Sexology of the Vaginal Orgasm (12 page)

ticism of old texts, the mentions made of the female geni- tal fluid according to these sources are much more plenti- ful than in any modern accounts (Stifter, 1988, Table 7).

In times when the orgasmic emission was considered posi- tive, because it was deemed necessary for conception, women could be far more uninhibited about “squirting” and achiev- ing orgasm.

Almost 100 years later in 1780, Wilhelm Tissot once again reminded us why the once potent juice of conception dege- nerated before it all but completely dried up in the purview of scholarly circles: “The infertile seed, on the other hand, flows out with particular voluptuousness
and just as for men spews forth and as with many women so frequently that they squirt like men into the distance
… so that the one seed, which almost looks like saliva, is also referred to as such, namely succus salivalis, whereby this latter has no use, produces nothing, rather nature created it for the sole purpose of voluptuousness” (Tissot, 1780; III, p. 65 f.).

1. The Medicinal Draining of the “Female Semen”
   

   The orgasmic ejaculation of this “secretion of voluptuous- ness” gradually became the most important medication for hysteria and many other women’s complaints. As early as Plato’s Timaios, we find the famous statement: “
   Nubat illa et morbus effugiet
   ”, which means that marrying will make the illness go away. Soranos of Ephesos observed this method of treating the ailment demonstrated by a midwife in the 2
   ^nd
   century: He himself had seen how “… The midwife insert- ed a finger into the vagina of a woman afflicted with this
   

   illness and rubbed it vigorously, upon which the woman writhed with a mixture of pain and ecstasy and then an abundance of thick semen flowed out of her, from which point on she was free of affliction and seizures” (Kossmann, 1903; p. 56).
   

   The general assumption that increasingly gained ground was that the genital fluid underwent a pathological change when it was pent up in the body. In old literature this pro- cess is described using terms such as corruption, putrifac- tion, venomousness, venomous fume or venomous vapor (cf. Elsässer, 1934; p. 11).
   

   Back then it was felt that the poisoning of a fluid would necessarily poison all of the bodily fluids. And for those who actually believed in the accumulation of noxious gases, these would naturally be even more disposed to spreading throughout the entire organism. But as befits their parti- cular nature, they would primarily rise to the brain and heart.
   

   Soranos found that many doctors and midwives initiated and improved upon this procedure. They began dipping their fingers in oil before insertion to heighten the patien- t’s pleasure. In his practice in Würzburg, Ortloff von Bay- erland was supposedly particularly adept at this craft. He, too, held the view that the
   suffocatio matricis
   , or “the wan- dering womb” was caused by “the seed rotting inside her,” because the woman had no man and hence had “the falling ache” (quoted from Ortloff v. Bayerland, 1910 ed.; p. 11).
   

   As we can see from the caustic commentary of one medical historian, helping a patient to achieve therapeutic ejacula- tion provided a number of benefits: “This also provided an
   

   excellent opportunity for the profit-bent doctors of the day to amass riches and high repute, as hysteria has always been a goldmine for a clever doctor. But this could also be used for even more unscrupulous and shameful purposes and was a fine device for the many physicians of the Middle Ages, who, under the pretence of the Hippocratic Oath did the ignoble dealing of a Pandarus” (Herff, 1843; p. 82).
   

   In 1585 Arnaldus de Villanova reveals how women helped themselves when there was no physician or midwife present:
   

   “Certain widows and even merchant’s wives whose husbands would leave home and be gone two or three years at a time, suffer from such an ailment (semen accumulation). Some of them were quite obsessed with coition, but did not dare have relations with other men for fear of becoming preg- nant. So they needed the finger... Others used a metal-pla- ted male member or something penis-shaped made out of brass, concave in the middle and with a hole at the tip. They move (the instrument) around the vulva, both inside and out until they expel their seed. When it begins to flow she sends rose water through the aforementioned hole in the tip, which then mingles with her sperm” (trans. from Arnal- dus de Villanova, 1585; p. 1,346).
   

   In addition to ejaculation therapy, in the Middle Ages physicians offered other cures to their patients suffering from hysteria. They spoke highly of attempts to restrict the flow of new semen into the seminal vessels from the outset. There were many different means employed to accomplish this task, all of which reputedly reduced the amount of semen produced and hence abated the danger of decompo- sition. Certain foods are supposedly also effective, whereas others said to increase the production of semen were
   

   actually forbidden (cf. e.g. Arnaldus de Villanova, 1585;
   

   p. 1,283b - 1,284d). One method long considered to be highly reliable was “chastity water”, whose most important ingredient were the leaves of the chastity tree (Musitano, 1711; p. 501).
   

   As lustful thoughts were deemed to be just as responsible for generating semen as some foods, they were the primary target of preventive measures. As a consequence, the dark clouds of the general repression of female sexuality loomed even larger.
   

   “One should refrain from enamored thoughts as often as possible and strive to free oneself of them completely, which can be more easily accomplished if the patient abstains from conversing with menfolk. Nor shall she read any amorous books, or look at such paintings; rather she shall only see, hear and read such things which can arouse sadness in her.
   

   ... It is equally important that we preach chastity to simi- larly afflicted women and describe the disgrace which awaits them should they not desist. In this same vein, we read that Milesius helped virgins by passing a law which states that all women who were afflicted with this disease and lay their own hand upon themselves are to be dragged naked through the marketplace” (Musitano, 1711; p. 488).
   

2. From Curative to the Contrary
   

   At the turn of the 19th century the hypothesis which held that semen accumulation and its nasty consequences were the cause of hysteria gradually began loosing credence. All at once, the pro-lust belief in the cleansing effect of sex on health yielded to more ascetical views and treatment
   

   methods. The very tone adopted by the French physician Bienville, for example, when speaking of the conditions pre- valent in hysterical behavior makes it apparent that an increas- ingly icy ascetical wind was blowing the pleasure principle right out of the study. He believed that the genital juices and blood of the female became unnaturally acrid and caus- tic if they ate salted, peppered or smoked meats or drank strong wine, cocoa or coffee. “ … and finally, if they fre- quently enjoy salacious pleasures by engaging in repeated coitus or in some other way. The milk in the bosom increas- es with the sucking of the nipples: just like the salivary glands, the more you expectorate, the more you salivate” (Bienville, 1782; p. 76 f.)
   

   This makes it quite clear that conditions were gradually heading in exactly the opposite direction. Whereas only a few years earlier frequent sexual relations and the attendant female ejaculation were still regarded as a general prere- quisite for human health, now the dissipation of sexual secretions was being held responsible for illness.
   

   This reversal of the earlier prevailing school of thought had sweeping consequences, one of them being that at the turn of the nineteen century the view took hold that masturba- tion caused hysteric nymphomania. With this in mind, in 1782 Bienville lectured on how to deal with women who sully themselves in such a way: “Efforts must be redoubled to prevent them from relapsing into such excesses. One should never leave them alone for any reason whatsoever, even if it is merely to empty their bowels. For I have known a number of them who confessed that this abhorrent habit had taken hold of them to such an extent that, as they were watched over night and day, they finally decided to falsely pretend that they had to relieve their bowels so that they
   

   might perform this flatigious deed unobserved. I must add that, once one has dared to take this step, the female sex is much less shamefaced about it than any man” (Bienville, 1782; p. 154).
   

   In 1843, physician and bookseller Christian Gottfried Flitt- ner did not even dare publish his book
   Gynäologie oder das Geschlechtsleben
   (Gynecology or the Sex Life) under his own name. In this work he represented (and was most likely the last of his era to do so) a school of thought which was still characterized by the permissive medieval spirit:
   

   “Upon weighty consideration, Nature made sating one’s appetite for copulation a more urgent need for the female sex than for men. In order for a woman to be completely healthy … the stimulation she herself applies to her genitals during the act of procreation
   combined with the emissions of the lubrication discharged
   in the process are indis- pensable to keep those parts from hardening with advanced age and the blood vessels from occluding, that she may not produce a pernicious acrimony causing her nerves great pain and agitation or have those often dreadful fits of hysteria from which old maids suffer so greatly” (Flittner, 1843; p. 268).
   

3. Cynical Sexual Sadism
   

   The frosty climate of sexual hostility itself soon reached the heights of hysteria and in some places perverted into cynical sadism. The procedures which Léopold Deslandes recommends applying to counter the sensual lust of women are indeed representative of the prevailing sex morals of the day both in terms of the spirit in which they were intended
   

   and in their aggressive obsession. The underlying consider- ation is actually quite simple. The root of the evil must be extracted; the tool of lust must consequently be removed. He and his colleague, Levret, propose therapeutic amputa- tion of the clitoris (Deslandes, 1835; p. 247). Deslandes des- cribes the treatment of a young woman who masturbated frequently. The reason why I am giving such a detailed account of this case is because it illustrates what a debasing, inhuman and aggressive impact undiffused sexual anxieties can have when acted out in the guise of virtue without being either obstructed or constricted by parental love or profes- sional competence. Deslandes writes:
   

   “Haunted by the danger of her situation and yet too weak or too transfixed by the impulse of sensual desire, she could not abjure her vice. They bound her hands, but it was in vain, as she would replace them by rubbing up against any part of her bed that jutted out. They bound her lower legs, but a simple movement of the thighs, which she could still rub together or of the pelvis and groin sufficed to induce copious pollutions (ejaculations). So it was that her parents brought her to Mr. Dubois. Following Levret’s example, he felt compelled to propose amputation of the clitoris. The parents and the ailing woman willingly consented to the procedure. The organ was removed with a single cut of the scalpel and to stop the bleeding the stump was cauterized with a hot iron. The operation was a complete success. The patient was cured of her pernicious vice and soon regained her strength and health … Incidentally, the operation is not very painful, easy to perform and in the worst possible case can have no other disadvantage than uselessness” (Des- landes, 1835; p. 247 f.).
   

   (This cynical presumptuousness is mind-blowing and abso-
   

   lutely outrageous. I should take this opportunity to remind the reader that there are millions of cases of genital muti- lation being performed today as a circumcision ritual, above all in Africa, as the whole world stands idly by.)
   

   The resounding success of the French doctors must have considerably impressed their colleagues in other countries, as this type of clitoris removal was still being performed in Germany by Professor von Gräfe around 1880.
   

   In the 19th century the notion of ancient times experi- enced a renaissance in which the ejaculate was considered a valuable bodily fluid and hence the populace was warned against wasting it. Semen was once again the most perfect, most important and best elaborated part of the juices and the result of all digestions. Hoffmann, who was instru- mental in forming public opinion at that time, wrote:
   

   “It is impossible for the all-too-frequent waste of these juices not to terribly weaken the power of the body and soul … The seminal fluid, like the vital spirits emitted by the brain, is distributed to all of the nerves in the body and seems to be of the same nature, which accounts for the fact that the more semen is lost, the fewer vital spirits are emitted” (quot- ed from Tissot, 1791; p. 64). If we proceed on the assump- tion that the loss of semen also robs the body of valuable spiritual and brain substance, it is not surprising that Des- landes included dementia among the possible consequen- ces of masturbation and pollution.
   

   In the 19th century, it had long since been accepted that the fluid which some women ejaculated just before orgasm did not contain any sperm. Garnier accounts for this know- ledge by referring to this occurrence as “
   fausse éjaculation
   ”
   

   (false ejaculation). It was his view that many women were so obsessed with it, “
   that they would commit all manner of debauchery and abuse of copulation with this goal in mind.
   To achieve this goal, … women (mainly widows and maidens) would resort to the mouths of small dogs, or the tongues of men, women or obliging children to relieve the vulvo-vagi- nal glands through orgasm” (trans. from Garnier, 1887; p. 254 f.).
   

   The term “
   pollution
   ” crops up more and more often as a designation for the sexual climax. This actually is used to refer to the involuntary nocturnal emissions of pubescent boys or celibate men which can sometimes occur as the result of erotic dreams. Throughout the centuries, it was so self- evident that the phenomenon of ejaculation from the vul- va was linked to orgasm that it was difficult to separate out these two actions back then. For want of an appropriate term for the female orgasm, the struggle over its designation ver- ged on whimsical and downright schizophrenic. Since taking the first look in the microscope it was clear that there is no female semen and thus no actual ejaculation, and yet, amazingly enough, the orgasmic outpouring of genital fluid is still used to describe the woman’s orgasm. As a result, the orgasmic potency of the woman is becoming little more than a hollow phantom.