Categories
Impotence Cure

Penis Manipulation

When erections recur spontaneously, the wife is encouraged to place herself in the superior coital position, with her knees at or below his nipple line, before her sex play is directed toward penile manipulation.

When the wife is comfortable in this position, penile play should be initiated.

This position also allows the husband full access to the breasts. When or if a full erection is obtained, the wife may mount, but, intromission should be attempted in a non demanding manner.

No hurry to mount, no rush to obtain sexual tension release should be permitted. When she is attempting penile insertion, the penis should be angled at approximately 45 degrees from the perpendicular and directed cephalad (toward the head).

When mounting, the wife is encouraged to move back on the shaft of the penis rather than to sit down on it.

Sexual Tension

There should never be any question as to the mechanics of penile insertion.

Penis Insertion

The woman always should control the insertive process. Many men have been distracted from a partial or even a full erection by bumbling, fumbling, vain attempts to describe the vaginal orifice in the process of penile insertion.

The male usually is not sure anatomically where the penis goes and, during frantic moments of searching and finding, his opportunity for distraction is patently obvious.

Every woman knows exactly where the penis goes. Additionally, she is indeed sexually stimulated by the opportunity to assist actively in the act of intromission.

Just quietly relieving the impotent male of the responsibility for penile insertion removes yet another distractive roadblock from his vitally necessary level of sensate input.

Anything that can or does distract him will dull, dilute, or destroy his levels of sexual tension.

With the wife already posed in the proper position during the preliminary sex play, she can accomplish intravaginal containment with facility and grace. Even during the insertive process, she should continue active manual manipulation of the penile shaft.

Hard Penis

Positioning herself correctly ahead of time again avoids a distraction. Many males attain an erection with sex play but lose security of penile rigidity when attempting intromission. The actual mounting process is distracting to the impotent male.

Both his wife’s stimulation of the penis and his stimulation of her pelvic organs usually cease. He then moves to assume a male-superior position, hunts for the vaginal outlet, and finally attempts intromission.

Since all this takes time, and mutual sexual stimulation stops, the husband loses his sense of continuity. Consequently, any man following this reactive pattern may lose the fullness if not the total of his erection in the process.

The concerned male has only to notice the slightest loss of erective fullness and he panics, distracting himself completely in a spectator role and, of course, immediately loses the rest of his erective security.

Obviously, the concept underlying the use of this mounting technique is to remove inherent male distractions and to let the sensual pleasure developed from mutual sexual stimulation take control so that the tense male will not react in his usual pattern of performance fears or spectator role.

This experience is repeated several times until erective security develops.

This coital teasing technique is comparable to that of attaining, losing, and then returning to full penile erection with manual manipulation. Any male must have a series of obviously successful intromissions if he ever is to lose permanently his concerns for performance.

Categories
Erectile Dysfunction

Influence to Penis

There is a recorded history of one man whose failed attempt at initial coitus developed while he was partially under the influence of drugs.

Two men (the exception mentioned above) failed in their first attempts at vaginal penetration under the influence of excessive alcohol consumption. In none of the 12 individual patterns among these 13 men is there specific evidence to support psychodynamic concepts of the dominant mother and the meek and docile father or the inadequate mother and the supremely dominant father.

The one common factor:

The men had restrictive input from an immature or even negatively disposed sexual value system. The psychosocial system certainly exerted overwhelmingly dominant influence on the biophysical component.

The interesting observation remains that, although there obviously are instances when primary impotence almost seems preordained by prior environmental influence, there frequently is a psychosexually traumatic episode directly associated with the first coital experience that establishes a negative psychosocial influence pattern or even a life-style of sexual dysfunction for the traumatized man.

Penis and Emotional Influence

The male with a meaningful, well-established homosexual orientation in his teenage years may be expected to experience varying strengths of conditioning against active heterosexual involvement. Similarly, a negative sexual value system can be anticipated from blind adherence to any form of religions orthodoxy.

Particularly does orthodox orientation develop as a psychosexual handicap when the wife-to-be has matured in similar religious environment. Aside from prescribed religious orthodoxy, there is little evidence that familial influence, so frequently held the primary suspect in the multiple etiologies of sexual dysfunctions, carries much statistical weight.

Certainly in the histories of primarily impotent males there are recorded instances of compulsively neurotic maternal influence, including forms of direct mother-son sexual encounter. But little is known of unopposed maternal dominance or direct mother-son sexual encounter relative to the anticipated percentage of resultant primary impotence.

What is known of the individual psychosocial characteristics of young men who are bent and occasionally broken almost beyond repair by the oppressive conditioning of unopposed maternal dominance, orthodox theological control, or homosexual orientation that another youth in similar circumstances might consider serious, but not of lasting moment?

Most men so traumatized in their teens or early twenties survive the stresses of their initial opportunity for heterosexual coition, whether or not successful, and move into a continuum of effective sexual functioning with facility and pleasure. As time passes they at least partially neutralize the negative psychosocial influences that have accrued as a combination of their environmental backgrounds and the trauma of their initial coital failures.

Penis and Social Influence

One cannot propose that environmental influence inflicts upon young males such a depth of psychosocial insecurity that statistically they must find themselves inadequate to react to the tension-filled demand of the initial coital occasion. For to make such an assumption would be to negate the influence of their biophysical system.

As an auxiliary to the Foundation’s basic research concepts of evaluating sexual functioning in our culture, investigators continually record histories of young men sexually traumatized beyond any reasonably acceptable measure, indeed well beyond the scope of the acute episodes described here.

These men may have failed to:

Perform successfully during their initial coital exposure and for a considerable period of time thereafter may have continued sexually inadequate. Yet they have recovered from their experiences with sexual dysfunction without specific psychotherapeutic support.

As far as can be, ascertained from corroborative histories of husband and wife, have led effectively functional heterosexual lives. Regardless of the depth of the specific trauma resultant from a prejudicial sexual value system, ultimately it is the interdigital response patterns of the psychosocial and the biophysical systems and the individual characteristics of the men directly involved that predicate sexual survival or failure.

Of these characteristics we know so little. It is relatively easy for the cotherapist retrospectively to identify etiological influence in states of sexual dysfunction, but to generalize from such specific retroflection is statistically unsupportable and psycho dynamically unacceptable.

In brief, the etiology of primary impotence has a multiplicity of factors. In most of these instances, the unexplained sensitivity of the particular male to psychosocial influence adjudicates the specific failures of the virginal experience with sexual function into subsequently high levels of concern for performance.

Sexual Peers

Most of his peers would not perform inadequately under similarly combined pressures of prior environmental handicapping or the immediacy of sexual trauma. At present it not only is statistically inadequate but also psychotherapeutically inappropriate to attempt definitive correlation of etiological factors for primary impotence.

From an investigative point of view, it is infinitely healthier to admit that we really have no concept of the specific psychodynamic factors that render the young man failing in his first coital connection susceptible to continuing failure at sexual performance.

The approaches to reconstitution of male sexual function from secondary impotence are essentially similar to therapeutic considerations of primary impotence. Therefore, the erectile treatment techniques and program statistics for both primary and secondary impotence will be presented in a separate discussion considering the subject from a composite point of view.

Since there have been more unmarried men referred for primary impotence than for any of the other three distresses in the continuum of male sexual dysfunction (premature ejaculation, incompetent ejaculation, and secondary impotence), a discussion of use of replacement partners, or partner surrogates, in cooperation with authority will be presented as an integral part of this chapter.