bothersome unconscious was disposed of in cavalier fashion, it was simply not acknowledged as a factor at all. Thus basic facts were disregarded and blind spots (scotoma) substituted.
Kinsey has revived an old triad of errors in the science of sex: simplification, scotomization, schematization. Despite his good intentions, the end effect of his investigation has been to damage scientific sexology. But, said Douglas Jerrold, “in this world truth can wait; she’s accustomed to it.” Now that Kinsey’s conclusions have been so widely publicized, the truth about sex will just have to wait a bit longer.