Ten Sex Myths Exploded

In this age of candor and supercommunication, it has been a pleasure to witness the demise of some of the more irrational and pernicious sex myths. True, many boys still may worry needlessly about masturbation, but (presumably) they no longer believe it will grow hair on their palms, or cause warts, or drive them crazy, or even make them sprout wings. And the average man with a modicum of education probably no longer fears that his sex partner, in passionate embrace, will lock up on him--like a dog--to be pried away only with the aid of a bucket of steaming water.

But the pleasure one feels at this progress, which has come about through increased sex education in the communication media, in the schools and in the counseling professions, is tempered by the realization that for every myth uprooted, another rises to take its place. Sometimes the new freedom of communication works against proper sex education, because it merely spreads superstition and speculation, myth and fallacy, much faster. A best-selling book about sex, if not based on facts, can negatively accomplish in months what it took a chain of whispering children generations to do. And the new mythology has a learned aura about it--partly because of the boost given by the media and partly because it doesn't originate so much in boys' camps as in offices with diplomas on the walls--which makes it more difficult to combat. A lot of it is created with the intention of achieving control over an educated and skeptical population, the idea being that this population will more readily accept restrictions that have a scholarly and plausible ring than they will the old thou shalt nots. We have no quarrel with social control, but we feel that when people in authority prescribe fallacies instead of facts, they risk losing the very control they seek to maintain. There are too many credibility gaps already. Moreover, sexual misinformation tends to increase sexual fear (exactly what it is designed to do, unfortunately) and fear is a cause of much of the sexual distress in society today.

We have chosen for this article ten myths, a few of them as old as Methuselah but still running strong, and others almost as modern as today's headlines but likely to be discussed a good deal longer. We trust that discussion will be leavened with a few facts.

The most satisfying position is The Male Superior

The "missionary" position is certainly the one most frequently employed, but it isn't necessarily the most gratifying. In fact, the female partner generally has more freedom and, hence, more satisfaction if she is above. Another position we recommend--particularly for sexually distressed couples--is the lateral, or side by side. It does not put the responsibility on either partner to accommodate the other. Rather, it makes it possible for either or both to exercise whatever activity is desired at a given time. This position allows the greatest freedom of movement for both partners and it gives the male the greatest security of ejaculatory control.

But there should be no guidelines as to the "best" position. Whichever a couple finds most satisfactory at a given moment is the one that should be used. Many couples--particularly those in the higher educational strata--like to vary their coital positioning, rather than follow any rigid pattern.

Sex during menstruation is unclean and harmful

The erroneous notion that a menstruating woman is dirty and dangerous, still prevalent in modern society, dates back to prehistoric times. J. G. Frazer states, in The Golden Bough: "According to the Talmud, if a woman at the beginning of her period passes between two men, she thereby kills one of them. Peasants of the Lebanon think that [the shadow of] menstruous women... causes flowers to wither and trees to perish, it even arrests the movements of serpents." The Bible declares that anyone lying with a woman within seven days of the onset of her period--even if it lasts only three--"shall be unclean seven days and every bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean."

This is nonsense. Medically, the menstrual flow is in no sense dirty or harmful. But it has been used as a convenient excuse by women wishing to avoid intercourse. As a pathetic example, we have had many reports at our clinic of mothers who force their daughters to wear menstrual pads when going on dates.

This attitude is a residual of the double standard and, as society approaches a sane sex ethic, women should be able simply to say no if they wish to avoid intercourse and men should be secure enough to accept an honest, well-intentioned rejection without considering themselves humiliated.

Actually, many women feel below par during the height of their menstrual flow and they are frequently bothered by cramps. This, and not an irrational taboo, should be sufficient reason to abstain. But if the woman feels up to it, and a small percentage actually experience heightened desire toward the end of their periods, there is no reason for her or her partner to be deprived of the pleasure of sexual intercourse.

Sex should be avoided during pregnancy

"The ban on coition during pregnancy," writes Alex Comfort in his book The Anxiety Makers, "has an interesting history. Hippocrates was against it (together with hill walking, washing and sitting on soft cushions)--Galen was more concerned with abstention during lactation, since intercourse spoiled the taste of the milk and a new conception robbed it of important ingredients. For the anxiety maker, it was an additional means of cutting down the amount of unpleasant and dangerous coition to which the moral athlete was to be exposed."

The mythology about sex during pregnancy has continued apace since those early bans. Dr. J. R. Black, quoted by Comfort, wrote: "Coition during pregnancy is one of the ways in which the predisposition is made for that terrible disease in children, epilepsy." Dr. J. H. Kellogg said: "Indulgence during pregnancy is followed by the worst results of any form of marital excess... the results upon the child are especially disastrous."

Unquestionably, sexual intercourse with a pregnant woman should not be indulged in as lightly as a stroll through the park. There are some precautions to be observed, but they are certainly not of the magnitude dictated by those Comfort rightly describes as the "anxiety makers."

During the first pregnancy, the initial three months may be a difficult period--sexually and otherwise. Many women usually suffer from nausea, vomiting, bloating and a general sense of discomfort. These will tend to blunt her sex drive and reduce her sexual effectiveness. More seriously--but much more rarely--women who have lost at least three early pregnancies may abort when the uterus contracts during orgasm (from either intercourse or masturbation). This has not yet been clinically proved, but it hasn't been disproved, either, and in such cases, it's wise to avoid elevating sexual tensions to orgasmic levels--by any means--during the first three months.

It's also possible that uterine contractions will stimulate labor in the final stages of childbearing in a normally pregnant woman. However, this usually occurs during the terminal period of pregnancy and does not represent a danger; postorgasmic uterine response leading into premature labor is extremely rare.

Apart from these contraindications, there is little to prevent a willing couple from having intercourse during pregnancy. Many women report a level of sexual tension during the three middle months that represents a personal high in their experience. Frequently, their sex drive is unlimited, regardless of how many episodes they may have. One of the explanations is the increased blood supply to the female reproductive organs as pregnancy progresses. This may cause many women to remain in a relatively constant state of sexual excitation.

The primary modern taboo on sex during pregnancy pertains to the final six or eight weeks, when many doctors, as a precautionary measure, proscribe sex. This restriction is generally unnecessary, though the woman herself may find that she is growing lethargic and uncomfortable and, as a result, not very desirous of sex. However, if there is no vaginal bleeding, no pain during intercourse, no broken membranes, and if the woman retains some degree of sexual desire, there is no reason to avoid intercourse right up to the moment of labor.

A small penis is less satisfying to a woman than a large one

This phallic fallacy is one of the most destructive of sexual myths, because belief in it leaves men feeling inadequated and women unfulfilled. For, indeed, a woman who believes that a large penis is necessary to satisfy her will be satisfied with nothing less, even though, physiologically, her belief is totally unwarranted.

Here are the facts. There is a great deal of variation in the size of flaccid penises. But when they become erect, the differences are minimized, because the small flaccid penis grows proportionately bigger than the large flaccid penis. The insignificant differences that still exist among the sizes of erect penises are further minimized by the fact that the vagina accommodates to any size. This occurs because it's a potential rather than an actual space and during the plateau phase of intercourse (between initial excitement and orgasm), it contracts snugly around the penis, regardless of its length or circumference. The male who is fearful of penile shortcomings should also take comfort in knowing that the vagina itself is not very sensitive. Once the penis is inserted and the male begins thrusting, he is providing indirect stimulation to the clitoris, which is the center of female sexual sensitivity. It is this that provides the woman with pleasure, not necessarily the contact between the male sex organ and the vaginal walls.

Prostitutes are either Frigid or Homosexual (or both)

It's difficult to trace the origin of this myth, but one would suspect that it's part and parcel of the new puritanism that tends to infiltrate the social sciences. The old Puritans decreed that sex was sin and, counting on the populace's adherence to religious tenets, let it go at that. But in our modern society, where science has replaced the traditional deities for many people, we find new ways to impose the old restraints. So we no longer point our finger at the whore and declare her sinful; that's too unsophisticated. Rather, we declare that she's sick. It's not considered possible for her to be motivated by economic gain (in a society that thrives on such motivation) nor even by sexual pleasure (it offends the sexual restraint we've worked so hard to achieve to believe that anyone can have that much fun). To make our diagnosis more plausible, we define her sickness as unconscious homosexuality or unconscious antagonism toward men, either or both resulting in frigidity.

There was some justification for the belief that prostitutes rarely experience orgasm in earlier times. Then, when bordellos were the fashion and the girls had a quick turnover of clientele, there was little opportunity for them to turn on during the few minutes with each customer. But today's call-girl, who frequently spends an hour or more--and sometimes the entire night--with each John, has infinitely greater opportunity for orgasmic return. As a consequence, and because prostitutes, like all women (and men), respond to time, place and circumstance, they frequently do experience orgasm.

Finally, it's true that some prostitutes are overt Lesbians. But so are some married women. There is no valid generalization to be made from either statement.

Anal Intercourse is perverted and dangerous

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Thus said the Old Testament (Leviticus 20:13). A host of fallacies and legal proscriptions has proliferated since to enforce this Biblical injunction against "unnatural" intercourse (anal and oral). Both are against the law in almost every state of the Union--even among married partners--and have been blamed for nymphomania, cancer, impotence, insanity, blindness--even backache--among other ailments.

Nothing could be further from the truth, although certain elementary precautions should be observed when performing anal intercourse. Initially, it can be painful; but, presuming that the receiving partner is willing to undergo an uncomfortable breaking-in period and that the male partner (in a heterosexual situation) takes care to avoid contamination of the vaginal tract, there is no reason to fear physical harm from the practice. We have had many reports from men that they withdraw their penis from the rectum and insert it in the vagina just prior to ejaculation. When the man does this, he risks transporting bacteria to the vagina, which may produce severe infection, afflicting not only the vagina but the uterus and Fallopian tubes as well. An additional danger in both heterosexual and homosexual anal intercourse is that bacteria may enter the penile passage and cause prostatic, bladder or kidney infections. These usually can be prevented if a condom is used.

Thus, there are certain easily prevented dangers in this practice, but the notion that it is "perverted" requires no medical comment. Obviously, if an individual's aesthetic or religious scruples preclude this or other forms of nonvaginal intercourse, then he should obey his conscience--without making judgments on the practices of others.

Unfortunately, many husbands apply undue pressure to their wives, who may be reluctant to have anal intercourse; but it should be needless to say that no form of sexual activity is enjoyable if performed unwillingly. However, when conducted with the consent of both partners and with the routine precautions we've outlined, anal intercourse can afford great pleasure. Indeed, many women report that it provides them with overwhelming orgasmic response.

It's good to sublimate the sex drive for long periods of time

This is a tricky myth, because the concept of sublimation is so little understood and so highly controversial. Some authorities have suggested that it is possible to suppress or repress the sex drive and convert it to higher goals--such as success in art, writing, athletics and other endeavors. We have never seen any evidence, however, that abstention from overt sexual activity can transform the libido into other kinds of energy.

The next question that arises is, sublimation apart, can human beings simply abstain from sex for sustained periods of time? The answer is yes--with reservations. Human sexual expression is a natural physical-response pattern, like breathing, or bladder or bowel function. But sex is unique among physiological responses in that it can be taken out of its natural context for indefinite periods of time. This quality is useful in a civilized society, for it allows us to delay overt sexual activity until an appropriate time and, accordingly, lets us go about our business. Unfortunately, it should be noted that religious and legal authorities have abused the capacity for the deferral of sex by imposing all sorts of unrealistic restraints on it, thus conditioning people to avoid sex and to fear it even when it is appropriate. For example, the little girl whose hand is slapped for touching her genitals may develop an aversion to sexual touch that can last a lifetime. This negative conditioning contributes to the multiplicity of sexual distresses suffered by so many people today. (We estimate that 50 percent of all marriages in the U.S. are afflicted by one sort of sexual inadequacy or another.)

Unquestionably, there are men and women who have never had heterosexual nor homosexual intercourse, never masturbated and never had sex dreams or fantasies. We believe that these individuals are rare--incredibly rare, we should add.

The final question is: Are extended periods of abstention harmful? If a person rates sex at the bottom of his value system, he may be able to adjust to periodic or even lifetime abstention by making suitable adjustments and compensations. These often take the form of defensive armor commonly described as uptightness. But we do believe that he will not be able to turn on and turn off his sex drive at will. Regularity of expression is essential to effective sexual functioning--particularly if the individual wishes to perform sexually in his later years. Rejection of sexual activity for extended periods of time can introduce a mental handicap when it is resumed and can even contribute toward a mild atrophy of the sexual organs.

We must speculate in conclusion that abstention is certainly possible but, with few exceptions, it is seldom advisable from a physical point of view.

An excessively amorous woman is a Nymphomaniac

Classically, a nymphomaniac is defined as a woman with persistently high levels of sexual tension who constantly searches for orgasmic relief but fails to attain it. This is a fascinating fantasy--the woman in constant heat and begging for fulfillment--that could have been created only by males with great imaginations and little familiarity with female sexual response. Statistically, this type of woman is virtually nonexistent.

We suspect that the men who have perpetuated this notion have been victims of the situation described by War-dell Pomeroy (a co-author of the Kinsey reports), who, with tongue in cheek, characterizes a nymphomaniac as any woman who exhibits even a slightly higher degree of sexual desire than her male partner. Pomeroy's point is well taken, because, in our culture, nymphomania does not refer to objectively measured states of female excitation but, rather, to male concepts of excessive female need. Obviously, the term excessive varies from female to female and from male to male, and in their relationship to each other.

In fact, the human female has an infinitely greater capacity for sexual expression than the male. She has the natural potential for multi-orgasmic response and her orgasmic experiences are more intense and last longer than those of the male.

The American male, who suffers from society's destructive dictum that sexual success rests with him, often attempts in vain to match his partner's orgasmic ability with an equal number of ejaculations. This is ridiculous and self-defeating. It can lead only to a sense of insecurity that may ultimately become a sexual inadequacy.

Advancing age means the end of sex

The most pernicious of all sexual fictions is the nearly universally accepted belief that sexual effectiveness inevitably disappears as the human being ages. It simply isn't true. Obviously, our vigor progressively declines as we go from our 50s to our 80s. This means that our sexual performance will not be characterized by the same physical energy as it was in our teens, 20s, 30s and 40s. But then, we can't run as fast in later years as we did when we were young. And we don't worry about that.

Sexually, the male and the female can function effectively into their 80s, if they understand that certain physiological changes will occur and if they don't let these changes frighten them. Once they allow themselves to think they will lose their sexual effectiveness, then, for all practical purposes, they will, indeed, lose it--but only because they will have become victims of the myth, not because their bodies will have lost the capacity to perform.

Here are some of the changes that can be expected. The male's erection will take longer to achieve once he's past his 40s. It may take minutes, as compared with seconds in his salad days. Also, his erection may not be as full or as firm as it was when he was younger. If he has an understanding partner who helps him guide his penis into her vagina, he'll find that it will become sufficiently erect after a few strokes. There is also a reduction in seminal fluid and some men may notice that the force of ejaculation has lessened as well. At the conclusion of intercourse, the older man may find his erection returning to a relaxed state so quickly that it virtually feels as if his penis is dropping from the vagina. And then he'll probably notice that it takes considerably longer for him to obtain another erection. These are natural occurrences and should not be cause for concern.

Perhaps one of the most perplexing changes in the older man's physiology is his reduced need for ejaculation. He simply does not feel the demand for an orgasm that a younger man feels. If he performs once or twice a week at the age of 60, let's say, he may want to ejaculate only every second or third time. This change can be particularly upsetting to a couple, because the man and his partner may think they're not getting the job done. They're both victims of the fallacy of "end-point release"--in other words, they believe, like so much of society, that sex cannot be satisfying and fulfilling unless a goal is set for both partners: ejaculation for the male, orgasm for the female. If the female can be educated to the fact that her aging male partner should ejaculate only when he feels like it, then the odds are greater that he'll continue being an effective lover. He needs to be educated, too, to understand that he should ejaculate at whim and not at her urging.

The icing on the cake in all this is that, concomitant with the reduced demand for ejaculation, the male usually is able to exercise much greater control than he ever had before. This means less likelihood of premature ejaculation for him and greater likelihood of orgasm-- (concluded on page 303) Sex Myths Exploded (continued from page 128) and even multiple orgasms--for his partner.

Her physiological changes may also make her fearful as she reaches her 50s and beyond. She tends to lubricate more slowly than before and the walls of her vagina become thinner. This means they can be easily irritated and may even be stretched or torn with forceful sexual activity. Regular sexual activity and adequate sex-steroid replacement therapy--in other words, a replenishment of hormones--can compensate for this involution to some degree, but a simple understanding that these are natural changes and need not prevent intercourse is just as important.

In the final analysis, the male and the female do not have to give up sexual relations well into advanced age, as long as they remain in good physical condition and have partners who are interested in them and interesting to them.

Any man who can't make it with a woman is suffering from severe, Psychiatric problems

As Gershwin's Sportin' Life said, "It ain't necessarily so." Certainly, there can be a background of psychopathology in cases of impotence and premature ejaculation--the two major types of male sexual inadequacy. But often these dysfunctions are caused by faulty conditioning, negative sex education and/or pervasive ignorance (often compounded by irrational fear).

The underlying cause of premature ejaculation, in our estimation, is the male habit of "going for the goal line," with nothing valued in between. This reflects male disregard for female satisfaction, an attitude that is usually conditioned in the young man before his sex ethic is fully formed. Many men who ejaculate before their partners are satisfied were initially exposed to quickie sex relations with girls in the back seats of cars or with importuning prostitutes. Similarly, the first sexual experiences of some men are under intense pressure in cheap motels or behind park bushes. Also, the adolescent practice colloquially called dry humping teaches disregard for female satisfaction, as does coitus interruptus, the technique in which the male withdraws his penis just prior to ejaculation; he may (or may not) accomplish birth control, but he usually leaves his partner in a state of high sexual excitation.

Clinical experience convinces us that since premature ejaculation is usually a result of faulty conditioning, it can almost invariably be cured by simple reconditioning techniques, accompanied by counseling that stresses the importance of the male's concern for his partner's pleasure, both physiological and psychological. If there is an accompanying neurosis--and there frequently is--then that condition may require psychotherapy. But the inability to control the ejaculatory process is not necessarily linked to a psychiatric condition.

Impotence is a more complex dysfunction and more often does, indeed, have an underlying psychopathology. But almost as often it does not. Many men have normal sex lives for 10, 20 and 30 years before the onset of erective inadequacy. In some cases, these men are premature ejaculators whose wives complain of their inadequacy to the extent that the husbands finally become convinced they lack manhood and consequently lose their power to erect. In other cases, a bout with drugs or alcohol, or fatigue or preoccupation or a fight with one's partner can induce an episode of impotence, which, if not understood and placed in its proper context, may lead to a fear syndrome that perpetuates the problem. Moreover, some men who are adequately attuned mentally fail to have erections because of an endocrine imbalance or other physiological disability. This is relatively rare, but it occurs. One of the saddest and most unnecessary causes of impotence is the male's tendency to convince himself that he won't be able to function sexually beyond a certain age. As we pointed out in the preceding myth, advancing age does not prevent sexual activity; thinking it will might well prevent it.

The male's erective function is incredibly complex and can fail for a number of causes, some of them psychopathological but, as we have seen, many of them not. As a final note, we'd like to add that the professions that are most experienced at treating sexual inadequacy are the clerical and the behavioral (psychologists, social workers and marriage counselors). Psychiatrists and physicians fall quite a bit behind.