An article cited by EmpowHer reader entitled, "Almost Half of Women Have Sexual Problems" (Amanda Gardner of HealthDay News for The Washington Post on October 31, 2008) grimly described a near-pandemic of what is being called female orgasmic dysfunction.
In it, Gardner reports a scary 40 percent of women aged 20 to 65 with problems of sexual release, with a mere 12 percent distressed about it. To put it bluntly, this amounts to roughly 33.2 million women in America who deem themselves incapable of orgasming, only 10 million of which actually care about it.
Traced back to its origins, the appearance of the disorder in women directly corresponds to the nature of the female orgasm itself, which although complex, is not as physiologically complicated, difficult or impossible to achieve as some would have you believe. Yet, the fact that the female anatomy is somewhat more labyrinthine than a man's obvious shaft with its single, straight path to orgasm is apparently the source of real aggravation for many women who have long gone without it.
Still, it would seem that some 30 percent of women for which complete orgasm is a complete mystery are perfectly content to exist, mapless, lost in a foggy no man's land of sexual discontent. This is a heartbreaking idea. Hundreds of thousands of women have simply allowed themselves to prematurely accept defeat, having lost all hope of ever experiencing the vital richness of a sexually satisfying life, whether it be in relationship with a man, woman or simply with herself.
As a result of this surge, some women seek out or await hormonal fixes, such as testosterone or the as-yet undeveloped female Viagra with its hoped-for effect of artificially elevating desire. These desperate searches for quick, medical fixes very often resemble gold rushes, for both patients and pharmaceutical companies.
While testosterone likely has the promoted behavioral effect of "masculinizing" the female libido, it's dangerously limited not to consider that other factors are at work within the endocrine system. Not only does this resort oversimplify the interaction of hormonal systems, but hard-wiring physiology treats the body robotically, neglecting the social and personal-psychological arenas. Compare it to dropping a nuke on Hiroshima to win the war. Is this really the best and only way, or should we be seeking a "more complex analysis in which an individual's capacities emerge from a web of interactions between the biological being and the social environment"? (Anne Fausto-Sterling, Myths of Gender)
What seems to be required is something which has been overwhelmingly culturally absented--the genuinely loving relationship which fosters a trustworthy space in which the whole self is free to emerge. Because for women, sexual physiology is so heavily integrated with psychology, only when a certain level of comfort is met can she allow herself to be vulnerable enough to reveal her own powers, whether alone or with a partner.
Stated causes of the disorder are numerous and support this idea of the mind-body connection and prerequisite. All essentially point to broader mentally, psychologically, emotionally, even spiritually wounded states of the woman--stress, anxiety, depression, fatigue, worry, guilt, fear of painful intercourse, fear of pregnancy, the undesirability of a partner or setting, and lastly, the use of alcohol or drugs (MedicineNet.com: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=12588).
What, then, are the real issues at the root of the symptom? Allow me to posit the following theory in its simplest form: women hate themselves.
Many women stupidly judge themselves according to the mandated standard of desirability, yet the majority of women can't be expected to contend with these giants of fashion and beauty. Even for those "lucky" enough to be graced with youth and beauty for a time, this measuring stick of desirability is such a hollow way of elevating a feeling of self-worth that, inevitably, it has to collapse in on itself. The kind of supposedly positive accolade a woman earns by creating herself in the prototypically sexy image actually corrodes her real value as an individual capable of independent thought or creative emotion. Therefore, regardless of the relative beauty or youth of the woman, she can't win if she judges herself solely by this standard of self-worth or sexual prowess.
The pressure to be "sexy" is all demonstrative and not inherent. The female orgasm is, rather, an intensely private, internal tremor, stemming from a place of darkness, the profound unknown. A woman needs to feel comfortable enough to move into those subterranean waters, courageously to revel in her own pleasure, to lose control. But she can't become truly uninhibited if she's still clinging to the shallow definitions of sexuality predetermined for her by male-centric media outlets. If she's trying to be "sexy" according to something she read or saw in Cosmo, then she's merely performing sex, and her body knows. Perhaps this is why it doesn't respond in kind; perhaps this, among other things, is a true, social source of the blockage.
So while we may not be able to do anything immediately to cure what ails American society, we as women can at least begin to subversively cultivate unconditionally loving relationships with ourselves. Treat yourself with kindness and patience, chart the map to your own bliss, and believe me, the rest will come. And so will you.