“It Feels So Good It Almost Hurts”: Young Adults' Experiences of Orgasm and Sexual Pleasure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orgasm is a "goal" of much sexual activity, and a source of potentially intense pleasure and fulfillment, yet can be fraught with difficulty or distress. Relatively little social science research has explored people's experiences around, and their meanings related to, orgasm, and indeed other sexual pleasures, especially with young adults. This study aimed to provide a rich exploration of the meanings associated with orgasm and sexual pleasure during sex with a partner, to understand the social patterning of orgasm experience. A qualitative survey was used to collect data from 119 sexually experienced British young adults (81% women, mean age 20, 92% heterosexual). A descriptive form of thematic analysis that prioritizes participants' meanings and experiences was used to identify and explore patterns in the data. Five main themes are reported here: (a) orgasm: the purpose and end of sex; (b) "it's more about my partner's orgasm"; (c) orgasm: the ultimate pleasure?; (d) orgasm is not a simple physiological response; and (e) faking orgasm is not uncommon. These (mostly not gendered) themes demonstrate the complex and contradictory meanings around orgasm, and reveal meaning to be dependent on situation and context. However, they do resonate strongly with widespread discourses of sexuality that prioritize heterosexual coitus, orgasm, and orgasm reciprocity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it