Our society has trained us to think that sex equals orgasm but what if a greater connection is to be found by redefining what sex actually is. The textbook definition of sexual intercourse is "heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis" but we all know that sex takes on many forms. If we were to use the textbook definition, oral sex, anal sex, pegging nor any other sex act not defined as heterosexual vaginal penis insertion. I think we can all establish that at least Merriam Webster's definition is stupid. Let's expand our quest for definition to the word intercourse "physical sexual contact between individuals that involves the genitalia of at least one person". That definition gets us a little bit closer to accuracy. Accurate or not, it should be noted that neither of those definitions include anything about ejaculation. Society tells us that a sex act is defined by the male ejaculation. Sex starts when he gets hard and ends when he ejaculates. This of course leaves half of the equation in the lurch since our orgasms simply don't matter but that is a topic for another day, let's not allow Emma to get sidetracked here. I mean, she is already talking about herself in the third person. Sheesh.
So we've established that sex does not equal orgasm by either partner. Ok lets go back to the old dictionary for a definition of Karezza: Coitus Reservatus or "prolonged coitus in which ejaculation of sperm is deliberately withheld." Karezza is sex devoid of male ejaculation. Alright, I'll set my dictionary down for now.
Karezza is an approach to sexual satisfaction that fosters a deeply emotional connection without orgasm that is unique to an orgasm-less sexual experience.
Nature wants us to have multiple partners and we are designed to procreate and breed. Pair bonding is inherently unnatural to us but many of us find great pleasure in having a long term partnership with another.
Do you ever find yourself attracted to your partner emotionally but not craving him sexually? Interestingly enough, the female body is designed to desire different men for different purposes at different points in our hormonal cycle. This means that we want some men for sex and other men for emotional support. We may want our emotional support from one source but desire physical needs from another. If this all sounds very complicated, it is. To top things off, hormonal birth control takes female attraction confusion to an entirely new level.
I received a contact form several nights ago from a man that asked why I don't just date an alpha male if I want someone like that. Why "put Kev through" non monogamy when he isn't what I am looking for? To correct him straightaway; Kev IS what I am looking for but I think we should clarify that women approach relationships in two different ways. …
Emma, I’m really pleased to see you addressing this topic. Karezza completely changed sex for my partner and I since we started 5 years ago. We now “connect” at least five times a week, floating in a cloud of bliss for 30-90 minutes. We do orgasm occasionally, which is fine except it takes me a few days to get my mojo back, which I hate, hers not so much. I have difficulty holding back my ejaculation when she orgasms, but have learned how to orgasm without ejaculation, sometimes… I get excited just thinking about it – typing this response in self-imposed chastity wearing a Holy Trainer, haha. Besides Karezza practice benefiting our relationship, it’s also really upped my general energy level, probably just due to not having a refractory period of “down-time”. I’m 74, my partner is 82, we’ve been together 53 years.
Regarding books, I recommend Diana Richardson’s Slow Sex or Tantric Orgasm for Women. Also, J. William Lloyd’s and Alice B. Stockham’s old books are available on Kindle or scattered through the internet. There is also some really bad advice out there, such as The Gentleman’s Guide to Karezza Sex by Nick Brothermore.
There are other approaches we’ve tried with semen retention, which for me started after reading Yoga Girl’s blog a few years ago. Although my partner doesn’t like to take charge of when I can cum, the thought of it is very exciting for me. Have you seen A Married Woman’s Guide at https://toy4her.wordpress.com?
Having ED, what my wife and I do could probably be described as a form of Karezza. I never thought of it but I suppose it resembles it. I rarely come close to ejaculating due to a past health issue, so I try to pleasure my wife as best I can and get pleasure from pleasuring her. I know the chastity device I wear most of the time is basically theatre, though the lock is real and the device is there much of the time. It’s a reminder that I asked her to be in charge. Ironically, my wife enjoys our relationship since she is at the center of it. I pleasure her and depend on her for teasing or prostate play.
Perhaps in support of how society has trained us to view heterosexual relationships, I offer this quote from that and widely known great philosopher (unknown):
“When a woman is in love, she offers sex. When a man wants sex, he offers love.” – unknown
Thanks! I like your quote but from what I’ve learned on my journey, I think your quote vastly oversimplifies male and female motivation. I don’t think sex drives of either gender are quite that transactional but there is a glimmer of truth to it.
Hi Emma! First of all the best intimate sex for me is intercourse with a mutual orgasm. Yes it can be tricky to achieve but SO WORTH IT! I’m probably a bit different from the typical man in that the vulnerability of it immediately makes me seek to be cuddled. I will lay on my side cock up a leg and an arm and bury my face in her neck. The reaction to this ls so spontaneous there is no way that it can be anything but real. I get this ‘squeal’ of absolute delight and then she attempts to squeeze me to death! This is Exactly the reassurance that I need at that point. On the point of the point of the bonding guy and the relationship guy I get it. I am the ideal relationship guy,I love intament communication, giving love, etc, etc but if you go seek to get your sexual needs met with some hunk of beefcake your gonna lose me. That’s me, if it works for you and your lover than that’s great but there is one more point to consider. If you want children and find them with the’ mateing’ guy then it’s going to be HIS jeans that are passed along. Is this what you really want for the next generation?
There is certainly a conversation to be had about love, needs, satisfaction and sexuality. The balance will be different for every couple. The physical aspect of many relationships hits a plateau or decline after a number of years and the light of desire become dull for many of us. The love for our partner is still as strong as ever but at the risk of becoming more of a friendship. I urge you to communicate with your partner and understand limits and needs to work out the best balance for you.
There is a song by Lit which I always thought captures the life cycle of many relationships:
“You make me come. You make me complete. You make me completely miserable.”
Hi Emma, interesting take as always.
I don’t think I go along with the one guy for fucking and the other for loving scenario, for me it seems that our species is evolved for monogamy, not least because of the very long time our children take to grow up and leave the nest.
However, that’s all in our genetic past and our evolved brains have discovered entertainment and imagination as our social evolution gives us leisure time, so I think what we do with relationships and genitals these days is more linked to the latter.
Of course, our sexual natures and appetites have been messed with over centuries by those seeking power and control over us, notably organised religions that have ruined millions of lives. It’s not too long ago that attitudes such as yours and mine would have seen us persecuted and worse.
Sorry, off-track there, except to say that thank goodness I’m alive now in an age where anything other than missionary-seeking-pregnancy is an aberration.
When I began my journey into FLR, submission and chastity I did spend some time looking at Karezza because of its permanent orgasm-denial aspect. Those who practice it though seem to me to be into spirituality rather than kink, and cock cages don’t seem to be part of it. That’s not to say of course that kink can’t have spiritual aspects, but they’re not central as in Karezza.
Karezza also seems to prefer if not require both partners to be participants, so it’s a mutual equal thing rather than a power thing which, as a submissive, I need. My wife likes lots of orgasms and, as she sees the benefits to her of having me permanently orgasm-free, she also has grown to enjoy her power, so again that doesn’t fit in with Karezza. She, of course, bounces back from multiple orgasms immediately while I definitely do not (I have a hormonal downer which takes some days to leave me).
But we do have our big brains and our appetites and preferences, so that gives us a huge resource-pack from which to decide what works for us and to tinker with those resources to make them fit even better. It may not have been the original intent of the inventor, but I go straight to my bottom line: if it feels good and doesn’t do harm, do that.
Thank you for your opinions, I absolutely appreciate your perspectives. I personally don’t think we are evolved for monogamy, I think that monogamy is a societal imposition. I product of our environment and the pregnancy condition. Would your opinion change if you rejected the supposition that we were evolved for monogamy? Does it matter? Just curious.
You are correct, traditional Karezza does forego orgasms of both partners. I was trying to reach out to the Karezza couple (mentioned above) because it didn’t seem like that was the version of Karezza that they practice. I also question benefits of female orgasm denial. It seems to me that the sexual side of our brains simply flips off when regular orgasms are not present. I know I’ve gone through periods in my life where that is the case. Periods of stress and anxiety. Even when the stress and anxiety went away, the sexual drive was missing until I started exercising that desire.
When you say we are not evolved for monogamy, I’m not sure what that means. I think human history and experience have shifted us toward monogamy, but we realize it is a compromise and often a very bad compromise. Non-monogamy carries the risk of losing someone we love, but it also affords us what monogamy denies: sexual variety and sexual growth through the cross pollination of new ideas about what sex is and what sex can be. I guess I would say that our mammalian brain has a biological imperative to spread our DNA as far as it can. But we also seek stability. Emma, your other post about how women desire a bonding partner and a mating partner is “right on.” Of course, I would disagree that that is strictly for women because I think men equally want one woman as our soulmate and other women who fulfill sexual desires and fetishes. The problem is that our partners are often uncomfortable with that arrangement because they fear losing us. Or perhaps they are jealous that others get to share us. Even with compersion it is hard for many couples to square that circle, but I have no doubt it can be done if a couple can learn to have deep abiding love while allowing for the possibility of extra partners when the relationship needs spice.
Emma, I think I agree with you that we are not evolved for monogamy. But I am curious whether that applies only to women or to men and women equally. You describe a relationship in which the woman has a “bonding partner” and a “mating partner”—or perhaps more than one mating partner depending on her sex drive and her desire for variety? I take it that you would expect your bonding partner to be faithful to you. In other words, your bonding partner should be monogamous. Is that correct? Does that mean that you see monogamy as natural for men but not for women?
I identify with the bonding partner you describe. My wife has had sex with other men, but we have agreed that I am to be faithful to her. Also, she rarely has penetrative sex with me because she finds that kind of sex more satisfying with other men who are better at it. I make love to my wife in other ways that are deeply satisfying, but we don’t “fuck”, as you put it.
Does that mean that non-monogamy is natural for my wife but not for me? I don’t think so. I think I also have a natural craving for sexual variety. But even greater than my natural desire for sexual variety is the masochistic pleasure I get from the seeming unfairness or inequality of our arrangement. That seems strange even to me, but that’s just how I am.
Anyway, I wonder how you see your arrangement with Kev. Do you see him as being naturally monogamous, unlike you, or do you see his faithfulness to you as a sort of sacrifice he makes to deepen his emotional bond to you?
I think this will be different from couple to couple. Most men desire sexual variety but when they have a constant sexual supply, they are satiated. Did you know that 70% of divorces are initiated by women? If you look at college educated couples, 90% of divorces are initiated by women. I think this statistic is relevant because most men will stay in a bad situation as long as some of their sexual needs are being met.
As you know, female sexuality is more complex than that of men. Men will agree to many things when they are at a state of high arousal. Women still retain a greater semblance of rational thought even when aroused. Have I made some bad decisions due to being horny? I think we all have. Of course.
I think that monogamy is a social construct, like gender definition – to some extent. We built monogamy because it suited both genders. Men were able to own women a’la property. Women were able to have a greater sense of security that their partner would be around to protect her and her younguns. Over time, monogamy evolved into what we now know as marriage. We parade ourselves in front of our family and friends to show how great our relationship is. This creates a level of publicity for the coupling and guilt if the coupling were to crumble.
As society evolves, partnership is more important because of financial constraints but I don’t think that monogamy is as important. The definition of marriage could change to that of a social partner. Partnered life does not need to mean monogamous life, although many couples would probably prefer it. Sex isn’t about fairness, nor is life. Women endure childbirth, period cramps while men endure a greater responsibility for work and generating wealth to support the family accompanied by somewhat shorter lifespans.
Fairness is not a thing but equal support for a couple’s sexual needs is intensely important. Men need sexual attention because many men find their sexuality as a core component of their self confidence and identity as a man. Women don’t typically find the same identity with their sexuality although some do. Faithfulness is not a sacrifice, it is just a part of the partnership. In a reciprocal partnership, both partners are obligated to fulfill the needs of the other partner. Sometimes those needs aren’t the same because we aren’t the same. Our needs aren’t the same.
Kev desires a deep bond with me and I with him. He needs to be desired for who he is as a man (emotionally) and desired for his physical characteristics (physically). Those needs can be fulfilled completely by me. During the beginning of our relationship, my physical and emotional needs could be met completely by him as well. After a time, I noticed that I thrived on the attention of others when we went out. Coincidentally, or maybe not this aligned with the time I became obsessed with fitness but that is a topic I want to explore on another day. The eyes of other men and to a lesser extent, women became important to me. I don’t do too much with my personal social media but I started to find loads of value in the likes that I received. Was I seeking validation for the dedication to my fitness regimen? Ok ok, we will come back to that later. I realized that my emotional needs were being met but my physical needs were sputtering. The attention that I received elsewhere was fueling my flame. When I would flirt with a guy while out at the grocery store, I’d come home and really take out some energy on Kev and of course we discussed this.
HIs body and looks is completely the type that I found myself flirting with. I was just seeking new, seeking butterflies and seeking validation. That validation I think is where men and women differ mostly but we are all stronger in predominately feminine and masculine traits despite the gender we identify with. Have I confused things more with my long response? Most likely but hopefully you’ve come along for the ride of my thought process. As you can see, it isn’t an easy answer.
Yes, I think I can understand what you are saying. Because men’s sexual needs are more easily satiated than the sexual needs of women, a wife can give her husband all the sexual attention he needs, but she may need more than one man to satisfy her needs. That rings true to me, but then I am not sure I am a normal man. One thing is certain: when my wife enjoys the attentions of other men, she seems to have more sexual energy to give to me. That means that if I tried to keep her sexual energy to myself by demanding sexual fidelity of her, that would diminish the erotic energy between us. But because my male sexual energy is more limited, my having sex with another woman would deplete the sexual energy available to my wife. Thus, it is beneficial for our marriage for my wife to have sexual liberties that are denied to me. Is that what you are thinking?
Yes I think so. I know after a night of dancing or flirting I take out my intensely heightened sexual energy on Kev. This is the same for him so I think the arousal level is similar for both of us. Where things begin to differ is when we go through with some sort of physical intimacy such as making out or further.
The male sexual energy is better focused on one female while the female version of sexuality is amplified as it is exercised. If you feel sexy in one aspect of your life, you feel sexy in all aspects of your life. I think there is a point of differentiation that I cannot quite put my finger on. After that precipice is reached, the female becomes more empowered and confident while the male becomes depleted and less focused. I am of course only speaking for my frame of reference which includes my research and my first hand knowledge of myself and Kev. I’m sure others will have different perspectives.
Agree? Disagree? I’m certainly interested in hearing from anyone that might be able to articulate my thoughts better than I.
I feel this blog is beyond agreement or disagreement. It is about a particular way of seeing the world. There are statements which don’t ring true for me, but I know that there are men and women who agree with things like:
“…male sexual energy is better focused on one female…”
“…female sexuality is more complicated than that of men…”
“… That validation I think is where men and women differ…”
These broad generalizations are not so much facts as templates which form a prism through which you and the intended audience view the world.
I agree with you and remember that many of my opinions are based solely on my research and personal experience. As are yours. The only truths that I bring to the table are peer reviewed studies of which there are few but I do reference them from time to time. Sadly most of the research in terms of sexuality is hypothesis and conjecture. So yes. Come with me on the journey and take my truths to be your own where they suit you and reject those that don’t apply.
Emma, what you say rings true to me, but I am probably not representative of men in general because I am sexually masochistic and submissive. I have a question to clarify the first paragraph of your response. You say that “after a night of dancing or flirting I take out my heightened sexual energy on Kev.” That is exactly how it is for my wife and me. Our sex life is most exciting for both of us when she is enjoying extramarital erotic fun. But I am not certain what you mean when you say when you say, “Where things begin to differ is when we go through with some sort of physical intimacy such as making out or further.” Does the “we” in that sentence refer to you and Kevin or to you and the other men you dance and flirt with?
Thank you @HappyCuckold
“we” in that sentence was the royal we as if I am somehow capable of speaking a general truth that applies to all women on planet earth.
I am a little confused when you say that women don’t need sexual validation as much as men do, but go on to say you needed validation through fitness and flirting. Are you saying you’re more like a man in that sense?
While I am fully supportive of your female dominant view of things, I sometimes get concerned that you’re conflating facts with a worldview.
Women need emotional validation of their sexuality to feel sexually confident however men need physical validation of their sexuality. Fitness and flirting gives me confidence. Physical sexuality gives men emotional validation and relationship security. Sexual confidence for men often comes from their ability to perform in bed rather than just look good. Hopefully that spells out my intent better.
Once again, Emma impresses with her ability to show the world through a different pair of eyes. I am a male dominant and have been for 22 years, but I love to meet female dominants (although Emma is or wasn’t ready to call her relationship BDSM) because I think we learn to become better at what we do when we study the techniques of others. It is also the case that most people are not dominant all the time. Men may be dominant in the office and submissive in bed. And women may be submissive in the office and dominant in bed. Or vice versa.
Reading Emma’s blog is like picking up a James Bond book but Bond is now a woman named Jane. Her bosses are all female and the secretaries and support staff are all male. Jane Bond loves to pinch the office boys on the booty as she goes out to her next assignment. I’m sure some writer on here will steal an idea like that. You’re welcome.
I still have no interest in female led relationships (blech) or caging or “female first” lovemaking. But I doubt I will ever have anything but respect for Emma’s work. It is really top notch. I don’t think any blog in the country is putting out material of this quality on this topic. There is no doubt in my mind that this community will grow in size because of Emma and her dedication to providing intelligent information for women exploring leadership in bed and men seeking to find their place beneath her.
And Emma, props again, your use of verbal manipulation is unlike anything I’ve ever seen. Arguing compellingly that men will enjoy being anally penetrated because it takes the pressure off them to perform. They enjoy this newfound “freedom” which comes from being the toy of their female lover. It is just so beautifully written. I don’t think I have ever seen such well-constructed arguments in support of male submission. In awe. Total props to you, Emma.
As a male submissive, I think I agree with you, spankandblow. I find Emma’s worldview and her arguments for male submission incredibly sexy. But that’s because of the way I am wired, I think, not because her generalizations about the differences between men and women are applicable to everyone.
Thank you so much. The word manipulation gave me pause but I think this was intended as a compliment. I don’t intend to be manipulative but I acknowledge that some level of persuasion is necessary for people to accept a broader comfort zone. We cannot experience happiness unless we reject that which makes us apathetic and embrace something new. So I’ll take this as the kindest of compliments which I believe was your intent. If not, let me know so I can shift from my current loving and appreciative mindset to an angry and defensive one. LOL.
There is no doubt that my comments are genuine. I don’t agree with some arguments made on here, so, to me, they sound like verbal manipulation, but it is like advertising. I don’t have to like the product to enjoy the saleswomanship. You are a master at attracting fireflies to your wonderous light. The depth of each one of your articles indicates the degree to which you take your blogging mission seriously. When you wrote the article on CFNM, you chose to include lots of pictures and videos to put a visual imprint on the ideas. This attracts your audience to your message. You really are a master of this medium.
Emma, that is one of the sexiest posts I have ever read. I just had to say that.
Yay! Thank you!
5
1