Object Lessons

Okay - it's not every day that I see something that surprises me. Yet this video does for some reason. I think it is because the folks in it seem so earnestly "into" their inanimate partners. Now many, many women "enjoy" inanimate objects - and men too, don't leave them out. But these women seem to have developed one-way emotional ties that are inordinately strong and sexual in nature.

Is this a fetish? Or something different?

I plan to expand on this article but for now, just want to expose you to the concept.

I will say that one woman is seriously into her gear - but there is no nudity. Still, I'd say this one's not work-safe. For that matter neither is this blog in general - so you've been warned.



But - my only exposure to this (so far) is through this documentary. And as a rule, I like to check out the studies and get to the science behind these kinds of behaviours. Still, with a little research I did come up with some interesting information.

The condition is called "Objectum-Sexuality" or "Objectophillia" and the video is from a documentary called "Married to the Eiffel Tower." (I'm trying to track down a link to the "real" video - it isn't on Netflix yet.) The documentary talks with several people who are in love with various objects - such as the Golden Gate Bridge, the Eiffel Tower, and -as you may have surmised from the snippet above - a large mechanical side-show. This is no new condition, with a famous case being that of a woman who married the Berlin Wall. Not sure how they worked that out.

The video does appear to be available in chunks on YouTube - not my favorite way to watch a movie, but here's the link to part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag3pFIDapIw

So - is it a real condition? That's the big question on the Internet. That and "why would anyone love a bridge?" I have to admit with my naturalist world view (that's the science one, not the naked volley-ball one) I can see no reason why it wouldn't be feasible for someone to fall in love with an inanimate object. I'm of the personal opinion that much of what the world thinks of as "love" is far more brain chemistry and confirmation bias - (still I loves Mrs. Doctor Atlantis with all my chemical heart.)

The condition seems real enough, but I'll do some more journal searches and see what I can dig up. Dig up with my big shiny Internet shovel. Mmmmm. Shovels... Where was I?

Oh, I remember. There is a website for folks with the condition (if that's the right word) and you can find that here: http://www.objectum-sexuality.org/

We'll get back to this with some more details on the specifics of the condition (besides the obvious) and perhaps discuss what role animism has in the whole matter.

Vaginal Orgasms and G-Spot Theory

In my research on matters prurient, one item which has always aroused my interest is female orgasm. There are so many myths rumors and legends about this - and taboos, and cultural and religious strictures on discussing it, that just narrowing down one specific aspect of it to research was difficult for me. But while researching what to research (how's that for meta?) I came across multiple medical journal articles which talked about different kinds of orgasms in women.

Sexuality researchers categorize orgasm into two major types. The clitoral orgasm is the kind most people are familiar with. Most women can achieve one of these through clitoral stimulation (with a vibrator, finger, partner's body part, etc...). For many women this is what they think of when they contemplate orgasms.

However, according to multiple researchers there is a second kind of female orgasm. It is called a vaginal orgasm and is generated by stimulating the g-spot (named after sex researcher Ernst Gräfenberg) which lies on the anterior wall of the vagina, behind the clitoris. This type of orgasm, which can be generated by vaginal-only stimulation, is described as being stronger and more powerful than the more well known clitoral type.

But controversy has surrounded g-spot related claims. Some doubt the existence of such a place because many women don't seem to be capable of vaginal orgasms, and cadaver research hasn't uncovered any corresponding increase in nerve distribution in the corresponding physiological regions. (I doubt they'd have had any luck making those cadavers climax even if they could find a corresponding high-nerve spot to stimulate.)

Yet for women who have vaginal orgasms, and those who experience other g-spot phenomena such as female ejaculation (a subject due its own article), there is little doubt that they have a place that will take them places.

Two recent articles in New Scientist magazine discuss the work of sexologist Emmanuele Jannini, MD. His team has been working on trying to identify the g-spot and they found that in a group of women who experience vaginal orgasm, they have a corresponding increase in thickness on the anterior wall of the vagina. Or as they put it in the summary:

The measurement of the space within the anterior vaginal wall by ultrasonography is a simple tool to explore anatomical variability of the human clitoris-urethrovaginal complex, also known as the G-spot, which can be correlated to the ability to experience the vaginally activated orgasm.

Many of these sex studies have very small sample groups. I'm not sure why that is, but rather than lament the frailty of studies based on small groups I choose to lament the lack of massive interest in research which could lead to well documented methodologies to make women happier in bed. Why is this not being researched more thoroughly?

Still, back in 2002 Dr. Terrence Hines published a paper called, "The G-Spot: A Modern Gynocological Myth," that is critical of the research methodologies on g-spot studies up to that point. Whether Dr. Jannini's research will hold up to scrutiny, or whether Dr. Hine's point of view is still valid remains to be seen.

Jannini's work did lead to this observation by Indiana University professor Elisabeth Lloyd in a Guardian UK article:

Elisabeth Lloyd, a professor at Indiana University and author of The Case of the Female Orgasm, said scans should now be conducted on a larger group. "There's been controversy over which parts of the female anatomy might be the G spot, and what the role of it might be," she said.

Lloyd said only 20% to 25% of women had vaginal orgasms during sex. "It has never been explained why that is the case; it's a mystery. This paper doesn't totally explain it, but it might do partially, and that could help us understand what those numbers are about."

On the bright side, recent follow-up work by Dr. Jannini seems to point to the possiblity that currently non-vaginally orgasmic women can be trained to become vaginally orgasmic. This, however, being contingent on whether or not you've secretly got a g-spot or not. Jannini's research involved taking women and scanning them with his g-spot finder technique, then asking those women who seemed to have g-spots if they had vaginal orgasms. Then, that subset that reported they didn't were instructed on how to try - and some of them were able to do so after the training. None of the women who didn't seem to have a g-spot were able to achieve this vaginal orgasm. (Read that whole article at New Scientist.)

So - is there really a g-spot? For some, it appears that the answer is "yes." The easiest way to find out is probably through experimenting. But if you don't happen to have that thickened anterior wall, there's always the clitoris. Nothing wrong with the clitoris.