Masters And Johnson 1968 Playboy Interview

Share

Tweet

M&J 1968 Playboy Interview

In 1968, 2 years after their book Human Sexual Response was released, Dr. William H. Masters and Virginia E. Johnson were interviewed in Playboy Magazine on their groundbreaking research about how the body responds to arousal and orgasm contained in that book. I will be summarizing and commenting on that interview in this post.

Playboy Magazine, “Masters & Johnson Interview,” Hef's Philosophy: Playboy and Revolution from 1965-1975, accessed May 29, 2021, https://forthearticles.omeka.net/items/show/17. You can link to the full pdf of the article HERE.

The Interview Highlight (in my opinion)

The really interesting part of this article and the reason I really want to include a summary of it in my SSL collection is that Johnson reveals that, contrary to popular belief, no woman in their research was able to orgasm from use of the artificial phallus alone. All the test subjects needed some form of additional self stimulation to orgasm. This artificial phallus (that they called cyclops) was basically a clear dildo on a machine that could pump in and out of the vagina at the varying speeds controlled by the test subject. It also had a specialty camera inside that could record (even accounting for the movement from pumping) so that the researchers could observe what was happening in the vagina during arousal and orgasm. Masters and Johnson (M&J) recorded things like vaginal lubrication seeping from the walls and the rhythmic pelvic muscle contractions that mark an orgasm - pretty cool actually. 

I didn't know Johnson had said this until recently when my trusted lady-gasm research partner-in-crime sent me the article with it highlighted. It's actually quite a huge revelation because frankly the details in Human Sexual Response about how exactly female orgasm during intercourse was recorded and what exactly was happening when those orgasms occured is unclear. In fact, I would say it's one of the mushiest aspects of the research. It is often assumed (and I assumed) from what they write that orgasms during intercourse that M&J reported were observed and recorded while nothing was happening to the woman except for a the dildo moving in and out of the vagina - AKA an orgasm from intercourse with no additional external clitoral area stimulation.  M&J are clear that there is not some different type of "vaginal orgasm" that happens during intercourse, and give an explanation of how the clitoral glans is involved in this process. In the book they tell us that even if the clit is not given additional simulation during intercourse, it is close by the action and still able to get physical stimulation. They write that when the penis moves in and out of the vagina, it pulls on the labia, which pulls on the clitoral hood, which moves over the clitoral glans and thus simulates it. With that very indirect method of getting stimulation to the clitoris, you might not be surprised that M&J also found the orgasms from intercourse to be the weakest they researched, with manual manipulation by a capable partner being stronger and strongest of all, masturbation. 

Johnson's reveal tells me/makes me wonder a few things

1. If not during the use of the artificial phallus where they could have clearly visually recorded the rhythmic contractions that physically are known to indicate orgasm, how then, did M&J record orgasms during intercourse? It would be easy to record female orgasms during partner manual manipulation and masturbation because you can just put a camera looking right at the muscles around the vagina that contract during orgasm - and M&J certainly did this. However, during intercourse the view is bad. My assumption would be that maybe they used electrodes on the pelvic muscles to look for muscle contractions, but they don't specifically discuss how they dealt with what must be a tricky situation of keeping electrodes in place and measuring the correct things during the often quite violently physical act of intercourse. That they didn't discuss those details make me wonder.

 

2. It is interesting to note that although M&J only allowed participants who had a history of being orgasmic during masturbation and during intercourse (the history, I assume, being simply that the participants claimed they had this history), that even these seemingly orgasmically experienced women could still not orgasm from merely a phallus moving in and out of the vagina (and at a speed they chose and in a position where they were allowed to move their body freely). Yet, they were able to come when they added other additional stimulation to this dildo machine's movements. It tells me that if there are women out there that can come from merely the simulation of the penis in the vagina (with no additional external simulation), then it must not be very common or easy.  

3. It also tells me that the, let's face it, somewhat outlandish Rube-Goldberg situation they described with the labia pulling the clitoral hood and then moving against the clit, well, that didn't happen during the artificial phallus experiments - at least not enough to actually cause orgasm. The artificial phallus experiments would be the ideal time to really get that Rube-Goldberg orgasm mechanism recorded, but they didn't do it...and that makes me wonder if that really did happen even in the partner intercourse parts of the study. Did they observe that mechanism during the partner intercourse, or did they just hypothesize? It would have been harder to observe with a partner certainly (blocked view, ya know). So this means women in this study who came during intercourse did so with a human partner, and in that case there are a number of ways (besides the Rube-Goldberg-no-direct-external-clit-stimulation-situation) a woman could get direct clitoral stimulation during intercourse; grinding the clit against her partner or the bed for instance, or even her or her partner touching the clit - and M&J never specifically rule out that either of those things were happening during the intercourse orgasms...in fact M&J seem to always describe the orgasms as orgasms during intercourse - which is not the same thing as orgasms from intercourse.

4. So all that brings me to a very important revelation of my own. M&J, maybe didn't actually observe women orgasming from nothing more than something moving in and out of their vagina. I had previously assumed they did observe this during the artificial phallus experiments, and that they identified the Rube-Goldberg process as having caused it. 'It' being the orgasms during intercourse, aka the lowest intensity orgasms they researched, but an orgasm none the less. When I (hopefully soon) reread and summarize Human Sexual Response, section by section, I'll very carefully comb through their confusing language and statement about female orgasms during intercourse and see if I can get a clue of exactly what they did to observe and record these types of orgasms...'cause I'm much more skeptical now.  

The Interview Summary

So that's was my big upfront news on this, but also there are a lot of other cool tidbits in the interview as well. Below I will highlight any interesting and/or SSL-relevant items, and may comment a bit (always clearly denoted that they are my thoughts - not the article's - by putting it within brackets [ME:]). Do enjoy.

Writing Style and Early Criticism

• Used Little, Brown & Company as publisher because its reputation was beyond reproach. M&J also specifically used dry, medical, Latin, complicated language to make it not titillating in the least...and it is not. No one can say this book was made to get you horny.
• Masters, about the choice to write the book with such scholarly emotionlessness, "...in sexual matters, regardless of one's discipline or lack of it, one evaluates the material first emotionally and then intellectually - if the second evaluation ever has an opportunity to develop."  p68
• Dr. Leslie H. Farber, a psychoanalyst was one of the early criticizers when the book came out.  He was appalled that Masters and Johnson had mechanized and dehumanized sexuality, and was sad about the lack of morality and modesty in this discussion of sex. He also was skeptical about the ladies. This Playboy article quotes Dr. Farber, "'My guess, which is not subject to laboratory proof,' wrote Farber, 'is that the female orgasm was always an occasional, though not essential, part of women's whole sexual experience.'" p67
• Masters on the criticism about mechanization and dehumanization, "Rather than present an opinion-or psychologic interpretation - we felt it was long past time in this field to find out a few basic facts. That's what we tried to do." p74
• M&J say 8% of their mail is negative of the work, with about 1/2 vicious, nasty, and unsigned and 1/2 from fine well-written people who simply think sex shouldn't be studied. Masters is clear that they respect these opinions. 22% are supportive, and the remaining 70% are the important ones - people asking questions about their problems of sexual inadequacy.
• Masters: "We absolutely refuse to defend ourselves except in open discussion. If, for instance, a critical review of our work appears, whether it's totally valid or a total farce, we never write a rebuttal. We think there is only one defense, and that is continued research productivity. In anything as emotionally charged as this area, inevitably there is going to be criticism - some of real value, some useless. But if we were to spend all our time answering the critics, we wouldn't get any work done. " p70

The Research and Participants

• M&J were able to maintain a press blackout during most of the years of their research so they wouldn't get shut down, but it got leaked 18 months before publication. They wanted another year to do more research on the cardiorespiratory. Masters says the book is quite weak in that area. 
• Johnson about the artificial phallus that is now destroyed, "This may be an appropriate time to put to rest a popular misconception created by the mass media - that is the titillating assumption that the only purpose of the artificial phallus was to stimulate sexual response. This was not the case. During artificial coition, the research subjects never could achieve orgasm by use of the phallus alone - they all had to employ additional self-stimulation derived from their own personal preferences and previously established patterns.  The point is, a female responds sexually to that which is endowed for her with sexual meaning. Over a period of time, all the women in our sample probably could have oriented themselves to respond to the exclusive use of a phallic device if they had been so motivated; but to them, the laboratory phallus was nothing in or of itself, and neither the situation nor their own personal interest required that they make it so. Consequently, the only reason for creating and using the device was to provide an opportunity for definition and measurement of the intravaginal environment."
• [ME: So, this is the quote I discussed above. In addition to all I said up there, I also think her total speculation that the participants would eventually have been able to 'respond' to just the dildo alone was a bit out there, and certainly not within the just-the-facts manner of speaking that they often pride themselves on.]
• M&J used prostitutes but just to begin the research; no data from them is used in book
• About 40% of people who wished to join were eliminated 
• Playboy asked, "Because of the selective nature of your study population, some of your conclusions cannot be applied to the population in general. Is that true?"
• Masters - "As it pertains to physiology, this criticism doesn't hold up, because the identical reactions were observed under all laboratory condition. Psychologically the criticism might be true, but we didn't make any psychological generalizations in Human Sexual Response. I might add, we were also selective in that we accepted only subjects who had a history of successful sexual response. If you are going to find out what happens, obviously, you must work with those to whom it happens."
• When asked of the motivations of their subjects, M&J said especially for the younger ones, money had something to do with it, although it was only about enough for babysitting and transportation. They insisted on payment for their subjects so they could meet and keep schedules. They also knew from interviews that for most people there was real concern for the state of affairs in our sexual culture and that they believed too little was known and this researchm could help. Everything from rape of a neighbor's child to worry about their children's marriage, to illegitimate pregnancies in the neighborhood were reasons people gave for wanting more known and thus for volunteering for the research.
• When Playboy asked if some participants maybe just wanted a socially acceptable way to get off, Johnson said, "In some cases, yes. There were young women-divorcees with children and so on-who had grave concern for their social image. They may not have had a relationship going at the time, and so the experiments served as a legitimate release for them." 
• Johnson answered a questions about whether they were criticized about using unmarried people in the laboratory. She said only by the people who criticize it outside the laboratory. Masters adds on that unmarried subject that worked together were only ones that had done so outside the lab as well, and that some people approve of sex outside marriage and some don't. They had not thought of using unmarried people actually until a group of psychiatrists suggested it - who thought maybe physical response patterns might be different in and out of marriage. They are not. 
• On the subject of privacy and of in-lab vs. private sexual response, Masters says, "The subjects were taken through several steps of orientation before being placed in research situation. It was a gradual process and included explanations of our motives or doing the work, of our techniques and of the laboratory environment. The individual was allowed to adapt at his own speed; some people indicated readiness faster than others. You see, it is our premise that the subjects bring their own patterns of response with them, and all we seek to do is to help preserve those patterns in a changed environment.  The reassurance comes from knowing the investigators are busy doing their particular work. There was never a situation where everyone was lined up looking." p76. Johnson noted that even though people were sprawled out and naked during the experiment, many of the more shy subjects still unconsciously or symbolically observed the rituals of modesty and privacy, like reaching for robes as soon as they were done, etc. The investigators also did so. For instance after done doing their work, they would intentionally turn away to give privacy even though they had already seen everything.  
• When asked about whether they were concerned there might be different sexual patterns for people that are comfortable performing under observation, Masters says, "If there were major variations between performing under observation and performing in private, then we would have observed them when we recorded the person in the laboratory four or five years after their first recording." p76. He also noted that research can only be done on those being observed. You could do something like put an electrode in the uterus to test them at home, but the complaint of artificiality would still be there because the person knew they were being recorded. "We were faced with the fact that we had to move in the direction of laboratory recording or not move at all. I will say that, after thousands of recordings, we're convinced that we can translate physiological findings that we have acquired in the laboratory to the privacy of the bedroom. But I want to stress that this is just an opinion; perhaps we can never know for sure." p76

The Data and Findings

• Playboy describes Master and Johnson's sexual response cycle, the final step being the resolution period after the orgasm which fairly quickly gets the the muscle tension and pelvic blood congestion back to pre-arousal levels. Then Playboy asks, "What happens to those individuals, particularly females, who don't go through the whole cycle to orgasm?"
• Masters: "There are periods of irritability, emotional instability, restlessness, pelvic discomfort, lack of sleep. Combination of these symptoms may develop in the human female. You see, orgasm is a release point for the congestion of blood in the pelvis. This vasocongestion-which is the medical term for it-is relieved very rapidly if there is an orgasm. If not, the release of vagocongestion is slowed, particularly if the woman has had babies and has enlarged blood vessels in the pelvis. Her period of frustration, irritation and pelvic discomfort may last for hours sometime - though rarely - a day or two." p.78. Playboy then asks about blue balls, and Masters says yes, high arousal without release can cause some tenderness, but a later ejaculation or nocturnal emission will relieve it.
• Asked about female ejaculation:
• Masters says, "We have heard from four women who claimed that, with orgasm, they have an overwhelming release of fluid. But we've never had the opportunity to evaluate these women in the laboratory.
• Johnson adds, "There are large numbers of women who have physical manifestations that fit their belief that they ejaculate. The fact that many women urinate under the intensity of emotional experience may very well be a factor here. But we don't know."
• [Me: M&J later (in the 8-0's, I believe) acknowledge that female ejaculation can happen]
• M&J were asked about penis size relating to a woman's sexual response and say they found this not to be true. They did mention their research is physiological, and it may be true that a person could have a psychological response to dick size..so maybe size might be mentally arousing, which would help get closer to an eventual orgasm.  
• Of uncircumcised vs. circumcised penises, Masters says, "The uncircumcised male-and, in some versions of the folklore, the circumcised male- is presumed to have a greater tendency towards pre-mature ejaculation, because he can be more easily stimulated. We have no evidence that either presumption is true. Fundamentally, we cannot find any difference in reaction time, or sensate focus, between the circumcised and the uncircumcised male."
• Asked about Freud's vaginal vs. clitoral theory pg 78-80
• Masters: "It was Freud's concept that if a woman's response was restricted to the masturbatory or clitoral orgasm, then it reflected psychic immaturity. She could be considered a fully responsive, hence mature, woman only if she had orgasms during intercourse-by definition, the vaginal orgasm. In order to delineate between these two types of orgasm, Freud presumed they were entirely separate physiological entities. Our research indicates this is not the case. Certain clitoral changes occur with stimulation of either the clitoral area or the vaginal area, or from manipulation of the breasts or, for that matter, from simple fantasy. These changes are anatomically and physiologically identical, regardless of the source of stimulation. Secondarily, it is physically impossible not to stimulate the clitoris during intercourse. And I'm not talking referring to direct penile-clitoral contact."
• Playboy asks if Freud presumed a mature woman transferring sensation from the clit to the vagina, and Masters says, "Yes, but there is no longer any need to speculate about this, because, as I started to say, the clitoris is stimulated during intercourse every time the female responds to a male thrust. This reaction occurs regardless of what position she may be in. You see, with each thrust, the minor labia are pulled down toward the rectum and, in the process, stimulate the shaft of the clitoris. So there is no physiological difference among clitoral orgasm, vaginal orgasm, breast orgasm or, for that matter, orgasm through fantasy. Incidentally, since the publication of the text, we've had the opportunity to evaluate three women who can fantasy to orgasm."
• [Me: A couple things. 1. Masters defines vaginal orgasm there, as he always does, as an orgasm that happens during intercourse - which is specifically different from the more common way of speaking about it contemporarily, which is that it is an orgasm that happens from the act of vaginal intercourse alone with no additional external clitoral stimulation. 2. 'During intercourse' allows so many more possibilities for external clitoral stimulation - including that Rube-Goldberg dick ponding pulls on labia-pulls on clit hood - stimulates clit theory that M&J made popular - and that I assumed, up until Johnsons comment I discussed above, was observed to some degree.]

Female Sexuality and Orgasm

• Playboy: "Manual stimulation of the clitoris by the male-as a form of foreplay-is strongly recommended in most marriage manuals. Does your research confirm the wisdom of this advice?"
• Masters: "Not entirely. Many marriage manuals err in suggesting that the glans of the clitoris be manipulated; this is an extremely tender area, which the female rarely manipulates herself. She more or less stimulates herself along the shaft or just in the general clitoral area, which is called the mons."
• Playboy: What about "riding high" - another favored marriage manual concept-in which the male maneuvers his body so the shaft of the penis comes into direct contact with the clitoris?"
• Masters: "This is a misconception. Our findings show that the clitoris elevates and withdrawals from its overhang position during intercourse, making it extremely difficult to attain direct penile shaft-clitoral contact. It can be done, but it's an acrobatic maneuver in most cases and not really worth the effort."
• M&J are asked about female orgasm and conception. They say they don't have sure knowledge. Some research, but nothing that can be scientifically supported.
• Asked if their research has caused a preoccupation with female orgasm, Masters says: "We don't think you can over emphasize the importance of this subject." p.80 
• Johnson: "Orgasmic preoccupation could occur only in a society in which sexuality has been so negated that many women have been unable to move confidently through all this discussion with a foundation of self-knowledge. A woman who has or has had a satisfactory relationship-and is secure in its effectiveness-can skim through the magazine article stressing orgasm or listen to the neighbor lady at the coffee Klatch brag, 'Oh, we have intercourse eight times a week and I'm orgasming one hundred percent of the time,' and still not feel threatened by this kind of discussion. But someone who lacks personal knowledge can be thrown into pure panic."
• Playboy: "In your book you also discussed female multiple orgasm. You wrote, 'Women have the response potential of returning to another orgasmic experience from any point in the resolution phase if they submit to the reapplication of effective stimulation.' Since multiple orgasms were discussed by Kinsey and earlier by L.T. Terman, what particular significance did you attach to it?"
• Masters: "Apart from several physiologic observations of a technical nature, one of the important things we established-to our own satisfaction at least-is that the female is naturally multiorgasmic. This had not been established before."
• Johnson: "In spite of Terman and Kinsey, scientifically oriented people still imply that this is a freakish thing."
• Playboy: "Picking up on the phrase "naturally multiorgasmic," do you believe that, all other things being equal, the female should achieve orgasm as easily as the male?"
• Masters: "Yes, indeed. We have nothing to suggest otherwise. It would seem that the puritan and Victorian social restraints have destroyed or altered significantly the female's natural responsivity." 
• Playboy: "Another aspect of female sexuality discussed in your text is the notion that the female's response is more diffuse than the male's - that is, that women respond sexually with more of their bodies than do men, whose pleasure seems to be centered in the penis. Would you comment on this?"
• Johnson: "This, too, is probably culturally conditioned. We find that those men who value total expression undergo all the thrill and sensate experience of a total body phenomenon commonly attributed only to the female."
• Masters: "I think what should be stressed here is that physiologically, the male and the female are incredibly alike in sexual response-not different. This is really what we tried to emphasize in the text."
• Johnson: "If I may be permitted to comment on the larger issue implicit in your question-the fact that so many people of both sexes feel sexual pleasure only in the sex organs themselves-this is a manifestation of their rejection of their total sexuality. For example, a lot of women do not respond to breast stimulation because of its implied impropriety. A young person exposed to this type of negation will frequently reject the concept of breast stimulation and/or response. An anesthesia comparable with self-hypnosis is induced. I mention the breasts particularly because this type of negation comes out so dramatically when women reject nursing."
• Masters: "Yes, and this negation may extend even to the genitals-as with the unresponsive woman who claims she never feels a thing during intercourse, no stimulations whatsoever. She has a certain amount of vaginal anesthesia that we're convince-as are many others-is psychogenically induced and relates to attitude, circumstance and environment. I do want to stress however, that we lack definitive data concerning the psychological deterrents to sexual response and sexual tension." p.80
• Asked if women experience anything like nocturnal emission, they say they've done no dream research, but their certain it can happen, and Johnson points out there have been frequent reports of more erotic dreaming by abstaining women.
• Playboy notes many women abstain from sex during menstruation and asks if women's sex-tensions are lower then. Masters says women can certainly be sexually responsive during menstruation, but few women report their greatest levels of sexual tension during menstruation. Johnston notes women might reject the idea of sex during menstruation, and that could put off sexual feelings. Also some women are physically uncomfortable during that time which would put sexual interest on the back-burner, but then again, if the circumstance is overwhelming in these cases (being reunited with a lover for instance) that would overcome everything else. Masters goes on to say there is no physiological constant related to this that is true for all women. Certain percentages of women report higher interest at certain times of the menstrual cycle, but, "Probably the greatest number of women report no consistently identifiable pattern of response." p 82
• Johnson: "There are so many factors that make this difficult to pin down. For some women, sexual deprivation sends their needs and interest up. On the other hand, we find that frequency of orgasmic return helps maintain a high level of sexual stimulation - in other words, success breeds success."
• Asking about Imagination, [Me: I think Johnson's points are important because it relates to my feelings about how women slowly lose the connection between orgasm/pleasure and sexual situations in a way men do not. As in the actual partnered sexual experiences women tend to have are less erotic and less orgasmic than the actual partnered sexual experiences that men tend to have...and our bodies' reactions when faced with future partnered sexual acts reflects that recalled knowledge of what we should expect.]
• Johnson: "What some people call imagination could be described as recall. The only psychological constant in sexual response is the memory of, or the conditioned response to, the pleasure of sensation-in other words, to those things that have become sexually endowed for that person. These may be deliberately invoked during masturbation or during intercourse to help overcome a particular environment or occasion-a time or place that doesn't turn the individual on."
• then, Johnson: "I do want to emphasize that imagination, as we understand it, relates not to fantasy but to reality, to a recall or use of the realities of a person's life. True fantasy-in other words, the invention of thought patterns related to sex or sexuality-is generally employed by those individuals who have had little or no previous successful experience." p. 80 

Other Miscellaneous and Philosophical Questions

• Then playboy goes on a whole thing asking questions about imagination playing a big role in fucking an unattractive person, pressing about whether some things are more attractive than others like breast size for example (all focused on female not male attributes of course), and M&J deflect appropriately noting that although it's cliché to say, beauty really is in the eye of the beholder and things like Madison Avenue and Playboy are creating connotations related to things like breast size. Johnson points out that a woman's worry about her appearance might actually preoccupy her and cancel out her attention to real sexuality. She also said some women might take their symbolic sexual qualities and use them to conceive of herself as a more sexual person.
• When asked if women find the naked male body attractive, Masters notes that Kinsey felt that women were not so aroused by the male body, but they didn't find that to be the case, and Johnston points out they've come through an era when the male body was very unsexualized - wearing shirts to the beach, etc. "Given equal opportunity, women will react to sexual anatomy just as men do-just as much or just as little, if society permits them to, and if they begin to perceive themselves as sexual beings." p80
• Then playboy starts asking about porn and if it's taboo nature makes it particularly erotic and it should be legally restricted. M&J react with sensible statements about how we don't really know, and 'it's everyone's individual decision' kinds of things.
• About birth control, M&J say their conclusions about effectiveness match previous studies. When asked if contraceptives affect sexual response, M&J speak on a few physical irritations that go along with some of them that might affect it, and then defer from speaking any further because they are currently researching contraceptives.
• Masters, when asked about the medical profession's knowledge of sex said, "They know no more or no less about the subject than any other college graduates. They share most of the common misconceptions, taboos and fallacies of their nonmedical confreres."
• Of pregnancy, M&J say barring pin or membrane ruptures, sex can happen throughout and that abstinence for about 6 weeks after is sensible because of the trauma to the vaginal canal. 
• About aging, M&J basically say if there were satisfactory sexual experiences in the younger years, there's no reason they wouldn't continue into the older years.
• They also get asked about sex ed and speak philosophically about setting examples for children throughout their life and what sex ed teachers should be like. What they say is pretty close to what any modern progressive would say. They also are asked about the sexual revolution and say it's not a revolution. It's a renaissance; speaking about pre-industrial eras where farmer's wives took them lunch in the field and had a roll in the hay - something that changed when men went away to the city.
• Masters: "It must also be realized that the one physiological activity, after eating and sleeping, that occupies that greatest part of human life is no less worthy of definitive and objective research. We intend to devote the greatest part of our lives to that research." p202