Is female ejaculation real?

The Wild Bunch

Did you know that Ted Bundy's first dog, a collie, was named Lassie?

Lou.m

syklops wrote: »

Its not the last post.

It had it's time.

HughWotMVIII

This thread is now about Ted bundy and serial killers. Proceed.

WilyCoyote

Lou.m wrote: »

I never expected to read this as a last post of a thread on female ejaculation.

syklops wrote: »

Its not the last post.

Correct syklops! And as for you Lou.m ........... please refrain from getting stuck in your alimentary canal. Surely this is what you meant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLlrWIQGTVA

syklops

Wut?

The Wild Bunch

syklops wrote: »

Wut?

Huh?

Ed Winchester

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/women-squirting-during-sex-may-actually-be-peeing

The Wild Bunch

Ed Winchester wrote: »

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/women-squirting-during-sex-may-actually-be-peeing

Been saying it all along!

Wibbs

Yea pretty much my take too. Small amounts isn't pee, but if it's coming out in any sorta volume it is. It's pretty logical folks. I mean the male reproductive system most certainly ejaculates, it is biologically engineered to do so and even the most prodigious producer of such liquid is hitting 10 milliliters and the average is around half that, yet we're supposed to believe that the female reproductive system which for a start has no biological need to ejaculate is firing out ten times that and more and doing so repeatedly? Eh no. This isn't the first study on the matter to come(missus) to the same conclusion.

fred funk }{

So she been pissing herself all this time?

AboutaWeekAgo

Sure all you'd have to do is smell the sheets the next morning to know its piss. Some bang of piss off it!

Gummy Panda

I suppose that's another thing to tick off my list

EoghanIRL

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26772-female-ejaculation-comes-in-two-forms-scientists-find.html#.VLD89I0gGc1

Urine with PSA in some women according to this article .

The Wild Bunch

Pissing and not even an orgasm


Pfffffffffft

Tatra

Wibbs wrote: »

Yea pretty much my take too. Small amounts isn't pee, but if it's coming out in any sorta volume it is. It's pretty logical folks. I mean the male reproductive system most certainly ejaculates, it is biologically engineered to do so and even the most prodigious producer of such liquid is hitting 10 milliliters and the average is around half that, yet we're supposed to believe that the female reproductive system which for a start has no biological need to ejaculate is firing out ten times that and more and doing so repeatedly? Eh no. This isn't the first study on the matter to come(missus) to the same conclusion.

My missus has gushed half a liter and it certainly didn't smell like urine.

Wibbs

Tatra wrote: »

My missus has gushed half a liter and it certainly didn't smell like urine.

Cool, but can you explain where half a liter of fluid is coming from? What biological mechanism is producing such volume and where is it stored? No way on earth are the skeins glands doing so. As I said women do produce fluid from those glands and through the vaginal walls and if arousal in intense enough those fluids can be expelled, but not nearly at the volumes you're noting. On the urine smell, don't wash the sheets for a week and get back to me.

dr.bollocko

Wibbs wrote: »

Cool, but can you explain where half a liter of fluid is coming from? What biological mechanism is producing such volume and where is it stored? No way on earth are the skeins glands doing so. As I said women do produce fluid from those glands and through the vaginal walls and if arousal in intense enough those fluids can be expelled, but not nearly at the volumes you're noting. On the urine smell, don't wash the sheets for a week and get back to me.

Maybe that's where she stores her lucozade.

looking_around

Tatra wrote: »

My missus has gushed half a liter and it certainly didn't smell like urine.

half a litre? really? 2 ordinary glasses full? And somehow thats not from the bladder?

There's clearly some differences to squirting and urine, the speed the bladder fills up is one. (and probably contributes to the lack of smell.)

I drink ALOT of water. Some days..if I've drank 3-4L that day, particularly if I drank alot & fast and with little food...my urine can be the same colour of water, and has no smell. Does that mean it's not pee? or simply that the body processed it quickly and didn't have time to leave it sit in the bladder or increase the chemical components. (darker urine has more urea and waste .)

EoghanIRL

looking_around wrote: »

half a litre? really? 2 ordinary glasses full? And somehow thats not from the bladder?

There's clearly some differences to squirting and urine, the speed the bladder fills up is one. (and probably contributes to the lack of smell.)

I drink ALOT of water. Some days..if I've drank 3-4L that day, particularly if I drank alot & fast and with little food...my urine can be the same colour of water, and has no smell. Does that mean it's not pee? or simply that the body processed it quickly and didn't have time to leave it sit in the bladder or increase the chemical components. (darker urine has more urea and waste .)

Anti diuretic hormone would just make your urine more dilute if you drink that much water , still urine though .

If you were peeing pure water then I reckon your plasma osmolarity would be in trouble .

looking_around

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Anti diuretic hormone would just make your urine more dilute if you drink that much water , still urine though .

If you were peeing pure water then I reckon your plasma osmolarity would be in trouble .

you might want to go back and read my post
I didnt say it was water............................... said it looked like water, to make the comparison for squirting

EoghanIRL

looking_around wrote: »

you might want to go back and read my post
I didnt say it was water............................... said it looked like water, to make the comparison for squirting

Your post says " does that mean it's not pee" .

looking_around

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Your post says " does that mean it's not pee" .

rhetorical question.

due to people saying squirting isn't pee, because it doesn't smell like pee..................
I thought that was obvious, but I take it you haven't read the rest of the thread?

CK73

AboutaWeekAgo wrote: »

Sure all you'd have to do is smell the sheets the next morning to know its piss. Some bang of piss off it!

Seriously if it smells of pee... it is pee. However you will find a 'real' squirt doesn't, not even the next day.

I'm terrible for not drinking enough in the day, so my pee tends to be quite yellow and can smell quite strong. I know it's a bad thing and I need to drink more water, but I don't get the urge and I forget.

However, when I gush it is clear and smells sweet and there is no trace of ammonia at all. I didn't believe it myself to begin with and I was in my 30's before I met someone who knew how to get me to do this, so I've puzzled with it all before now and I know for me, it is not urine. There may be some fluids combined, I don't know, but there is no ammonia and it is clear, so when it comes out, it is a different fluid to pee.

Please also take into consideration that only 7 women were used to make this conclusion. It wouldn't be sufficient to prove or disprove anything else scientifically, so why this? It's not even adequate for student research.

Kevin McCloud

Its definitely real, had to make the bedroom into a wetroom and install a sump pump.

flutered

in my long and mostly very happy erotic and fulfilled sex life, may i say it is definatly not urine, the female is of the opinion that she is about to p, but similar to the male, no she does not

Ave Sodalis

I think a cupful is an awful lot. However, the main problem with this study is they used 7 women, and only five of them are conclusive. According to the study, you can only actually "squirt" a small amount but I don't believe this. If my pee was like that, I'd be going to the doctor. I'm not saying women don't pee, or there isn't some element of urine in it but if my pee was clear to white, slightly sticky and smelled and tasted (apparently) sweet, I think it would be cause for concern. Not to be overly graphic but it does "gush" as the article claims. However, something that doesn't smell like pee, doesn't taste like pee (I'd imagine), doesn't look like pee and doesn't feel like pee... how can it be pee?

They looked at the bladder in that study. I'm wondering if the excess water comes from the bladder but under goes a different process? I don't think the study is big enough to be taken overly seriously and I don't think it's detailed enough to draw any definite conclusions from it.

mikom

It's real alright.
The first time I experienced it was with a young lady by the name of Aska Sykes.

Chloris

Your cervical muscles just cannot push lubricant out of your vagina at the rate necessary for it to be considered squirting. It's a biological impossibility.

The Wild Bunch

It's PISSING, People. P*ssing

krustydoyle

It can be whatever it wants to be..

Doesn't stop me from absolutely loving it

chrysagon

Either way..im armed with a mop in the bedroom...

Mister Vain

I thought I had a squirter once. It turned out i just nicked a hole in her waterbed.

LorMal

LizzieJones wrote: »

Partially true. Not only does she have to trust you but she also needs to know how to pleasure her own body and what it takes for her to orgasm first without a partner.

Then with a partner, he (or she) needs to know how to pleasure a woman without worrying about their own needs first or watching the clock.

All sounds like hard work. Can I watch telly while you work away yourself and sure you can give me a shout when you're nearly done?

LorMal

CK73 wrote: »

Seriously if it smells of pee... it is pee. However you will find a 'real' squirt doesn't, not even the next day.

I'm terrible for not drinking enough in the day, so my pee tends to be quite yellow and can smell quite strong. I know it's a bad thing and I need to drink more water, but I don't get the urge and I forget.

However, when I gush it is clear and smells sweet and there is no trace of ammonia at all. I didn't believe it myself to begin with and I was in my 30's before I met someone who knew how to get me to do this, so I've puzzled with it all before now and I know for me, it is not urine. There may be some fluids combined, I don't know, but there is no ammonia and it is clear, so when it comes out, it is a different fluid to pee.

Please also take into consideration that only 7 women were used to make this conclusion. It wouldn't be sufficient to prove or disprove anything else scientifically, so why this? It's not even adequate for student research.

think I'm going to puke..

Mister Vain

Is it also know as the cream of sum yung gal?

PizzamanIRL

The Wild Bunch wrote: »

It's PISSING, People. P*ssing

Just a bit windy where I live.

Boscoirl

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

Just a bit windy where I live.

Fanny farts

UCDVet

I'm assuming someone has already said this - but we need only look to the UK for an answer.

The UK passed a bunch of (ridiculous to me) laws legislating pornography. They made it illegal to film people urinating during sex acts. Thus, if female ejaculation is pee, it is illegal to film. If it *is not* pee, then it is legal.

Here is a quote from the governing body of such things in the UK.

Therefore, unless it's very clear that what is being shown is indeed 'female ejaculation', as opposed to urolagnia, the Board's position has to be that scenes of this nature featuring liquid that might be urine have to be cut

They clearly recognize that female ejaculation exists and is separate from urination.

Several medical studies have shown that female ejaculation is not urine

They and other researchers analyzed female ejaculatory fluid and found that it is not urine, but rather a combination of secretions from the paraurethral glands that chemically resemble prostate secretions in men.

Constituents of female ejaculate Researchers isolated the fluid and found that in contrast to urine, it has higher levels of PAP, PSA and glucose and lower levels of creatinine.

So - why do so many people think 'It's just pee' or 'fake'. Because - a lot of times it is. Like so many things in porn, it's a fantasy and reality doesn't live up. Doctors think that only *some* women can ejaculate. Some figures put the number as low at 10% (others as high as 50%). And, in the same way men have prostates and ejaculation through stimulation of the prostate is possible for any man (baring medical or psychological issue) only a tiny fraction of men will experience it.

And, more importantly, the amount produced is quite small. This is no different than male ejaculation in porn - the adult film industry has used a number of 'tricks' to increase the volume of ejaculate because, well, I guess that is what people like.

What you see in porn is frequently the product of an actress drinking a lot of water and urinating, a vaginal douche, creative camera work, plumbing or a combination of the above.

Titzon Toast

Damn right it's real, and it's not pee either.
From what I've read in this thread it's folk who haven't experienced it for themselves who are adamant that it's fake and it's pee etc.
Anyone who's experienced it first hand (no pun intended) believes it to be real. Funny that.

looking_around

Titzon Toast wrote: »

Damn right it's real, and it's not pee either.
From what I've read in this thread it's folk who haven't experienced it for themselves who are adamant that it's fake and it's pee etc.
Anyone who's experienced it first hand (no pun intended) believes it to be real. Funny that.

tbh, I think the study covers why it doesnt seem like pee.

the bladder is filling more quickly and it has psa.

UCDvet, makes the point that female ejaculation is real but doesn't "gush".
If it gushes it has to be coming from somewhere else.

From the study it seems, it's clear because the bladder and everything is working faster, it doesn't have time to become concentrated.

I'm not entirely sure why people are bothered by the findings so much.

If it gushes, it's diluted urine +psa. Could be very diluted, need more studies with women at different hydrated levels.

I'm more interested in why the body has this ability to speed up the system and exactly what biological process triggers this. (what signal is being sent to the brain and where etc, )

looking_around

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm assuming someone has already said this - but we need only look to the UK for an answer.

The UK passed a bunch of (ridiculous to me) laws legislating pornography. They made it illegal to film people urinating during sex acts. Thus, if female ejaculation is pee, it is illegal to film. If it *is not* pee, then it is legal.

actually its illegal to film female ejaculation either way, because on camera it's "indistinguishable" from pee.

Ave Sodalis

looking_around wrote: »

tbh, I think the study covers why it doesnt seem like pee.

the bladder is filling more quickly and it has psa.

UCDvet, makes the point that female ejaculation is real but doesn't "gush".
If it gushes it has to be coming from somewhere else.

From the study it seems, it's clear because the bladder and everything is working faster, it doesn't have time to become concentrated.

I'm not entirely sure why people are bothered by the findings so much.

If it gushes, it's diluted urine +psa. Could be very diluted, need more studies with women at different hydrated levels.

I'm more interested in why the body has this ability to speed up the system and exactly what biological process triggers this. (what signal is being sent to the brain and where etc, )

The study doesn't really cover it, it's just speculation and nothing conclusive but for some reason, IFLS has gone a bit tabloidy on this.

Plus, it does "gush" or feel like gushing, even if it's ejaculation, and ejaculation can leave a mess. Doesn't go through the sheets but is uncomfortable enough to necessitate a towel.

looking_around

sup_dude wrote: »

The study doesn't really cover it, it's just speculation and nothing conclusive but for some reason, IFLS has gone a bit tabloidy on this.

Plus, it does "gush" or feel like gushing, even if it's ejaculation, and ejaculation can leave a mess. Doesn't go through the sheets but is uncomfortable enough to necessitate a towel.

My point is, it has to come from somewhere.... you have a place it comes from that doesn't include kidneys/bladder?

How much would you say you "gush"?

and put some paper under the sheets and tell me it hasn't gone through the sheets.

I'm not saying it isnt real, I'm saying that to be a 'cup' full, it has to be coming from the bladder.

It would be interesting I think, if the same study was done with women who only let out a little, oppose to the "cup full". and test the constitutes of that fluid.

Ave Sodalis

looking_around wrote: »

My point is, it has to come from somewhere.... you have a place it comes from that doesn't include kidneys/bladder?

How much would you say you "gush"?

and put some paper under the sheets and tell me it hasn't gone through the sheets.

I'm not saying it isnt real, I'm saying that to be a 'cup' full, it has to be coming from the bladder.

It would be interesting I think, if the same study was done with women who only let out a little, oppose to the "cup full". and test the constitutes of that fluid.

I'm my first post, I wondered if it was formed in the bladder through a seperate process. Actually, I think a lot of this post I've answered in the first post I wrote.

It doesn't go through, we've checked. It still gushes though.

looking_around

sup_dude wrote: »

I'm my first post, I wondered if it was formed in the bladder through a seperate process. Actually, I think a lot of this post I've answered in the first post I wrote.

It doesn't go through, we've checked. It still gushes though.

I'm sure you have, place kitchen paper under sheets, and tell me it doesn't go through the sheets. Unless you have some really thick sheets, if your sheets are wet, so is your bed.
___
Please study biology and tell me this separate process Even basic biology explains how they're connected.

The study did mention that the bladders and kidneys were working at an accelerated rate, so there's something to that.

I suspect if your ejaculation was tested, it would have the same constitutes as pee, + the extras.
The question then, is the percentages and for that a greater number of women would have to be studied.

But the point is,it's still coming from the bladder, which has to come from the kidneys, therefore it's still urine, albeit, possibly very diluted.

Ave Sodalis

looking_around wrote: »

I'm sure you have, place kitchen paper under sheets, and tell me it doesn't go through the sheets. Unless you have some really thick sheets, if your sheets are wet, so is your bed.
___
Please study biology and tell me this separate process Even basic biology explains how they're connected.

The study did mention that the bladders and kidneys were working at an accelerated rate, so there's something to that.

I suspect if your ejaculation was tested, it would have the same constitutes as pee, + the extras.
The question then, is the percentages and for that a greater number of women would have to be studied.

But the point is,it's still coming from the bladder, which has to come from the kidneys, therefore it's still urine, albeit, possibly very diluted.

It doesn't go through the sheets, we checked straight after one time out of curiosity.
I'm in my final year of a science degree. There's many processes we don't fully understand. The study just said the bladder was active. It also only studied a very very small number of women and limited to those producing over a cup. Over a cup is a huge amount of liquid so maybe it was pee. What I'm saying is that an ejaculate can also use a large amount (maybe not a full cup) but doesn't look, smell, taste or feel like pee. The diluted pee may be an explanation for the clearness or the smell. It doesn't really explain the stickiness or the sweetness of it. I also think that IFLS didn't do the greatest of jobs reporting the study.

pickarooney

What is PSA? I keep thinking of the French rugby manager but he's pure piss so I guess it must be something else.

looking_around

sup_dude wrote: »

It doesn't go through the sheets, we checked straight after one time out of curiosity.
I'm in my final year of a science degree. There's many processes we don't fully understand. The study just said the bladder was active. It also only studied a very very small number of women and limited to those producing over a cup. Over a cup is a huge amount of liquid so maybe it was pee. What I'm saying is that an ejaculate can also use a large amount (maybe not a full cup) but doesn't look, smell, taste or feel like pee. The diluted pee may be an explanation for the clearness or the smell. It doesn't really explain the stickiness or the sweetness of it. I also think that IFLS didn't do the greatest of jobs reporting the study.

the psa could explain the stickiness.

Like I said, use paper sheets, I guarantee if your bed sheets are getting wet, so is the mattress, the sheets don't magicly hold it, like some inverse sponge.
__

What is a large amount, if a cup is a huge amount?

I don't know if I said it, I would like to see a study on women who squirt low amounts. I can imagine that some is just glands, but I can't see glands filling much more than an egg cup.

Basically, I can't imagine female ejaculation, somehow being larger in amount than male ejaculation, there's nowhere, for it to be stored.

If it is coming from the bladder, it's urine, by definition. Albeit probably heavily diluted, but that doesn't change what it is.

Should this change/stop anyone from enjoying it? no, I don't think so. but I don't understand the up in arms against the likelihood.

looking_around

pickarooney wrote: »

What is PSA? I keep thinking of the French rugby manager but he's pure piss so I guess it must be something else.

Is my google better than your google?
http://www.northernurology.com/articles/urologic_conditions/psa.html

Firewalkwithme

Its very real and its not piss. I know from personal experience.