Does Penis Size Matter? Nahhh.

So, my last post was a random Hite Report, and it just happened that the page I turned to was about guys feeling like their dicks were too small (actually, the question asked was about genitals, not penises in particular, and it seemed like a couple of the guys were talking about their balls which seemed strange to me. I really never suspected men worried about them being too small...I mean, is that a thing? Cause maybe it shouldn't be).

Anyway, it got me thinking that I should speak on this whole "does size matter" thing. I'm sure I've made my feelings known on this subject in various places in this blog, but I don't think I've ever written a whole post on it.

Big ol' penises you can find on the Strange Things of Korea website HERE

So in short (no pun intended), the answer is no, size doesn't matter...for bringing women to orgasm that is. As I've pointed out here many times, the penis rubbing in the vagina does not cause orgasm. That means that a fatter one isn't going to create more orgasm pressure in there or any crazy thing like that, and longer ones aren't more able to hit some made-up magically orgasmic spot in the depths of the vag. Those are just shit people say and not based in the physical realities of female genitalia.

Women need clitoral stimulation in order to orgasm, not a penis moving in and out of their vagina. So, contrary to popular belief, men do not need a long, thick or hard cock to bring their woman to orgasm. They don't even need a penis. Top notch oral sex skills and solid manual moves are your best ladygasm-giving moves whether you have a big or a small pole. What I'm saying here is that penises don't cause women to orgasm (unless you're rubbing it in circles on her clit...although honestly, I just don't even think that would work. The pressure wouldn't be right...I mean just use a finger - it's be easier). I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it's going to sound, but I'll say it anyway. Penises don't really matter for women's orgasms so the size of the penis certainly doesn't matter.

That said though, I will acknowledge women may have size and shape preferences and that size may matter a little, but not in the way most people may think.

Possibility 1 
Some women might just like the looks of a big penis. It's a turn on like big boobs or full vulva lips are for some men. Having intercourse with a big dick might also just feel hotter to some women - like they're in a porn or something, and so they like it for that turn-on factor. That's just a matter of taste though and would only really be relevant to a woman's level of pleasure or arousal, not to her capacity for orgasm.

Possibility 2 
The size of a dude's penis may have an effect on particular women's abilities to grind on the dude to orgasm while engaging in intercourse. For instance, she may need her vulva to grind against a particular area on his pelvis while her pelvis is tilted in a certain way in order to get the right clitoral friction against his body so she can get her orgasm. It may be that a longer penis will allow her to get her pelvis where she wants it without the ol' dong falling out. It may also be that the angle of the penis is important to a lady in getting her vulva in the right position to rub against him during intercourse.

Possibility 3 
A certain size of penis may feel more comfortable for some women, and an uncomfortable size could feel as though it inhibits her orgasm. For instance, maybe the easiest way for some ladies to come during intercourse is on their hands and knees going doggy style while using a vibrator on the vulva. Doggie style allows for more of the penis to enter the vagina and can often hit the cervix which can be uncomfortable if not down right painful (am I right, ladies?). Bigger dicks mean more cervix bangin' and that may not sit well with some ladies. In this case, smaller dicks probably work better.

Possibility 4
 Some women may have preferences that relate to causing ejaculation (not orgasms) during intercourse. Although there's not a lot of research on this, it seems that a small number of women do ejaculate sometimes during intercourse, and we know that stimulation of the G-spot (in the front wall of the vagina not too far from the opening), has been known to cause ejaculation in some women. So it makes sense that for some women, the penis moving in the vagina could elicit ejaculation in this way, and it may be that certain penis sizes and shapes, as well as intercourse positions, make it easier or harder to do so. So some women may have preferences based on this, but please note that this is about eliciting ejaculation - which is not the same physiological event as an orgasm. It involves a spritz or spray of ejaculate fluid through the urethra. It is not always described as particularly pleasurable, and from the little that is known of it, it doesn't seem like this kind of ejaculation through intercourse is common at all among women.

So, although some of the small number of women who this is relevant to may enjoy an ejaculation and prefer penises that will help that ejaculation happen, it still holds true that size doesn't really matter to women's orgasms. Besides, the only ejaculations that have been observed in scientific study are ones caused by a finger (not a penis) moving in a "come hither" fashion in the vagina, and that seems to be the most common way sexperts recommend eliciting ejaculation - not through intercourse. So, even for ejaculation, the penis is really not even necessary.

So, preferences for size could vary among women, and size could matter for her ability to orgasm during intercourse or for her ability to ejaculate during intercourse. However, the penis is not necessary for either and isn't even really part of the stimulation to orgasm at all in women. I mean it's not like a penis, big or small, needs to be inside a woman for an orgasm to happen. The penis in vag thing is just something that can, if the couple so chooses, happen alongside whatever other thing is being done to her clit to get her off.

So, my point is don't fret about size. These worries are a holdover from the incorrect idea that men are supposed to use their penises to bang women into orgasms. That simply doesn't work, so stop feeling bad if your penis or your man's penis doesn't size up to porn rods, and stop focusing on intercourse. Whatever the two (or three or four or whatever) of you have available on your bodies can be well utilized, and all parties can enjoy great orgasms no matter what kind of junk ya'll got - that is if everyone takes the time to explore the options.

Also I made a poem.
Cheers to penises tiny and  tall, thick and thin, cherish them all. 
Here's to dicks with bulbous heads and torpedo shapes,
Bald as cue balls and hairy as apes.
Buy a round for poles that point to the ground and lean to the right,
Nads that hang down low and are pulled up tight
Ah, man junk: A tip o' the hat to all ya'll...big and small


Random Male Hite Report #4

It's time for another edition of random Hite Report: Male Edition. As you know, this is where I flip to a random page in the 1981 Hite Report on Male Sexuality by Shere Hite and simply copy that one page and that one page only into this blog. There are more of these randoms from both the male and female reports HERE.

The following are answers to the question, "Do you think your genitals are beautiful? Do you think your penis is a good size?" These particular answers fall under a section prefaced by:

Most men, in answering this question, wished over and over again that their penis could be just a little larger
Now for your randome page.

p. 391
 The Hite Report on Male Sexuality by Shere Hite

Alfred A. Knoff. NY. 1981

   "Always felt my penis was too small. Ashamed of it."
    "There's always the sneak look to compare sizes. I usually lose. Mine are too small for my liking. But that's part of my general feeling of sexual inadequacy now. When I was 'performing well' they seemed about right."
    "I do not think my penis is beautiful. It sure can shrink to a very short stub. Extended, I believe my penis is medium length but quite thin. Maybe it is long, but it is not what I call powerful. I've seen some powerful penises."
    "I think it is a good size when I'm by myself, but in the presence of other men I feel self conscious as if they all have huge cocks. It is as if I am underdeveloped. Intellectually, I know I am good looking and have average secondary sex characteristics. Emotionally, I feel I am a boy in a world of men."
    "I am small-bone and nonmuscular, therefore I am lucky my dick is as big as it is. When I undress at the gym, it is almost non-existent. Otherwise, 3 inches when flaccid. There's got to be a psychological hang-up about my body and dick."
    "My penis is smaller than average. When nude, if cold it shrivels to an inch or less as it is nearly all erectile tissue. When warm and flaccid it is perhaps as long as 3 inches and 2 1/2 inches in circumference. On erection and full tumescence it is about 5 3/4 inches long and about 4 1/2 inches in circumference. Strictly bad news in the locker-room derby and a source of continuous embarrassment to this day, though now I know that mine works all the time and some of the locker room jocks are impotent!”
    “Sometimes, lately, these past two or three years, I sort of wistfully wish that my penis, at least when erected, were larger or longer in length. To tell the truth, that way I could suck myself off. Isn’t that terrible.”
    “I love the way male genitals look. Although mine are smaller than I’d like.”
    “I feel easily threatened by other men if they are big and muscular or have good body hair (a lot of it, whereas I have poor beard growth and a bald chest). Men with large penises make me feel threatened and inferior. It makes me think that a big cock must work better, and that’s what women really want because even if they don’t say it or admit it, I imagine that a woman with a man is in his company because he has a big cock and can protect her. This is my own paranoia concerning what penises look like.”
    “I think my penis is really beautiful, all of them are. Mine is too small though.”
    “I’m O.K., my balls are not as big as I wish they were.”
    “Well, I suppose everyone wants to be tremendous, so I guess a little larger wouldn’t hurt.”
    “I like the way my genitals look, but like most men (I suppose) I sometimes wish my penis were longer. (It’s average in length, although thicker, I think, than average).”
    “Men check out other men’s penis size and length by glancing in the showers, toilets, clothes, etc. It’s part of being male to check what the other fellow has and see where you stand.”
    “I haven’t thought about my penis being beautiful, but don’t think it’s ugly. It is soft and smooth and in good working order. My grandmother who gave me a bath on occasion when I was a small boy said it looked like a rose, so I guess she thought it was beautiful. Naturally, I think it it too small, but I don’t fret over…


SSL - The 2013 Halloween Costume Special Edition

Last year around Halloween, I talked about sexy costumes for us females and how to use them for our own lady pleasure instead of just to please the dudes - who, lucky for them, aren't being bombarded with stupid super sexified costumes even though they should be getting equal treatment in the Halloween aisle if you ask me. Anyway, If you are going the sexy cowgirl/nurse/princess/hotdog/witch/keyboard...etc... route this year, check out last years post and at least use that costume for good (clit lovin') instead of evil this year.

This year I've decided to comment on a costume I found when I typed "female orgasm Halloween costume" into Google. Yes, it might seem like a strange search, but I was just wanting an idea for a Halloween themed post, and I got kinda curious as to whether there was a pre-made costume of a female orgasm out there, and if so, what exactly it looked like. There doesn't seem to be one, but I encourage anyone with a creative mind to make that and wear it this year. Better yet, if you can make an Orgasm Equality costume I'd be even happier. Then send me the picture.

Orgasm Donor Costume - Remember ladies, he's there to give not get.

Okay, so the costume is the Orgasm Donor costume. As you can see it's just a doctor's coat and a long tongue. It's part of a series of ridiculously easy pre-packaged costumes for men in a series called "General Malpractice Hospital" that are slightly raunchy. They include things like Dr. Ben Dover (includes large foam finger), Hospital Life Support Patient (complete with beer in a hat with straws - cause I guess the joke is that beer is what is supporting the patient's life?), Dr. Seymour Clearly (with eye chart and thick glasses - I guess this one isn't so raunchy). Anyway, The Orgasm Donor here clearly gives ladies free orgasms with his big ol' tongue. Let's hope Dr. Feel Good has some learning and realizes that the tongue should keep near the clit and not worry about ramming into the hole (hey, I know that there has been a lot of misconceptions about how this whole oral sex on women thing works - see this Playboy Adviser question from the 90's if you don't believe me).

I do appreciate that the Orgasm Donor costume does focus on tongue work and doesn't include a huge fake penis or something - like he'd be banging me into an orgasm or something. I'd say they got it right on that account - cause vag banging does not an orgasm make, and honestly if I were to imagine my perfect orgasm donor it would in fact be someone who was particularly adept at polishing the nub, if ya get my drift. And that brings my Halloween posts full circle because if you're going to wear one of those sexy, maybe kinda creepy (sexy SpongeBob?), costumes to that Halloween party this weekend, do yourself a favor and find yourself one of those orgasm donors. Get yours and get out. You and your weird sexy little costume deserve it!

Uh, I guess Ketchup is sexy. It has curves I guess.

Again, SpongeBob? 

I don't know - sexy Girl Scout just seems bad for a variety of reasons


Behind "I'll Have What She's Having"

I was driving home from work the other night and was listening to an interview with Billy Crystal on Fresh Air when I heard him tell a story about the famous orgasm scene from When Harry Met Sally. It was right when I stopped the car to go into subway to pick up some dinner, so I just sat in my car and finished listening - which was cool cause there was a long line anyway, and it had gone down a bit by the time I went in.

So it went something like this. Apparently after the movie got the green light, stars Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal, Director Rob Reiner, and writer Nora Ephron would hang out in an office in Hollywood and throw ideas around. Nora said there should be something in there about women faking orgasms, and Rob was all like, "What?! women fake orgasms? That's crazy! - They don't with me." That last part about women not faking with him made it into the movie, which is what Billy Crystal said to Meg Ryan to make her start her fake orgasm...(I think that's the way it went). Anyway Rob was just totally flabbergasted at this idea, but Meg was like, "yeah, I should fake an orgasm in the movie." Then Billy was like "Yeah, it should be someplace public....like in a diner...and then an old woman next to her should say, "I'll have what she's having," which also clearly made it into the movie.

Oh, other things I learned. The woman saying the line about having what she's having was Rob Reiner's mother. Meg was very nervous about doing the scene day of. Rob kept wanting it bigger, and eventually did one himself for her to mimic that included him beating on the table and stuff. Oh and Meg is wearing Billy's sweater in that scene because she didn't feel comfortable about the outfit she had on.

Nora Ephron - Writer When Harry Met Sally

Anyway, I thought the insight was worth a post. Nora Ephron was a woman, and she wrote this movie, and she thought it was important to point out that women fake orgasms and that men don't seem to know or care when it's happening. There's a lot of baggage there we could discuss about why women feel the need to fake orgasms and why men don't seem to notice, but that's for other times. For now, I just think it's a darn good start that this situation, that is so common among women, was put out into the world in such a big movie and in such a humorous way, and it happened because a woman was at the helm. I feel like more women telling stories means more fresh material, tons of new opportunities for humor and eventually more understanding and empathy about our unique experiences and issues. I mean, if it were another man instead of Nora Ephron working with the male (and fake orgasm oblivious) director Rob Reiner, then this classic humor scene would have never happened. For the sake of comedy and the greater human good  people, let's get more women writing and directing and producing big movies!

P.S. This movie was made back in 1989, and you'd think women would have come a long way in Hollywood, but they actually haven't come that far. We have a long way to go.

  • Women accounted for 15% of writers, 17% of executive producers, 20% of editors, 4% of cinematographers, and 25% of producers working on the top 250 domestic grossing films of 2011. - Celluloid Ceiling 2012 Report
  • Women accounted for 9% of directors working on the top 250 films in 2012, an increase in 4 percentage points from 2011 but even with the percentage of women directors working in 1998. - Celluloid Ceiling 2012 Report


The Case of the Female Orgasm: An SSL Book Review

Are you looking to read a good crime drama with plenty of mystery and appalling deceit? Well then, I suggest you read The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Study of Evolution. Why? Because I find the history of research into the evolution of the female orgasm (which author Elisabeth Lloyd expertly navigates) a crime against science. A crime, I say! I'm being a bit dramatic here, but honestly, this book opens one's eyes to absolutely glaring problems that exist in most of the scientific discussion surrounding the evolution of female orgasm, and the reasons that the problems were and continue to be ignored are really kind of a mystery...a mystery that Lloyd seeks to solve.

I pretty much fell in love with it and the author. I had learned about it at the very end part of my writing for the movie. I was spending much less time reading stuff and taking notes and much more time writing and preparing to shoot a movie. When I heard about it, though, it seemed important to check it out, so I immediately bought a copy and read a bunch of write-ups about it on the ol' interwebs. When it showed up at my door, I read through a few areas and answered some questions about the content I had after reading stuff online. I actually read enough to decide and use it to cite the statement in the movie about female orgasm not improving fertility (cause it is about the most comprehensive assessment of that statement out there). I thought the book seemed right on target for the argument it was making, but I never took the time to fully read through it because the subject, although very much related, was outside scope of the arguments I was making in the movie. That is until a few month ago. I read the hell out of that book, and it's a thing of beauty as a total package.

I will preface by saying that I really like Philosophy of Science, and this book is just that. I fell into a Philosophy of Science class in college because I just didn't want to take a straight up mushy, "I think therefore I am" Philosophy class for my requirement.  It just wasn't my cup of meat, ya know? My decision paid off. It was actually a really time consuming class, but I wanted more, so I took Philosophy of Biology my senior year even though my Chemistry degree didn't require it (and I'm not one to overdo class taking). I'll try not to be all gushy here, but those classes flipped something in my brain, and I have never thought about science the same again. I am skeptical of it and respectful of it in a whole new way. That brain flip, plus an intro to feminism course (and oh yeah my personal interest in porn at the time) got me heavy passionate around that time about looking into what would become this movie.

So, yeah, I got mad love for Philosophy of Science, and one thing that really strikes my fancy about it is the way it very methodically, logically, carefully moves toward keeping science ever in check, and I think science needs to be kept in check. Science is just a word and scientists are just people, but both can change our world drastically.  When "science" or "scientists" lose integrity, I think our world suffers. We so we need that ongoing critique of science and scientists, science techniques, and science institutions that Philosophy of Science provides.

The Case of the Female Orgasm indeed takes up that noble-ass cause.  Lloyd decisively rips apart sad evolutionary arguments that strangely ignore completely the overwhelming evidence that, for females, orgasm and reproductive intercourse are not often joined. She uses basic scientific logic to shred crappy research studies commonly used to back up evolutionary arguments that should no longer hold water. She does it all with a measured, thoughtful tone. It's a very "science-paper" read in that she largely does not use her language for flowery romps but to get her point across exactly as it should be made. I have a special place in my heart for that kind of writing because it means to me that the author is taking pains to be serious and careful. Its focus is a rock steady argument. In the end, her argument about which existing evolution of the female orgasm hypothesis comes out as most plausible is easily convincing - almost too easily, which makes her discussion about why other crap hypotheses have endured and still endure so interesting.

 I've read some push-back about this book (including one within the book The Science of Orgasm that I'd like to write about soon), but frankly I haven't seen anything that has any bite at all. In fact, I feel like people spewing off about this book haven't read it, like they are just completely ignoring her main points. It kinda seems that the strange power the topic of female orgasm has to make evolutionary scientists forget basic rules of science and make evolutionary hypotheses anyway also allows people to ignore the information in a book about the evolution of the female orgasm and critique it anyway.

If you ask me, I'd say this is an important and in some ways revolutionary book for science, for philosophy of science,  for feminism, and for sexuality.


Recording the Score

Did I mention yet that watching a room full of musicians recording our score was crazy amazing? We started out the day with a room full of strings, moved on to wood winds, and then to a room of brass, ending with a sweet ass French Horn solo that will slather its beautiful self all over top of the Science, Sex and the Ladies romance novel segment. Thanks you , thank you, thank you Nathaniel Blume, our good and wise composer, for making this all happen.

Oh and when I say "musicians" played this music, what I meant was Me, Charlie and Barney threw down some hot percussion action, and it was perfect and awesome.

Oh - and see that TV? It actually didn't play our movie while the musicians were playing the score. It normally would, and it could have this time, but alas a strategic decision was made to not distract the musicians too much while playing. Oh musicians - could you not play and watch three large vulvas on the screen at the same time? Now that I think of it, those poor strings had a pretty difficult part right there where the vulvas are. They would have been staring at them a while. And that wild brass crew - oh the jokes that would have been a-flyin'. I can assure you that when the first set of brass was finished, they wouldn't have gone out into the lobby to eat pizza, drink wine, and talk about golf. Oh no, they would have hung in the booth to watch what other crazy shit popped up on that TV - and that's just too many people in the booth probably, so it was a good decision.

Ah, it was a good time. We got to meet some of Nathaniel's friends from back in composer school (I'm just gonna call it that). They manned the booth (boothers I think they call them) and were totally cool and fun. The engineer working the board was also awesome as hell. We even ended the session with a good ol' champagne toast (thanks to Nathaniel and his wife). We'll be missing the recording sessions for voice and for guitar/mandolin/ukulele/bass/etc...etc... that will be happening soon, but our hearts will be with them.

Okay, I'm done talking about our LA trip. Next post will be about something different, promise.


Pictures from LA

So, I believe I owe you some pictures. I'll keep this pretty simple.

Here's our fearless sound re-recording engineer, Kieth Waggoner, sitting in his red studio in front of  his sweet sound set-up. This was after we watched the movie with the pretty new dialogue that he had cleaned up. It sounded better than we hoped.

We were also able to just brainstorm together and do some good ol' fashioned artistic collaborating about getting or improving some of our original sound effects and about how he would eventually mix the dialogue, sound effects and music together. It was pretty nice, I tell ya. Well, until we got into a huge fight and were threatening to kill each other.

We also got to hang out in LA and be awesome.

Stay tuned. I'll have some more pics of our score recording in the studio adventures soon.


AnC in LA!

Okay, so I've been kinda off line the since my last post, but it was for good reason. The AnC 3 - me, Barnaby, and Charlie, took ourselves out to LA for the recording of the Science, Sex, and the Ladies score and for some creative collaborating with our sound re-recording mixer. (The name Sound Re-recording Mixer doesn't make much sense, I know. I just say he's the dude that makes all the voice/production recordings sound good and then puts the music, voices and sound effects together in a sweet, sweet beautiful mix, but it's technically called...Sound Re-recording Mixer. It's a carry over from the olden days of movie making.)

Anyway, it was...it was one of the best experiences of my life. Seeing this movie come together in this way after all the years of work that has been put into it up to this point, seeing that music being created...the way it was brought to life by the musicians...I'm not exaggerating when I say it brought tears to our eyes. Seriously, we were all talking later, and the gravity of what was finally happening and the really lovely sounds that were coming from the studio, got us all a bit. I'm not even embarrassed to say it. Our composer, Mr. Nathaniel Blume, not only created a bad ass score, organized everything, ran a tight ship day of, was super calm and nice through it all, but he also hosted us while we were in LA. We couldn't have asked for better accommodations and company from the Blumes. There is still a guitar/Ukulele/mandolin/bass recording happening and a voice recording happening, which would be awesome to see, but alas I have a job to get back to, and we did see the bulk of the score recorded so I'm pretty much on cloud nine.

So the whole score situation was out of this world awesome, but we were also incredibly pleased and excited to hear what Mr. Keith Waggoner had done with the dialogue in the movie so far. It sounds so clean and nice. It's really amazing how much that kind of treatment can up the whole feel of the movie. Honestly, we didn't know what to expect because we'd never gone through this sound post production part before, but I can tell you we were more than pleasantly surprised. The work Keith had done so far was more technical - just cleaning and such, but he'll be getting to the more artful part soon when he's really mixing the soundscape, and we are looking forward to experiencing that.

Ah, it was an amazing, awesome, exciting trip. We also got to see some friends and check out some sites. I couldn't be happier now to be honest. I'm about to get on a plane now, so there will be pictures to come. Also, if the plane goes down, know I died happy. Oh, and someone needs to finish the movie. My dying wish would be for someone to finish it...just so you know.


Masters of Sex: My Thoughts On The First Episode


So I just watched the first Masters of Sex episode...and I was pretty disappointed. I figured I'd be disappointed since I'm so involved in the subjects this show could touch on, but I was a little more disappointed than I had hoped. I'm not going to get too in depth. I certainly could though. I've been thinking and talkin' about it with Charlie, and I could say all kinds of things, but it's the first episode, and I'm gonna wait it out a bit. However, here are some of my quick observations.

Master and Johnson in Masters of Sex

1. There was a scene in which the famous coitus machine is used for demonstration. In real life this is a clear dildo that moved back and forth so as to pump in and out of a vagina. It is clear so you can see what's happening in the vagina. I believe it can also have a camera in it. Anyway, this is the only way M&J recorded orgasms in women that resulted only from vaginal penetration. It was with this dildo machine. M&J hypothesized that the dildo/(or penis they assumed) pulled on the engorged labia which pulled on the clitoral hood which stimulated the clit. It then caused a weaker version of the orgasms women obtained through manual clitoral orgasm. Okay. So that's reality.

In the show, the clear dildo machine is shown as really  just a vibrating clear dildo. It isn't on a thrusting machine. There's even a close up of a switch marked "vibration" being flipped on. We don't really see what she does with it - put it in her vag or rub it on her vulva, but what we do get is the wrong idea about the nature of Master's and Johnson's research. This scene makes it seem like vibrators were a part of it and they certainly were not. It also seems to me like the creators are intentionally downplaying M&J's obsession with emphasizing the importance of orgasm through vaginal penetration. It is a wierd aspect of Masters and Johnson - since they specifically say and their research specifically shows that there is no such thing as a "vaginal orgasms" and that the orgasms had through penetration alone are simply less intense versions of orgasms had through more direct clitoral stimulation. I mean why were they so obsessed with coitus? Frankly, I have a theory about this after reading the book this series was based on...but no matter what it's a peculiar aspect to this scientific duo, and it annoys me that it's ignored.

2. The couple having sex at the end of the show in the lab all hooked up to equipment ended up looking just like a porn scene. It almost looks identical to a porn scene we use as an example in our movie. Anyway, it's got the woman on top - cowgirl style, back straight so that there's no way the clit/vulva area is touching his body. Her hands are in her own hair. It's really porny. The scene ended before she had an orgasm, but it seemed like she was headed that way. Hated it. So this show's about this important research on realistic physical knowledge about female (and male) orgasms, yet right from jump it shows an unrealistic depiction of what physical acts might actually get a women off.

 3. It's a little over dramatic so far. I'm hoping they tone that shit down.

At one point in the show, Virginia Johnson is trying to get a female to volunteer for the studies and she tells her that this could be the biggest change in women's lives since the right to vote. I actually liked that statement a lot, and I think that if the scientific knowledge that Masters and Johnson gave us actually penetrated and stuck in our cultural consciousness, then that would be a very true statement. Unfortunately, I don't believe that change has actually happened yet. I hope we get there soon, but I'm not quite sure yet if this show will help or hurt the cause.