For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

Saucium · 25-08-14 15:15:03

Hallo, friends. This is just to ask the men if anyone has engaged in multiple orgasm training here (or is already at that point). I'm referring to the kind of dry orgasm that involves disciplined, non-ejaculation as outlined by Mantak Chia and many others. I am still undergoing training and I'd like to compare notes with those who are doing the same or those who have mastered the discipline already.

Oddly enough, it is easier for me if I do not watch the IFM videos while I pleasure myself. The extremely erotic nature of the videos makes control more ejaculatory challenging and distracts me from being aware of my arousal level. I am better able to discipline myself when I lie on my bed. The process makes me feel warm and tingly all over, especially in the legs, and I find that I can keep at it for a longer time. There are times when I get the timing wrong, though.

What about you guys? What was/is your experience like?

Last edited by Saucium (25-08-14 15:18:16)

AmyDiamond · 17-09-14 09:10:59

Hello, yes, I turned to tantric sex last year and almost without understanding how I adopted it, I started multi orgasm. This "ability" initially was difficult to maintain, but now I sometimes orgasm, for example, along my spine when relaxing in bed to go to sleep. Being tantra, of course love -making does not tire me, but invigorate me; which is why I feel more energized after sex than before sex. I too have been very inspired by Mantak Chia, or rather, I use his book(s) as hand books. I was introduced to multi orgasmic and non-ejaculatory orgasms by a woman who usually train women to become multi orgasmic, which we trained with instructions, no physical contact needed.
During a several day workshop course held by Barbara Carrellas from N.Y., Urban Tantra, I met a man who was baffled by the fact that some of us men on the course did not ejaculate. "Then"; he asked , "what's the point?" I was silenced for a second. I could not believe his question. "What do you mean", I asked and tried to be tactful when saying that "Well, the objective of making love is not ejaculation; it's being together with somebody whom you love". He still wouldn't understand, but I interpreted the reaction from his now silent wife who sort of froze, that she felt there was something important in this discussion playing out.

A woman sitting next to me said that she had never met a man who stopped ejaculating wanting to return to mindless ejaculation. And I understand why. I was always "good" at controlling my ejaculations, but prior to engaging in tantra, I could only stop myself from ejaculating and cut off the erotic flow in the process. This all became a bit technical and momentarily also turned my focus from the woman I was with, which is no good. Now I do tantra techniques meaning I can control ejaculation without lessening my presence with my partner and without stopping the flow. But I have not completely stopped ejaculating, I have actually returned to ejaculation, but I do it sparingly and , above all, not habitually and thoughtlessly automatically. There is no right and wrong in this, like some tantra people seem to believe, but it is always good not to be obsessive about things.

Having said that, I think I must add that I do not masturbate to video clips. I enjoy the beauty of the wonderful contributors here at ifm and they really get to me, arouse me, and make me feel very horny and all sorts of feelings (and sometimes make me feel shy), but I separate my watching ifm videos from my feeling myself. My reasons are that I actually think that sex depiction kills sexuality. If you've read Mantak Chia, you know what I mean. With videos, our experience of sex is transported from our body to our mind, where sex turns from an emotion to a thought-image of someone else’s *idea* of sex, an idea that is marketable. And this money connection is decidedly unsexy. Chia recommend men who have become semi-impotent from masturbating to porn, to start multi-orgasmic practice by masturbating to the preferred porn, but to shut the porn off as soon as possible and continue practice while returning attention home to one's own body.

Also, please have a look at Australian educator Janet McGeever. She is amazing. She truly is. See her TEDx-talk "It's called making love, isn't it". I subscribe one hundred percent to what she tells us. YouTube link below:

It's Called Making Love, Isn't It

Last edited by AmyDiamond (17-09-14 09:17:47)

viva · 18-09-14 03:14:33

Interesting stuff. I struggled with the video by Janet McGeever, possibly because I myself am an archetype of a young person raised on "porn." Porn seems to make her almost cry. It makes her so sad. Whereas porn and porn-type interactions make me feel happy, special, and fun... while deep breathing, intentional compassion, and gentle caresses make me feel squirmy, bored and weird.

Janet Mcgeever draws a value line between people who experience pleasure which depends on intellectual AND physical stimulation, and people who can focus completely on physical stimulation. Is one type of loving better than another, or are some people just into different things?

I was always keen for and searching out dirty sex stuff. From quite a young age I was thrilled to discover porno books and then chatrooms full of filthy, incredibly stimulating sexual material. This material wasn't about love, so I too learned that sex is separate from love... just like eating ice cream, getting massages, and having a philosophical debate. However, like all those things, sex is better when love is present. It's just, maybe I show love differently. I like scenarios, I like the intellectual stimulation of service - for example, giving a blow job on my knees to someone who is standing will always satisfy me, personally, more than the same act when the man is laying down. I like the visual, I like the intention, I like story. And when you add love to these sex roles and stories, they take on so many levels of pleasure and significance...

I don't think Janet McGeever is wrong, but I can't bring myself to think I'm wrong for being myself, either. Or to even think, "if only I'd been raised with more love..." Maybe some women would be more classically "romantic", and then have to learn how to spice things up a little, get comfortable with bedroom eyes, seduction and the joys of seeing cum on their own breasts. I'm all spice from the get-go, and I have to learn how to go sweet, how to let go and relax and be in my body.

We all have different lessons to learn, but I can't go and say, necessarily, that one is better than the other. From a girl's POV, yeah it kinda sucks to have grown up all porny and now kinda struggle to accept tenderness... but it also kinda sucks to have been sheltered from sexual content and brought up on romantic, candlelit and sanitized ideas of sex, only to be super embarrassed and icked out when your husband asks you to lick his asshole. Somehow I feel like my lesson is easier than the other girl's.

AmyDiamond · 18-09-14 07:12:05

@Viva:
Your post is indeed a very interesting one, and I must say that I definitely think it is a valid description of a liberating way of thinking and living. Liberating is the key word here, the way you present the settings; the liberty to be who we are, without being told to be romantic, planning the wedding 25 years in advance and "saving" ourselves for that occasion (more likely "losing" ourselves in the mean time). To be "slutty" (in the best sense of the word), to be free. Thank you for your input. Yes, indeed, to my mind you reason well.

You may be right that love and sex are different things. Many people say that. I think of it the opposite way (which was the reason why I was excluded from a forum belonging to a weird tantric sex cult which originated in Australia), because I feel that sex is -- if not more -- at least loving actions. And loving actions breed love. I, at least, would not engage in sexual acts with someone whom I loathe; there must be a seed of love or other warm feelings for her.

McGeever, however, does not so much speak of sex and love in terms of sex vs. love. She is more into the discussion of sex vs. porn as opposed to "porn is sex". This I subscribe to. To my mind, people confuse porn with sex. To me those things have rather little to do with each other. This confusion makes people live in confused manners. They start to practice sex as if it was porn. They start performing. Young girls who dislike anal sex or are intimidated by "disgusting" fellatio, are being pushed to do it by porn watching boys. Everybody thinks some sexual practices are a must nowadays, it seems. Boys lick their girlfriends in a manner done in videos to show the clit being licked, whereas in real sex, many women prefer to feel the tongue in more varied ways, perhaps in ways that are not so visible to onlookers, as in lips covering the whole of the "horse shoe" and not very graphical but very sensuous full-mouth sucking and what have you not. Amateur porn often mimic commercial porn: The cameras and web cameras focus mainly on the girl, while the boy is reduced to a penis, the rest of his body often out of frame; she will look into the camera and he not so much, sighing in stereotype manners; all performed as for the male eye. If one was to film a long love-making session where two people have sex to be present with each other and to share intense sensations and emotions, the film would be rather boring and not get many "likes" on whatever site for watching porn, because the problem of porn will always be: "How to get the state of arousal and pleasure across to the viewer?" Hence all the faked orgasms, loud moans, visible cumshots, cumshots with fake cum, etc.

To be perfectly honest, I have rarely seen amateur porn that looks as natural as the i.f.m. videos, which now, writing about it, seems odd. And a bit alarming. A nurse told me that young virgin boys in their mid- to upper teens, sometimes ask her "If I get together with a girl, how much Viagra should I take, and how far in advance?" The answer is, of course, "None at all, whatsoever!" But they do not know this.

By and by, McGeever was a sort of addendum to my post to Mr. Saucium, dealing with the the multi-orgasmic man way of life, which both he and I are interested in. Also, McGeever and Chia (to whom Mr.Saucium refers) are into tantric practice and slow sex practices, and such practices, descriptions and even philosophy (!) differ quite a bit to sex-making the ways I suppose most people think of it. One of them being that we men get sexually empowered by them. Without them we cannot be multi orgasmic. With practice, we can make love hours on end just as women can, day after day, and become energized by it, rather than energy deprived zombies just turning on our sides to snore, in bed or at work the day after. But as you say, it's not a question of right or wrong, good or bad. There are many walks of life to enjoy./
Love dear sexy one, from Sweden!

viva · 18-09-14 08:59:49

I really like what you say about these male orgasmic practices being empowering for men. I feel like we expect and teach men to only take their physical pleasure in one essential way, by thrusting repeatedly into a damp, warm place, often laughing off/referring to male sexuality as simple. In my mind, to be a good lover a man must please his mate by getting real hard, lasting to infinity (but being ready to come and ejaculate visibly when it's time), and moreover maintaining a perfect balance of constant arousal and constant awareness of the woman he's having sex with. For a woman, to be a good lover she must know her body, communicate her needs and desires clearly, be familiar with her own orgasm, and be ready to open up and relax to her lover's ministrations. In my own private little culture-bubble, women are encouraged to take space in bed, orgasm as much as possible, and men are encouraged to deny themselves orgasm for as long as possible.

This is theoretically at odds with what we're taught by our image and sex fueled society. Nevertheless, it's how I see and have experienced the world of sex. The thin veneer, that a woman is present for a man's pleasure, the whole male-gaze thing, seems obvious to me as a first-level ruse, a game we play. After the game, the truth is known - a man who cannot satisfy his partner in this very specific way is no man at all. And a woman who cannot open up and experience evident pleasure (again, in this very specific way) is non-satisfactory as well.

The problem with this dichotomy is that the woman's tasks are all things that we can learn and work towards, but the male tasks are mostly out of his control. He either is quality, sexually, or he's not. If a man struggles with erection, we offer only medication, if he comes too quickly, the only solution society offers is for him to think about zombie grandmas playing baseball.

When I was younger, I wanted men to like me, and I didn't want them to get too close. I was highly cerebral and visual in the sex I had - performing, making them the focus of my attention, and showing off how sexy and kinky and open-minded I was. And I had fun times.... but I think I often didn't fully please my partners, because I wouldn't let them really please me.

I understand how it could be hard for men, because in this worldview, I am empowered. All I have to do to be a better lover is work on myself so that I am more open and receptive, and then I am perfect just the way I am. But a man can't just work on himself - he has to also succeed. Succeed in lasting, maintaining control, maintaining erection - and without tantra and male orgasm consciousness, there's no method, no real way, for him to improve himself.

Oh dear it's getting late and I have to leave work and I haven't gone back over this and it's full of repetition and generalizations and it's all heterocentric and confusing... but I don't want to delete it, so there it is. I have a lot of thoughts on this topic and it all touches close to home because... well... sex and love... are so important to me.

And also I'm so happy to hear men expressing their feelings about sex and insecurity and empowerment. It's rare and good.

studley · 07-10-14 03:48:13

NoI have not engaged in multiple orgasmic training. I think I am a pretty normal guy, and have had a pretty normal past sex life. I think I can only recall a couple times in my whole life that I have had multiple orgasms. It always has been such a release to have one, or so intense that my body completely relaxes after am orgasm. I really don't think that I wanted a second orgasm at the moment. Although maybe an hour or two later I could be aroused enough to desire it or attempt it.
But that was my past. I am nearly 60 years old now. Unfortunately I am now just happy to have a strong enough, and long lasting enough erection to fully satisfy my wife, and for me to climax. That is a reality that has not come easily for me. But it is what it is.

Abraxis · 18-10-14 00:29:49

I used to do it all the time when I was a younger. When I was a virgin, I used to read about sex all the time (very nerdy, I know). Vaginal anatomy, cunnilingus techniques, the psychology of intimacy, erogenous zones and how to stimulate them... Everything I could find on the internet relating to sex, sexuality, and women, I found and read. I used to masturbate a lot too of course and found out you could hold the ejaculate back, wait about 10 seconds, then start all over again. So I started doing it all the time, cause, well, more masturbation was better than less masturbation.

First girl I slept with at 17 (and, admittedly only) was crazy about the whole thing. We had sex constantly everywhere we could everyday for months. Once we even went for over 7 hours straight, we could barely make it down to the kitchen afterward we were so exhausted, I mean literally crawling to get some peanut butter for energy.

I can't do it as well anymore, as I got older and sex ceased to be such a mystery, I stopped caring as much about my sexual performance. I can still do it, if for some reason I decide I want to. I just have no motivation to do it when I'm alone, and for personal reasons havn't been with a girl in ages.

You just have to wait for that moment you know the orgasm is going to be inevitable, cease all stimulation immediately and tighten that same muscle you use when peeing. It will prevent ejaculation if the muscle is strong enough. Even the slightest touch can trigger it though, so if you're having sex, you'll need to pull out, and make sure she knows not to touch it. You really need to focus hard on keeping that muscle tight regardless of what seems natural. Once that's over with, you risk losing your erection if you're not properly motivated, your brain can temporarily fall into that post ejaculation state of being uninterested in sex. You need to shift focus onto the most arousing thing you can. Your brain will sorta catch up, realizing you can still have sex and go back into sex mode. It gets easier everytime you do it (in a session), first time is always much harder than recurring instances.

Make sure you tell the girl you're with what you're planning to do before hand. I imagine you'd seem pretty damn weird otherwise and would probably really freak her out.

Last edited by Abraxis (18-10-14 03:33:36)

LydiaBennett · 23-10-14 06:15:16

studley wrote:

NoI have not engaged in multiple orgasmic training. I think I am a pretty normal guy, and have had a pretty normal past sex life. I think I can only recall a couple times in my whole life that I have had multiple orgasms. It always has been such a release to have one, or so intense that my body completely relaxes after am orgasm. I really don't think that I wanted a second orgasm at the moment. Although maybe an hour or two later I could be aroused enough to desire it or attempt it.
But that was my past. I am nearly 60 years old now. Unfortunately I am now just happy to have a strong enough, and long lasting enough erection to fully satisfy my wife, and for me to climax. That is a reality that has not come easily for me. But it is what it is.

here here, darling. and you are blessed that your wife still desires YOU.
one cannot coach DESIRE.

jack_justjack · 28-10-14 02:34:23

In high school 2-3 days was the norm. I'm much older now and It's painful without a days rest.

#1 25-08-14 15:15:03

For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#2 17-09-14 09:10:59

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#3 18-09-14 03:14:33

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#4 18-09-14 07:12:05

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#5 18-09-14 08:59:49

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#6 07-10-14 03:48:13

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#7 18-10-14 00:29:49

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#8 23-10-14 06:15:16

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

#9 28-10-14 02:34:23

Re: For the guys: has anyone here engaged in multiple orgasm training?

Board footer