~ The FEMALE MULTIPLE ORGASM Forum ~ www.femalemultiple.org
September 26, 2017, 07:56:28 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the new Female Mutliple Orgasm Forum!

The Female Multiple Orgasm Forum is THE place to find information, ask questions and share your experience about female multiple orgasms and becoming multi-orgasmic.

 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: advice for a route to modestly increased sexual pleasure with a partner  (Read 14627 times)
Administrator
Administrator
Newbie
*****
Posts: 33


View Profile
« on: August 07, 2008, 05:43:16 PM »

advice for a route to modestly increased sexual pleasure with a partner [female or otherwise].

Author                                                             
 
 
H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/28/2004 9:24 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hello, i've been browsing around this forum for hours now and i figure it's time to save myself some researching and just post a few questions.

there seem to be three routes that keep showing up.

1.) Glans Stimulation (Darkwhite/FlamingPole's method). From waht I can tell, this method couldn't work for intercourse (whether vaginal or anal), as it's whole basis seems to be on stimulating only a certain region. From waht I can read, on everyone who it's been successfull with I've heard no stories of it being during intercourse. I'm not interested in learning to have pleasure on my own, or on having pleasure that requires a great deal of effort on my partner's [who happens to be female, if that's important, which I don't think it is] part--besides, I've never been very turned on by oral sex. It works wonders, but, to me it's a very second-rate thing to being able to actually see a person and be a lot more physically intimate with them. Can someone verify once and for all whether or not Glans Stimulation would ever be helpful in intercourse? I'm not a fan of the excessive masturbating [or someone doing it for you with their tongue--not much difference, a pretty detached experience as far as I'm concerned] it seems to require, either; I'd much rather avoid masturbation altogether.

2.) "Key Sound" or "KSMO" (PanDragon seems to be a rather militant defender of this method--probably because it seems that it has sincerely worked for him and people he knows, but I, like others, can't help but be a bit put off by his tendency to claim it as the only revolutionary thing and to always refer people to a $30 CD; I mean, the whole thing reminds me of Woody Allen's "Everything you wanted to know about sex..." with the sexologist mad scientist who, if I recall, had a name as absurdly perfect for the sex-help industry as "Jack Johnson"--I mean, come on, is this a stage name? I wont discount this method flat out, becuase it obviously works for some people, but it's last on my list to try, because of the noise it requires [I don't hold back on making noise, I just have never been vocal at all, it feels unnatural to me--sighing is one thing, but using hte voice box is another, it seems out of place in an experience that to me is primarily tactile])..... This methods seems like it can work for intercourse and supposedly it's supposed to be more intense and full than the PC control method. What I REALLY REALLY hate about it, is that it seems like a set of training wheels you never remove fully. Sure, I can believe that psychologically making a sound can help relax someone or sensitize someone, but, really, you're confusing cause for effect if you think that the Key Sound does some magic--the key sound is an effect caused by specific bodily pleasures. It should be a direct route--bodily pleasures==>bodily orgasms. The idea that the pleasure has to pass through the magic 'key' sound, is to me, even if it works, a really bad philosophy and a really bad ritualizing of what should be a spontaneous and flexible activity. Further, that it has to be a really specific sound is hack-psychology at best. If we're dealing with a psychological problem, not a problem of accoustics, the nature of the sound should be allowed to vary, and what Jack Johnson should be selling is not a WAV file but a course, a program of learning how to open yourself up to something. The idea that he's copyrighting the sound as some special secret pseudo-scientific whiz-bang, makes me want to refuse giving him $30 even if he could help me. I'd gladly buy or check out a book or CD of his if it was something otherwise public domain of which his lectures and sound-advice HELPED. Instead, he puts up a $30 toll to his 'discovery' and sells the tap shoes instead of the tap dancing lessons. I'd try the tap-dancing trick if it was public domain and then, if it failed, go find the great instructor. Maybe PanDragon can pass that bit of advice on--if Jack Johnson has a serious offering enough to not stake his claim on a magic WAV file.

3.) "PC control" whatever that means. According to both Darkwhite and PanDragon, their methods (KSMO and Glans Stimulation) do not require this. Of course, it seems PanDragon thinks Glans Stiumulation does require PC control. In any event, I've got no issues with the idea of 'holding back.' I'm fine if an orgasm is 70% or whatever 'differentiating' we want to make of it--if it's pleasurable, I'd be happy with it, so long as I would be able to have multiple and eventually [if wanted] have an ejaculatory orgasm. My only worry is that a lot of people supposedly have trouble with this method--but is this simply because they're expecting a bunch of full-blown orgasms? In any event, as far as I understand it the technique is the same regardless of how it's prescribed: learn to control the muscles that participate in the ejaculatort-orgasmic process in order to learn to seperate orgasm from ejaculation and delay full ejaculation and the fatigue/refractory period. I saw a graph somewhere that showed several peeks and then finally an ejaculation. This is fine with me, I know it might not be as impressive as what Glans or Key Sound appear to offer, but it has a simplicity that sounds reasonable enough: seperate ejaculation and orgasm, and learn to control the ejaculation which is the thing that causes the "game over" as someone put it.

-- From what I've heard, I can do this by practicing holding and flexing the muscle and by trying to stop stimulation right as close to the ejaculation as possible and hold 'PC' [and I"ve heard some dbeate on whether that's the muscle your holding or not] muscles to fight off the ejaculation, then continue to maintain arousal and repeat the process. Of course, all the usual rules of bodily sensitivity apply: be as relaxed as possible, breath well, so forth. The one specific tip I've heard is really make sure not to flex anything OTHER than the PC muscles--focus on them, and of course, try to remain relaxed in the legs, buttocks, so forth [with specific tip of keeping knees bent].
Am I getting all of this right?


Now, short specifics of my situation so that someone can tell me whether I have other issues or not: up until a couple of years ago I had normal orgasms. Fairly short into intercourse, I could either orgasm or hodl it off a bit and eventually have a full orgasm. This was always in intercourse or oral sex, I don't make a habit of masturbating. Over time, and I'm not sure when it happened and whether there's a cause-effect relationship or not, but, two things happened:

1.) I became increasingly able to go long periods of itme without orgasming. At this point, I feel somewhat not that sensitive. This may be somewhat psychologically, because sometimes the sensitivity is plenty high. But, in any event, without much mental effort, I can put off orgasm quite indefinitely, with either boredom or increasing self-consciousness [of being in control of it and the whoel process then seeming mechanical] setting in if I put it off too long. This is odd, as far as I know, because I'm relatively in-my-prime [mid twenties] and I'm also uncircumcised [we're the ones who are supposed to have 80% or some astronomical number higher sensitivity].

2.) My orgasms always feel stunted. They come on normally, but it ends up being all hype with an orgasm. There's no feeling of release and even though there's hte spasms and all of that, it feels like I'm holding back [at one point for a few months it felt like I had to pee but was holding back to keep from peeing--but when testing out this theory by masturbating and feeling more comfortable "letting go" the orgasm was just as stunted and, put simply, rather all the more unpleasurable since there wasn't a human being to at least give a bit of emotional pleasure to it]. I've looked around online and can find almost nothing about this sort of condition, but one poster here ["J.B."] described it similarly in some ways [except I have full ejaculation]:

my orgasms have become weaker over time so that occassionally I ejaculate and feel NOTHING at all. I like to say that a man has one orgasm at a time as a teenager; by the time he is 40, he has 1/5th or 1/10th of an orgasm [J.B.]

That's how it feels, except it's not so much a 1/5th as much as an /incomplete/ orgasm. It's almost not an orgasm at all when it's worst, and when it's best it's extremely frustrating half-orgasm, where you want to continue becuase you're on edge but you've already ejaculated and are rapidly loosing arousal. Unlike J.B. I have full foce behind my ejaculations, though [he associated low force behind the stream of ejaculant with the reduced orgasmic pleasure].

Any thoughts and advice on methods? My hope is that working with the PC method, which could seperate ejaculation from orgasm, would allow me to regain my original orgasms or at least have pseudo-orgasms that are complete in their own sense [whether or not the sort of "ORGASM" orgasm, i just mean bodily sensations that seem to have a beginning, a middle and an end, cause right now i get a beginning and the edge of a middle and that's that].

Thanks!
H
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
 
 
Edwin
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 4:40 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi!

I just like to share some of  my experiences with you.. since you asked

I have read your post and I can totally relate to what you have said. 5 months ago I was at the same point you are now : searching, gathering information about how to improve things.  Also like you, I'm a pretty skeptic person, especially about things like these... and KSMO didnt pass my valibility(?) test. You only get one first impression and the website was simply not convincing. So I turned to PC muscle training with the help of a book ("How to make love all night" - Barbara Kiesling). I finished the book and exercices and although it gave me (at some level) what it promised, I was pretty dissapointed. I couldn't  enjoy being 'multi-orgasmic' this way at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I did it for obvious reasons, but I expected much more out of it. I couldn't believe I was so excited in the beginning.. over this.

Looking back at it now, I think I was so dissapointed that I was ready to try anything.. even KSMO. I started as a non-believer, but it only took me one session to begin having some faith in KSMO and one week to become a believer. I would be lying if I said I already experienced a KSMO orgasm after so many months, but I feel good about that, the pace feels right (most of the time ) and I really enjoy the near-orgasmic feelings I have in my sessions. At this point I can tell you that my life has already been greatly enriched by this practice. Even regular orgasms feel more powerful than ever (mind blowing!) and that's even without using the Key Sound.

I understand your reasons for putting KSMO at the last spot in your list, but why would you wait for the perfect methods to achieve perfect bliss, if you can already achieve just that with an arguably still rough method named KSMO?

 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
Edwin
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 5:04 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding the 2nd part of your post I have to say that a strong PC muscle does in fact improve the quality of regular orgasms. However, when using the PC Squeeze method, things start to get unpredictable. One time I kept delaying the final orgasm.. and when I finally let go (huge buildup), I felt nothing.. absolutely nothing. Even weirder, I didnt ejaculate at all.. all that hard work for nothing! I was very disturbed by that.

Luckily KSMO helps even more than a strong PC muscle, even when not using any Key Sounds at all. I never thought orgasms could become as intense as they are for me now.
 
Logged
Administrator
Administrator
Newbie
*****
Posts: 33


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2008, 07:03:49 PM »

bgrand
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/29/2004 4:07 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you circumcized?  If so, consider restoring your foreskin.  Look for the book at www.sexasnatureintendedit.com, which talks about what you can regain by restoring your foreskin.  I have been doing this for about a year, and I cannot tell you how much better sex is now that I have done this.  There are many inexpensive methods.  It really works, but takes a while. 

Even just keeping your glans penis covered all the time will help improve its sensitivity.  You can wear a condom or use medical tape.  Do a websearch on foreskin restoration.  I know it may sound whacky, but honestly this is probably the best thing I've ever done for myself.

 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
 
 
H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/29/2004 4:14 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I'm not circumsized.

H
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/29/2004 7:10 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hey H,

  "2.) "Key Sound" or "KSMO" (PanDragon seems to be a rather militant defender of this method"

  Militant? How so?

--probably because it seems that it has sincerely worked for him and people he knows,

  True. More over, I hardly know any men who have had real success using anything else. Do you?

 but I, like others, can't help but be a bit put off by his tendency to claim it as the only revolutionary thing and to always refer people to a $30 CD;

  I never said it's the only revolutionary MMO technique. I've made several posts here in the past recommending Neil Slade's amygdala clicking technique, the aneros, hypnosis and brainwave entrainment as alternative options.

  As for the $30 CD, how many MMO techniques do you know of that don't require some form of minor purchase in order to learn?

  There's darkwhite's technique and PC squeezing, they both have plenty of free info out there, but then, you said yourself, PC squeezing alone seems not to produce the desired results and Darkwhite's method isn't applicable to intercourse. 

 I mean, the whole thing reminds me of Woody Allen's "Everything you wanted to know about sex..." with the sexologist mad scientist who, if I recall, had a name as absurdly perfect for the sex-help industry as "Jack Johnson"--I mean, come on, is this a stage name?

  Nope. That's his real name. He's a real person, I assure you. I've been to his house, I know his family, I've pet his cat. There's nothing staged about Jack, the name is just a funny coincidence.

  I'm not a Woody Allen fan, so I can't comment on any comparisons there.

 I wont discount this method flat out, becuase it obviously works for some people, but it's last on my list to try, because of the noise it requires

  Well, just to be clear, it's a common misconception that the Key Sound needs to be loud to be effective. It doesn't.

 [I don't hold back on making noise, I just have never been vocal at all, it feels unnatural to me--sighing is one thing, but using hte voice box is another, it seems out of place in an experience that to me is primarily tactile]).....

  Pain is also a tactile experience. Have you ever made noise when you were in pain? Did it feel unnatural? Are women behaving unnaturally when they make noise during sex?

  I understand where you're coming from, I never used to be vocal in bed either. I thought that was a "female thing." But when you think about it, what about male biology dictates that we should never be vocal with our pleasure? Isn't it just a cultural norm that men are expected to be "strong and silent," rather than vulnerable and expressive, like women? Does it seem so far fetched that that very tendency to "bottle up" our feelings in bed, could be part of the reason we don't seem to enjoy ourselves as much?

 This methods seems like it can work for intercourse and supposedly it's supposed to be more intense and full than the PC control method.

  In my experience, yes on both counts.

 What I REALLY REALLY hate about it, is that it seems like a set of training wheels you never remove fully.

  Funny you should mention that. Because this is a topic I've been discussing at the KSMO Forum recently. You see the basic KSMO solo practice *is* a form of training wheels for learning to become multi-orgasmic. But once you have achieved that goal, you are free to disgard them and take it from there. The Key Sound fits quite naturally into sex, I assure you.

  Ideally, one should already be able to enjoy multiple orgasms through solo practice, before introducing KSMO to a partner. So you would already be past the need for training wheels by the time you were using it with intercourse anyway.

  So, there's no need to "REALLY REALLY hate." That's a lot of emotion over a minor misunderstanding, don't ya think?     

  Sure, I can believe that psychologically making a sound can help relax someone or sensitize someone, but, really, you're confusing cause for effect if you think that the Key Sound does some magic--the key sound is an effect caused by specific bodily pleasures. It should be a direct route--bodily pleasures==>bodily orgasms.

  Orgasm is actually a neurological event, not a physical one. Your penis isn't having the orgasm, your brain is. And your brain responds to much more than just physical stimulation. It responds to emotions, attitudes, and beliefs as well, and all of these play a significant role in orgasm and orgasmic potential.

  So, in fact, it's the belief that it's purely your body that provides the experience of orgasm that is confused. That's "putting the cart before the horse," as they say. It's backwards. If you learn how to become deeply and fully aroused, your experience of pleasure is greatly enhanced. But stimulation alone is not a route to significant arousal, it requires the involvement of your heart and mind, not just your body.

  If pleasure really was just a "body thing," men wouldn't be spending billions of dollars on pornography every year in order to feel aroused.

 The idea that the pleasure has to pass through the magic 'key' sound, is to me, even if it works, a really bad philosophy and a really bad ritualizing of what should be a spontaneous and flexible activity.

  I find it interesting that it's always the nay-sayers that pull out words like "magic," regarding the Key Sound, while Jack and the rest of the folks who practice the technique are discussing it in real, down to earth terminology. We're not calling it magic, we're just saying it works.

  KSMO is not a ritual or a philosophy, it's a physical technique, "orgasmic training wheels," like you said. It has no dogma, and no religious or spiritual affiliations.

  The funny thing is, your preconceived notion of how KSMO actually works in intercourse, is completely opposite to my experience of it. When I have sex, it's completely natural and spontaneous, and my Key Sound fits perfectly with that flow. I'm not distracted with performing a technique, the Key Sound simply becomes part of the experience, part of how I express my love and pleasure with my wife.

  In fact, for me, it was Tantra and Mantak Chia's Sexual Kung-Fu practices (PC squeezing methods) that felt awkward and out of synch with intercourse. They actually required me to stop at the right time to perform certain actions, squeeze certain muscles, breathe a certain way, etc. KSMO doesn't require any of that. I never have to interrupt the flow of pleasure, I just allow my Key Sound to be part of my expression and it enhances my experience of pleasure and intimacy. That's it, that's all there is to it during intercourse.

 Further, that it has to be a really specific sound is hack-psychology at best.

  Psychology? The Key Sound is based on a very real, physical response. If you research Tantra, Kundalini Yoga, Taoist Healing Techniques, Eastern Meditations, even Western Christian Monasteries, they all have one thing in common, the use of sound to elicit a change in physical, emotional, and mental states.

  Studies have shown that making specific sounds affect physiological functions, such as brainwaves, heart rate, the immune system, and endorphins levels. Different sounds create different results, depending on how they are used. The same way Yogi's use "Om" for specific meditation purposes, the Key Sound is used to achieve higher states of arousal. But they are very different sounds with very different results.

  And again, you may feel inclined to call this "magic" or "hocus pocus" but the effects of many of these traditional sounds are proven and well-documented through science. 

 If we're dealing with a psychological problem, not a problem of accoustics, the nature of the sound should be allowed to vary,

   But we're not just dealing a psychological problem here. We're discussing ways to enhance physical pleasure, without encouraging the urge to ejaculate, and any accomplished Tantra practitioner will tell you some sounds are better than others to achieve that goal.

 and what Jack Johnson should be selling is not a WAV file but a course, a program of learning how to open yourself up to something.

  That's exactly what he's selling. Have you even been to the website? The audio seminar is just that, a seminar. It includes the actual Key Sound along with the theory and basics of the technique and unlimited assistance at the website. You can post questions, attend live coaching chats, and speak with other practitioners about your experiences. A wave file alone would not be enough to learn this technique. But all the other assistance is free of charge, so where's the problem?

 The idea that he's copyrighting the sound as some special secret pseudo-scientific whiz-bang, makes me want to refuse giving him $30 even if he could help me.

  It's not just a sound, he developed an entire system that allows men almost unlimited pleasure and orgasms. It works and personally, I think he's earned the right to call it his own. If you think $30 is too much to ask for that, then don't buy it.

 I'd gladly buy or check out a book or CD of his if it was something otherwise public domain of which his lectures and sound-advice HELPED.

  You really haven't been to his website have you? The entire technique *is* public domain except for the Key Sound. Anyone can visit and read thousands of posts in the Forum, plus nearly 200 archived Coaching Chats for free, no purchase necessary. You can read all you want and see how other people have learned the technique, what problems they may have had along the way, and what assistance they recieved to achieve MMO's.

  The only thing you pay for is the audio seminar, which includes posting rights in the Forum and unlimited access to the Live Coaching Chats. But if he didn't charge anything for the audio seminar, there wouldn't be any Forum or Coaching Chats for the public to view or attend, because he couldn't possibly afford to do it all for free.

 Instead, he puts up a $30 toll to his 'discovery' and sells the tap shoes instead of the tap dancing lessons. I'd try the tap-dancing trick if it was public domain and then, if it failed, go find the great instructor.

  Go to the website:  http://www.multiples.com/pan.html

  Check out the Forum, and you'll see, the lessons ARE FREE, you just need to buy the tap shoes. What more do you want, free lessons and shoes?

  Maybe PanDragon can pass that bit of advice on--if Jack Johnson has a serious offering enough to not stake his claim on a magic WAV file.

  If there was any worthy advice here, I'd pass it along. All I've seen is raving prejudice and ignorance. No offense.

3.) "PC control" whatever that means. According to both Darkwhite and PanDragon, their methods (KSMO and Glans Stimulation) do not require this. Of course, it seems PanDragon thinks Glans Stiumulation does require PC control."

  When did I say that? PC control is irrelevent to Darwhite's method (glans stimulation). All I've ever said about it is, yes it works, but it's not applicable to intercourse and not as fun as other things I've learned. If you're just looking to experience any kind of MMO through masturbation, then Darkwhite's method is worth trying for fun.

  And as a final note, if I appear "militant" in my responses to criticisms about kSMO, it's because they are often based on false pretenses and incorrect assumptions. When that happens, they do a diservice to people who are trying to learn about MMO's. And I think everyone deserves to hear the facts before they make up their minds.

  You may not be interested in KSMO and that's fine. KSMO isn't for everyone, I never said it was. But when people say things that aren't true about KSMO, whether out of spite or misunderstanding, I feel obligated to correct them because it may cause others to be mislead about how it works. And honestly, I'd do the same for Tantra or anything else, because even if it doesn't work for me, doesn't mean it doesn't work at all.

  Peace




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/29/2004 11:23 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't read all of your post just yet, and I wont have time tonite. I expected a thorough response, and I appreciate it. I think you're a well reasoned person and what I mean by militant is that you devote both time and energy to something and are assured in its rightness by personal experience. I do think you tend to be a bit blind to reflecting upon serious criticism because of this. What I meant by militant, is, then, in a state of deffense. And this you are--maybe justly [there are just wars, after all, though they are rare, yes?]. You could instead be in a state of discovery--and I'm sure you are sometimes, but all I've seen is everytime someone asks a question you showing up with an infomercial that is nice enough to point out competing products but swears by Key Sound still.

I scanned and I saw a few places where you didn't read what I said--quite a few. Probably because you think I have a more naive view of something and am using a word in a way your used to it being used, when I'm qualifying and using it different. For example, when I said bodily pleasures==>bodily orgasm, I didn't mean that the neurological system was not part of the body. Read waht I said again carefully, because it's an important psychological critique of an important psychological method (Key Sound):

Sure, I can believe that psychologically making a sound can help relax someone or sensitize someone, but, really, you're confusing cause for effect if you think that the Key Sound does some magic--the key sound is an effect caused by specific bodily pleasures. It should be a direct route--bodily pleasures==>bodily orgasms.

Your completely off base saying I'm saying it's all about physical, as in tactile, pleasure. Because I did not mean the word body in that way. Emotions are bodily too. But, expecting to have a sound exit you, and hear yourself make it [the way the specific sound matters seems to be in that you need to hear it--this has been my impression of the way KS is presented. I think it's dead-wrong, and it's a mystification of what's really going on. I'll argue this towards teh bottom of this post better.].

What I mean is that what causes us to blurt out a sound co-ordinate with when we have pleasure, is the pleasure it coordinates with. So, for example, I see a beautiful painting and I sigh "ahh." Cause: the beautiful sensual strokes; Effect: my emitting an expression of pleasure, partly because I know it to be an expression of pleasure, partly because it's an automatic habit of making my own psychological state clear to myself and the world, partly because I cannot find words but the emotions must be released in some way so I opt for my sigh, when I could just have well raised my hands in fantastic celebration, and partly perhaps because the sound itself harmonizes with the pleasure and adds another pleasure on top of it, a different sort of pleasure.

Now, with the philosophy of the Key Sound method, the "ahh" rather than just being a spontaneous expression, any of which would do [I could gesticulate, I could say "geez," I could say "that, my friend, is quite a sensous line indeed!"], that /coordinates/ with my pleasure, that is, occurs at the same time and perhaps helps release what is an /excess/ of emotion that my body alone can't hold [say, the same emotion could make me grab my loved one tighter, if I chose to express it tactile-ly, through my sense of tough instead of through my vocalization--either would release the excess], SEEMS TO [and I only know Key Sound through heresay, not through experience] turn into a special sort of magic gate. At least that's how it keeps being referred to as, and at least that's the only reason why you sohuld need to continue it, or, and this part cracks me up quite honestly (and you may have responded to it, I haven't read yet), need to make a /specific sound/.


The problem with all these methods to me, is that they keep mystifying things more. It's like the PC thing--you know enough about it to just say what it is: learn to control that muscle and eventually seperate orgasm from ejaculation so that you're able to hover at PONR for long periods at time, basically. You've seperated the core of the understanding from all the mystification (Tantra, so forth--which mystify this fairly straightforward thing by making it part of a bigger-system; and it might be a great bigger system, sure).

So, my complaint about Key Sound is that it's a silly mystification. The specificness of the sound is not important. It might be a good trick to help someone concentrate or loosen up, like a tongue twister might help someone exercise their tongue, after which they can happily say any number of tongue twisters or complicated words--and some tongue twisters are better crafted than others [and so, some frequencies and inflections might better force your abdomen or diaphram muscles ease or contort in some certain way, for example--or may distract you less than other sounds [say high frequency, which would be hard to not find bothersome for some people, lower tones are far more able to be endured]]. This is great, wonderful even. But, if the overall method is sound, there should be a lot of these tricks out there, some working for some people better than others, but all basically being part of the same method.

Let me give an attempt here at what I'd guess is the way Key Sound works, my own demystification, tell me what yout hink here, because I'm trying to understand how, philosophically, psychologically, etc, this could work, and how it is that someone would come to mystify it in the way that's been done:

-----------------------------------------------

Think of sex like a balloon, the pleasure is when it's in highest tension. Wehn you blow up a baloon in one shot, you get quite an intense pleasure and finally a pop. This is what most men have, maybe with some fluxuations in the early parts, but never any holding on in the latter parts where the baloon is on the edge of being torn apart.

Now, there are several ways to keep this balloon from popping. Two are known so far: one is to stop blowing air in it, the other is to poke a small hole in it and continue to blow air in it.

The latter is obviously going to be the more pleasurable, as it ha sall these intense fluctuations but the stresses move in and out fluidly. In the first method, the balloon will probably still pop, like light bulbs burn out when turned off and on over and over. The tension going back and forth of air, no air, air, no air, will burst the balloon.

So, let's take it to sex. Let's say the orgasm part of sex is a psychological/neurological process, not a physiological one. That is, it coordinates with a physiologicla one because certain psychological things tend to occur with it at the same time, or are associated with it. Make sense so far? For lack of better term, we'll call the material that's worked on by this process, EMOTION. And sex is certainly filled with emotion. Whether dumb lust or passionate love, it's want, and desire and all sorts of specifically emotional content. If you don't believe it's emotional, then explain why you might have a bad sexual experience with soemone who is increadibly attractive and whose organs are as good as the next persons. This happens all the time, it's because we are not emotionally aroused by the person--they trigger in us now emotions at all, outside of those at the pleasure of their beauty, but it's not nearly as consummate as someone we think beautiful and whom we admire, let's say. Emotion is the air, then, to our balloon. Let's look at it again now then:

The PC control method is simply stopping the blowing right before the popping, and there's plenty of pleasure for those few seconds and a pleasurable contraction/falling-back. PC control, when it's good, is stopping the blowing for a few seconds. When it's bad, it's sucking the air out [which is what people describe when they feel like they have to fight to hold back, they're actually RAPIDLY reducing pleasure, rather than letting it fall back on its own]. It's stop and go, in other words, just happening gracefully when good. What your stopping, by concentrating on the musculo activities involved in ejaculation, is the emotion. In two ways: (1) by making the whole thing a purely physical event momentarily by shifting hte focus from the object of the passion [the person in front of you], to the organs which are receiving the physical pleasure, and by focusing a lot of mental and physical power on battling those organs into submission and (2) [2 is the same as 1, but stated very differently, you can see they just emphasize different things, but it's all one thing--your out of hte picture emotionally for a minute] by turning inward, focusing on the pleasure and the control and tempering of it. Often I find, if trying to control ejaculation, I have to on occasion look down or defocus. To look at my partner is too much, I'll orgasm if I allow myself to admire her beauty. Any way you want to call it, it's all the same: you block the emotion completely and allow yourself to feel the physical bodily pleasure while it pitches about and falls down. Great method for masturbators, then, I imagine. Because there's no difference there anyhow.

Key Sound, then, is the poking a hole in the balloon method. It allows emotion to be released at a steady rate so that the tension can be maintained, keeping the pleasure high while being able to still focus on the emotions, and so you get a less dead pleasure. This is I think why you describe it as being a better orgasm than a PC method. It's nto because you're not relaxed enough in PC, it's because in KS your not reducing your overall emotional surplus by blocking the input valve, but by just letting some of it flow in AND out. And this is where the "don't bottle up" is more than just a bad cliche. But most people dont' think of it so thoroughly, and how it works in terms of cause and effect.

So, KS is effective then in allowing emotion to be released and overall keeping high level of pleasure without distracting from the object of passion. Why, then, is it more successfull then releasing pleasure physically, by grabbing someone tighter, flexing legs, so forth (all things we doo automatically to try to release it when we approach orgasm). Well, all these expressions of the emotion are musculo-physical-tactile. This means, that they feedback in on themselves in some part. When we squeeze our partner tightly, part of it is the same as lifting our hands in gesticulations about the sensous marks of the painting, and we do release to some degree when we do it. BUT, that's only part, the other part is that, to a large degree, we get more physical pleasure from doing it. It's like looking at the painting--the audible and tactile expressions of the emotion are different 'sensoriums' [faculties, what have you] than the visual input.

So, tactile-musuclo-whathaveyou expressions of the emotion (where expression means to press-out and release waht's inside) are ineffective because they're the PRIMARY sense that sex works on, visual being a close second for some people more than others [some people it's all it is; I think sex is predominantly visual for the porn-addict, to the determent of the physical-tactile senses].

What's left, as a medium of expression, besides audio? I mean, what is there really, as direct outputs besides sound and touch anyway [visual we can only express with a pen in hand, and taste we can't do much a damned thing with, in terms of outpourings]. And on this basis, the sound thing is completely ingenious. Now, which sound it is, can't possibly matter [any more than my tongue twister example]. But, that it should be a sound could well be the secret. And, further, loudness could even matter, though a continuous quieter sound should work the same as bursts of loud sound, theoretically. The degree of tactile and visual arousing of emotions matters a great deal, too, but the audible-expression method is so superior because it theoretically allows the emotional arousement to be as intense as you want, so long as the intenseness of your expression matches it. Of course, non-stop intensity of anything is a burn-out, and waves [which roll both in and out] are the best sort of arousement to keep the experience fresh and full, and prevent exhaustion or boredum.
So, my complaint then about KS is simply it's mystification. I don't doubt, and I said this from the get go, that making sounds could help. This is AOK. But what I hate is all this "Key" sound and the metaphysical terminology, and the way it seems that you have to hear the sound your making and make sure to focus to make it the right sound [which sound eerily like the stop-and-go method, if it's focusing on how you make the sound then we have the same emotion-stopping method as PC above... so to me what it sounds like is happening when this is stressed is a DIFFERENT process than when it becomes automatic. It's teaching something different, and perhaps, it's strength in working for people is that it starts out with a PC-like "switch your focus away from the pleasure" method and slowly switches to a "let the pleasure out method"].

I will, based on this, try to work on the sound thing. Of course, it'd be easier if I was on a sailboat in the middle of the atlantic, not in a new york city apartment with thin walls. I will also be working on the PC method, because it's a good fail-stop that's fairly mechanical in method. And perhaps it doesn't work for some people because they simply cannot easily take their mind of the object they're having all these emotions over. Certainly, that's why it's harder with intercourse for people--not because the physical sensations are higher [which they are too], but because emotionally it's intense and you have the object of your emotions directly in front of you looking back at you. Hard to consciously switch modes then and ignore them for a moment.

And, if I need the tongue-twisters I'll buy Jack Johnson's WAV file, which I'm sure would be helpful, partially as placebo that boosts confidence in making noises people are otherwise hesitant to make, and partially as refined sound that works on several levels [say, both the way it may force relaxation of certain muscles and the way it may be pleasurable to the ears and not distracting, and so forth--however it is it's working well as a particular sound for particular people]. To me, though, the imagining that it's the nature of the tone and such of the sound doing the trick, is like someone swearing that you must use "Om" as your mantra when meditating, when a low whistle might also work, or work better, for some people. "Om" has the refinement of thousands of years and for good reasons, but it's not a "Key," just one of the better set of syllables/sounds for meditation for a great many people. Other meditation people /sware/ that a different mantra is way better, and, they mystify the whole debate with it being about the nature of the chi rather than talking about the sensory and musuclar effects of making that sound.
- H


[just scanning, re: your 'scientific' evidence that particular sounds do this or that, I think it's only statistical. we have no untrainable sensory responses. so the whole theories of this sound being peaceful and so forth, is wrong in the WAY they say it causes it. it's not a simple neuro-physiological reaction, it's a psychological one. and psychological composition can be modified (whereas neuro-physiological composition is fairly static and hereditary). but we're arguing the old nature versus nurture thing here, and it's off topic. see you say it's about science, and i think that's entirely wrong [in the way you conceive the word science at least]. you treat the whole thing like a behaviorist or empiricist. which means you have a mistake in your lines of cause and effect: Om does not reduce heart rate because of the sound wave it creates directly is a cause to a phsysiological change. If this were so, then everytime we heard someone making the sound Om, say, walking buy a guy meditating on the street, our heart rate would drop. These researchers tend to be narrow-visioned, they only know their field, If they are a neurologist, they think everything is a neurochemical response to a direct stimulus, they discount the psychology of it. If they're a psychologist, they may be an analyst, and think everything's caused by childhood memories, which is false. Which is why I keep talking about hte philosophy of it, because that's a term meant to mean a broad view of something that takes into account what it is to be a human, and undrestands a bit of everything that can be verified in human experience. The Om might work on more than one level, just like the Key Sound, but there's nothing inherent in the waves it sends out as they are processed by your ears. Perception is a psychological activity, not a physical one, and the sound must be perceived to be effective, and it has to be perceived by a mind that takes it to be effective. But this is enough of an inquiry, and far too much serious thought, to be taking place on a 'have better sex' internet forum.]


and please read what I write in the future. if "all [you] see is raving prejudice and ignorance" you should learn to read. most people never learn to read. my advice for Jack Johnson was clearly stated and was a practical business approach: sell a service, not a product. I don't know why you took that to be full of my failure to undrestand that his website has free forums and lots of help for those working on KS method. Didn't I SAY that he had that? That was my exact point: he makes the lessons free and the shoes cost. Read what I said! So my complaint is: sell me the service, not the sort of product that should be public-domain anyway [the WAV file--I know it's "an entire system" but the WAV file is the 'key']. Is that not a valid sort of advice? He'd likely both make more money and help to demystify his discovery. He might even attract researchers and the likes. Take it or leave it, it's my ethical and practical opinion: don't copyright a sound, and don't keep the tap shoes under lock and key. If he's a good instructor, he should place his wager on his instruction, and allow there to be competition and development of the discovery and method. What's so hard to understand, I said it exactly like this before, you just didn't read it! I honestly think he'd make more money doing it, too. Hell, and then he could clean up his website and make it a bit more of a professional proposition of seminars, books, and lessons on a technique he hopes to be the respected founder of, not the hoarder of.
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 3:47 AM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    H,

  Regarding your balloon analogy:

  It's an apt description of PC squeeze techniques, and just about any common male sexual experience which includes ejaculation, but it doesn't really apply to KSMO. The problem is that the concept of a "balloon" implies a maximum capacity (Point of No Return), a point where too much pressure/pleasure will make you "pop."

  The whole point of KSMO is not to control the flow of air into the balloon, but rather to expand the elasticity of the ballon itself (something most other techniques fail to address). If you equate filling the ballon with air, as stimulating the ejaculatory process, then KSMO focuses on stretching the balloon before you even introduce any air at all, and therefore, you never even approach a "maximum capacity."

  Or to put it another way, you continuously expand your arousal without even initiating the process of ejaculation. The basis of KSMO is that orgasm occurs through arousal, and although the genitals are part of that experience, they are not the source of it. So an experienced KSMO practitoner can enjoy continuous, strong orgasmic waves with very little physical stimulation and no urge to ejaculate whatsoever.

  You indicated that your impression of the Key Sound is it's simply a way of releasing excess "steam" so-to-speak, in order to receive more pleasure. That's one aspect of it, yes. But the sound itself, yes the specific sound, has other qualities that are more effective for inducing orgasms than merely "crying out" in pleasure.

  Again, if you research Tantra or simply ask a qualified teacher of that system, they will tell you that different sounds have different effects on the body during sexual pleasure. For instance, it's widely believed that a person who is prone to making high-pitched moans or screams during pleasure is eliciting an anxiety response to pleasure (often unconsciously). High-pitched sounds tend to encourage breathing which is centered high in the chest, a behavior that is also physiologically associated with anxiety. So it's common for Tantra teachers to encourage their students to express themselves with deep, vibrant moans and groans, which are more likely to encourage abdominal breathing, which in turn increases lung capacity and the intake of oxygen, as well as an over-all feeling of relaxation, which in turn facilitates awareness from one moment to the next. So a simple thing like pitch does have a very real effect on the body under certain circumstances.

  The Key Sound is more than a "release valve," for sexual tension, or a way of expression, it is also a tool for expanding and amplifying arousal on an energetic level. In KSMO practice, you're not simply expressing pleasure induced by physical stimulation, you're actually creating and enhancing pleasure with the sound itself. So much so, that myself and many long-term practitoners have reported being able to experience orgasms simply by making a Key Sound or even just visualizing doing so, without any physical stimulation whatsoever.

  Jack and others have reported that once a certain degree of success is attained with KSMO, the Key Sound is no longer even necessary in order to experience multiple orgasms. I have experienced this myself, but I still find it enjoyable to use and so I continue to do so. As to why it stops being necessary, I can only speculate that my experiences induced by practicing it in the beginning have "trained" my subconscious to trigger a particular response, like Pavlov's Bell. I also believe it is related to the amygdalae, energetic flow, etc. but if I attempted to explain every aspect of how I think the Key Sound does what it does, I'd be sitting here for quite awhile.

  Suffice it to say, one thing that many newbies in the KSMO Forum report is experiencing a surprisingly pleasurable effect even the first few times they try the Key Sound without any form of physical stimulation. They often find the sound itself is quite arousing and tends to induce certain physical responses such as spontaneous flexing of the PC muscles, pleasurable tingling feelings, even "mini-orgasms." You can chalk that up to placebo if you want to, but the specific physical experiences reported by first-timers over the years are consistant enough to suggest more than that.

  I know you're convinced it doesn't matter what kind of sound is used, although I don't understand how you can feel sure without having experienced any of this. All I can tell you is I've been volunteer coaching at Jack's website for almost 5 years now, and without fail, practitioners consistently report better results as they refine their Key Sounds to match what Jack demonstrates in the seminar. I can't count how many times I've helped a newbie by asking them how they make the Key Sound, and after assessing that they had it slightly incorrect and explaining to them how to refine it, they suddenly got the results they were looking for. When practitioners make the sound correctly they get results, when they don't make it correctly, they don't get results. That's proof enough for me.

  Sure, it's possible other sounds may have similiar effects. Frankly it's a moot point to me. It's not like the Key Sound is difficult to learn or use, and it's certainly effective. But ultimately, it's how it's used that produces the results. That's why KSMO is more than just a sound, it's a system.

  And now for replies to some random statements:

  "I haven't read all of your post just yet, and I wont have time tonite." => "I scanned and I saw a few places where you didn't read what I said--quite a few." => "and please read what I write in the future." => "you should learn to read. most people never learn to read."

  Let me get this straight, you felt comfortable replying to my post which you haven't finished reading yet, but you're accusing me of not reading your post (and not knowing how to read)? Interesting. I may have mistaken some of your points, but I did have the courtesy to read your entire post before replying. You're obviously a fan of psychology, ever heard of "projection?" You might want to look that up, when you have the time...

  "I expected a thorough response, and I appreciate it. I think you're a well reasoned person and what I mean by militant is that you devote both time and energy to something and are assured in its rightness by personal experience."

  Thanks for that. I'll accept it as a compliment.

  "I do think you tend to be a bit blind to reflecting upon serious criticism because of this."

  Can you appreciate the irony here? You're suggesting I'm blind because I, a man who has been experiencing multiple orgasms for 5 years now using KSMO, am not giving more consideration to criticisms about KSMO, from men who have never practiced KSMO or experienced multiple orgasms. What pray tell, am I not seeing that's so crucial?

  I am more than happy to entertain questions and comments. But if I know through experience that it works, why should I entertain ill-informed theories that it doesn't? If a criticism comes from one who has experienced multiple orgasms using another method, you can be sure I will perk up and listen attentively.

  "You could instead be in a state of discovery--and I'm sure you are sometimes, but all I've seen is everytime someone asks a question you showing up with an infomercial that is nice enough to point out competing products but swears by Key Sound still."

  Fair enough. God knows you're not the first person to suggest I write like an infomercial. It's just my style I guess. But in all fairness, KSMO is what worked for me. And again, I've found other things are effective as well, all of which I learned after KSMO. I always keep an eye out for anything new on the horizon, because I want to be informed as things develop. When I read about Darkwhite's method, I learned it, not because I felt the need, just so I can have an honest opinion if the subject comes up. And yes, I do mention other methods as options to people because I believe it's important to inform them of as many techniques as possible, in hopes that it will keep them optomistic about their goals.

  But I also believe in speaking from experience, and my experience has been that KSMO is the easiest and most effective way to have MMO's both solo and during intercourse. So when people ask, I tell them that's what works for me. I can't really recommend Tantra if it didn't work for me, now can I?

  "Your completely off base saying I'm saying it's all about physical, as in tactile, pleasure."

  These are your words, are they not?: "it seems out of place in an experience that to me is primarily tactile])....."

  "just scanning, re: your 'scientific' evidence that particular sounds do this or that, I think it's only statistical."  => "it's not a simple neuro-physiological reaction, it's a psychological one. and psychological composition can be modified (whereas neuro-physiological composition is fairly static and hereditary)."

  Regardless, my point was that specific sounds have a long history in many cultures as an avenue to achieve various states of being. Whether the sound is the "true" source of those responses is irrelevant. Subjective experience is what's important, and the continued reports from a decade of field research at Jack's website show the specific sound plays a key role in achieving MMO's with that method. I don't really know why exactly, although I have my theories. But I'm more interested in what works rather than why. If what works is simple, practical, and easily applied to intercourse, it's not really necessary to know to why, other than to convince others of it's effectiveness...

  "my advice for Jack Johnson was clearly stated and was a practical business approach: sell a service, not a product."

  Ok, I'm not going to discuss how Jack runs his business. It's HIS business, not mine. I'm interested in presenting KSMO to those who haven't heard of it as an option, answering questions, and clearing up misconceptions about the technique. Jack's business practices are not the kind of subject this Forum was intended for.

  So, to sum up:

   No, I don't believe any old sound will produce MMO's, especially if you're not familiar with how the Key Sound is used. There's a lot more to it than just letting off steam to stave off ejaculation.

  However, for an alternative example of how sound plays a part in orgasmic experience, and since you're planning to use PC squeezes anyway, you might want  to consider picking up a couple Tantric training audio cassettes, the "Sexercise" series, by a woman named "Ishtara," availalbe at Tantra.com. Specifically, "a Guided Erotic Journey," contains a sample audio session performed by Ishtara in which she demonstrates the ways in which sound enhances orgasmic expression and enjoyment.

  And no, I don't think the Key Sound or KSMO is purely psychological. I have many long-winded theories about how it works, but this conversation is already over-cooked. Perhaps I'll post about that another time.

  Peace 

 




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 7:23 AM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  For the record:

  I do realize that I misunderstood your point about how Jack chooses to run his business and I'm pretty sure I understand what you meant now. I still disagree with you, but I don't wish to discuss it at length, as it's not particularly relevent to MMO's.

  I also want to apologize for referring to your previous post as "raving prejudice and ignorance." That was rude and uncalled for. I still disagree with much of what you said about KSMO, and feel it was based on assumptions rather than experience. But that's no excuse. I normally consider myself to be polite, if nothing else. I guess I'm having an off week here, sorry.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 9:08 AM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perfectly valid critique re: assumption rather than experience. But, breadth of experience and undrestanding can get you pretty far--of course, not all the way. So sure, I can understand if my analysis of KSMO is off according to your experience with KSMO.

Anyhow, appreciate the apology re: the raving prejudice. Clearly, a prejudiced person doesn't spend three hours of his evening seriously considering the thing he's prejured about. I respect you as a thorough and honest person, compelled by personal experiences to share what you have come to know; please do the same for me.

I agree it shouldn't be a major discussion how Jack Johnson runs his business, it was just a point I wanted to make, as a consumer, since you were in defense of the way in which he does it. My frustration was simply that you didn't seem to be listening.

Re: not reading your post. I qualified things I said when I thought that your post my cover it, and by the time I got to the bottom of my post I had pretty much read all your post. I adimantly partially-read, and I said so. And when I did read I didn't read it emotionally but analytically, so I could undrestand what it was you were saying and not just react to it [which is what I felt you were doing with mine the first time--the second time you were perhaps struck by the sincerity in my want to understand something and to fit it into my philosophy of the world, and so you read/listened carefully and responded carefully.]

I'm not a big fan of psychology as it is codified these days. I am morally opposed to all psychologically prescribed drugs, and I feel the practice of psycho-analysis is a sham that projects a preconceived and dogmatic analysis onto the patient. Good philosophers are better psychologists because they undrestand human nature better. As far as projection goes: I already covered how I qualified my partial-reading of yours, and my critique of your 'reading' of mine was that though you quoted an exact sentence, you hadn't really taken the time to undrestand it [like the tap shoes]. I feel I didn't do that with yours.

On the other hand there's a concept of mis-centering that gestalt psychologies had. Centering is where you locate the unfitness in a problem. When centered right, your centered directly on the thing that's not quite piecing together, when centered wrong you center on its periphery, or on your self, or on another person. You're centered on me--or at least you were in your first post. And, it's understandable, because I talked about you in my post, rather than about KSMO. Which was a terrible mis-centering on my part.

Finally, with regards to the tactile-ness thing, which you still may not be understanding. I spend mayn paragraphs explaining how I took sex to be an emotional experience. What I mean when I say that for me it's primarily tactile, was said as a response to the making of sounds. I covered this extensively, including how for some people it's primarily visual. What I mean to say is that the /sense/ of it, the sort of input/output path of it all, is through the sense of touch, not hearing. That's really the core of it, it's PRIMARILY tactile, means that's the most primitive/primary, fundamental part of it. That doesn't mean that it's not to a huge degree a matter of emotions. Death is a primarily physical process, in terms of causes, but not in terms of the substance of the experience as it is percieved. You misunderstood my use of primary. I mean it in the old sense of the word--having to do with the origin of something--not in the mis-used sense that confuses it with a word like 'predominantly.' This should have been thoroughly clear in what I said in my last post, I covered the relation of the senses to the emotions in full, and I differentiated the different senses and how they may or may not play a role in things.

Thanks for your reflection upon your previous posts, apologies if I centered the argument on you versus on the ideas you were speaking of in my original post.
H
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
Edwin
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 5:15 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi!

I just like to share some of  my experiences with you.. since you asked

I have read your post and I can totally relate to what you have said. 5 months ago I was at the same point you are now : searching, gathering information about how to improve things.  Also like you, I'm a pretty skeptic person, especially about things like these... and KSMO didnt pass my valibility(?) test. You only get one first impression and the website was simply not convincing. So I turned to PC muscle training with the help of a book ("How to make love all night" - Barbara Kiesling). I finished the book and exercices and although it gave me (at some level) what it promised, I was pretty dissapointed. I couldn't  enjoy being 'multi-orgasmic' this way at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I did it for obvious reasons, but I expected much more out of it. I couldn't believe I was so excited in the beginning.. over this.

Looking back at it now, I think I was so dissapointed that I was ready to try anything.. even KSMO. I started as a non-believer, but it only took me one session to begin having some faith in KSMO and one week to become a believer. I would be lying if I said I already experienced a KSMO orgasm after so many months, but I feel good about that, the pace feels right (most of the time ), I keep improving and I really enjoy the near-orgasmic feelings I have in my sessions. At this point I can tell you that my life has already been greatly enriched by this practice. Even regular orgasms feel more powerful than ever (mind blowing!) and that's even without using the Key Sound.

I understand your reasons for putting KSMO at the last spot in your list, but why would you wait for the perfect methods to achieve perfect bliss, if you can already achieve just that with an arguably still rough (but simple) method named KSMO?

Regarding the 2nd part of your post I have to say that a strong PC muscle does in fact improve the quality of regular orgasms. However, when using the PC Squeeze method, things start to get unpredictable. One time I kept delaying the final orgasm.. and when I finally let go (huge buildup), I felt nothing.. absolutely nothing. Even weirder, I didnt ejaculate at all.. all that hard work for nothing! I was very disturbed by that.

Luckily KSMO helps even more than a strong PC muscle, even when not using any Key Sounds at all. I never thought orgasms could become as intense as they are for me now.

 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 5:52 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I'm glad we've reached a point of mutual understanding here.

  "I agree it shouldn't be a major discussion how Jack Johnson runs his business, it was just a point I wanted to make, as a consumer, since you were in defense of the way in which he does it. My frustration was simply that you didn't seem to be listening."

    I understand. I guess I should offer you what I know of Jack's reasoning behind his business practice.

    Jack originally started his business with the intent of making the opportunity to learn MMO's affordable not just to people in the U.S., but in less wealthy countries as well. I'm sure you know, $30 is a lot more to spend in many places than it is here.

    In keeping with that goal, he realized that, although the majority of practitioners achieve their desired results within 1-3 months by the average, some require much more time and assistance to experience MMO's. He decided he wanted to make the lessons free, partially because not everyone would be able to afford a long-term investment for extended assistance. And he wanted everyone to have a chance to learn it successfully. It also takes the pressure off the customer to "hurry up and have multiples" before they have to pay for another 3 or 6 months of coaching.

    Another reason why he sells the shoes and not the lessons, is because KSMO is highly scrutinized. Jack isn't blind to the fact that achieving orgasms through sound is unorthodox to say the least. And yet, at the same time, the benefits of practicing KSMO are often so profound, especially compared to what one usually hears from techniques like PC squeezes, that it sounds almost too good to be true. For this reason, he wanted to offer the public the opportunity to observe the process and the benefits of learning KSMO through the experiences of it's practitioners, rather than what he had to say about it. After all, who are you more likely to trust, the vendor or the people who bought the vendor's product?

    It's true, Jack might stand to make more money if he gave away the shoes and charged for private lessons, not viewable by the public. But then people wouldn't know what KSMO was all about unless they paid first. He's offering folks the chance to make an informed decision without risk, and most of the people who buy the seminar, say they chose to do so after reading a few posts in the KSMO Forum.

  Finally, our culture is already inundated with MMO techniques that promise everything and deliver very little. Only a lucky few seem to achieve anything close to what they hope for with most methods. Many of us guys, myself especially, bought the books and videos and felt cheated in the end, because even if the technique works in theory, there's no one there to ask if you have difficulties learning it. For that, they want you to spend much larger amounts of time and money for personal instruction and weekend seminars.

  Jack wanted to do more than sell a product, he wanted to actually help men achieve their desired results, because he strongly believes that the more we are able to find self-satisfaction, the more it will benefit society. So he didn't want to limit through money, our opportunity to learn and accomplish this goal. He wanted to prove that the technique is effective and show that he personally stands behind KSMO.

  Mantak Chia and Margo Anand, and a whole host of others are all too happy to take our money and promise success, but they're no where to be found when we need their help, unless you have several hundred dollars to spare. Jack has been personally available to his customers for nearly a decade. It may not be good business sense, but I think it's better than that, it's honest and trustworthy behavior.

  I hope that helps clarify his reasoning a bit. Please feel free to comment.

  "I'm not a big fan of psychology as it is codified these days. I am morally opposed to all psychologically prescribed drugs, and I feel the practice of psycho-analysis is a sham that projects a preconceived and dogmatic analysis onto the patient."

  Well said, we have much more in common than I realized!

  "Good philosophers are better psychologists because they undrestand human nature better."

  I couldn't have said it better myself! I was a Philosophy major in college.    ; - )

  "You're centered on me--or at least you were in your first post. And, it's understandable, because I talked about you in my post, rather than about KSMO. Which was a terrible mis-centering on my part."

  Agreed. For my part, I realized something important yesterday, the past 5 years of (militantly) defending KSMO, often from highly beligerent posts fraught with mis-directed anger, has lead me to become hyper-defensive and a bit sarcastic. I realize I wasn't really responding to you, but to a build up of many unpleasant Forum exchanges from the past. This has given me pause to consider a new perspective on the situation. Thanks for that.

  "Thanks for your reflection upon your previous posts, apologies if I centered the argument on you versus on the ideas you were speaking of in my original post.
H"

  It's cool man. I'm actually glad things finally came to a head for me. Sorry you happened to be the catalyst. If you'd like, we can start over from your original goal, modestly increasing sexual pleasure with a partner. I have a couple suggestions aside from KSMO, that you may find helpful.

  Cheers

     




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 6:01 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Hey Edwin,

  Good to see you again! I was still writing my previous post when you made yours. I just wanted to say thanks for jumping in here with your comments. I'll step aside now and let H respond.

« Last Edit: August 07, 2008, 08:13:32 PM by Administrator » Logged
Administrator
Administrator
Newbie
*****
Posts: 33


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2008, 08:13:45 PM »

H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 9:08 AM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perfectly valid critique re: assumption rather than experience. But, breadth of experience and undrestanding can get you pretty far--of course, not all the way. So sure, I can understand if my analysis of KSMO is off according to your experience with KSMO.

Anyhow, appreciate the apology re: the raving prejudice. Clearly, a prejudiced person doesn't spend three hours of his evening seriously considering the thing he's prejured about. I respect you as a thorough and honest person, compelled by personal experiences to share what you have come to know; please do the same for me.

I agree it shouldn't be a major discussion how Jack Johnson runs his business, it was just a point I wanted to make, as a consumer, since you were in defense of the way in which he does it. My frustration was simply that you didn't seem to be listening.

Re: not reading your post. I qualified things I said when I thought that your post my cover it, and by the time I got to the bottom of my post I had pretty much read all your post. I adimantly partially-read, and I said so. And when I did read I didn't read it emotionally but analytically, so I could undrestand what it was you were saying and not just react to it [which is what I felt you were doing with mine the first time--the second time you were perhaps struck by the sincerity in my want to understand something and to fit it into my philosophy of the world, and so you read/listened carefully and responded carefully.]

I'm not a big fan of psychology as it is codified these days. I am morally opposed to all psychologically prescribed drugs, and I feel the practice of psycho-analysis is a sham that projects a preconceived and dogmatic analysis onto the patient. Good philosophers are better psychologists because they undrestand human nature better. As far as projection goes: I already covered how I qualified my partial-reading of yours, and my critique of your 'reading' of mine was that though you quoted an exact sentence, you hadn't really taken the time to undrestand it [like the tap shoes]. I feel I didn't do that with yours.

On the other hand there's a concept of mis-centering that gestalt psychologies had. Centering is where you locate the unfitness in a problem. When centered right, your centered directly on the thing that's not quite piecing together, when centered wrong you center on its periphery, or on your self, or on another person. You're centered on me--or at least you were in your first post. And, it's understandable, because I talked about you in my post, rather than about KSMO. Which was a terrible mis-centering on my part.

Finally, with regards to the tactile-ness thing, which you still may not be understanding. I spend mayn paragraphs explaining how I took sex to be an emotional experience. What I mean when I say that for me it's primarily tactile, was said as a response to the making of sounds. I covered this extensively, including how for some people it's primarily visual. What I mean to say is that the /sense/ of it, the sort of input/output path of it all, is through the sense of touch, not hearing. That's really the core of it, it's PRIMARILY tactile, means that's the most primitive/primary, fundamental part of it. That doesn't mean that it's not to a huge degree a matter of emotions. Death is a primarily physical process, in terms of causes, but not in terms of the substance of the experience as it is percieved. You misunderstood my use of primary. I mean it in the old sense of the word--having to do with the origin of something--not in the mis-used sense that confuses it with a word like 'predominantly.' This should have been thoroughly clear in what I said in my last post, I covered the relation of the senses to the emotions in full, and I differentiated the different senses and how they may or may not play a role in things.

Thanks for your reflection upon your previous posts, apologies if I centered the argument on you versus on the ideas you were speaking of in my original post.
H
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
Edwin
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 5:15 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi!

I just like to share some of  my experiences with you.. since you asked

I have read your post and I can totally relate to what you have said. 5 months ago I was at the same point you are now : searching, gathering information about how to improve things.  Also like you, I'm a pretty skeptic person, especially about things like these... and KSMO didnt pass my valibility(?) test. You only get one first impression and the website was simply not convincing. So I turned to PC muscle training with the help of a book ("How to make love all night" - Barbara Kiesling). I finished the book and exercices and although it gave me (at some level) what it promised, I was pretty dissapointed. I couldn't  enjoy being 'multi-orgasmic' this way at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I did it for obvious reasons, but I expected much more out of it. I couldn't believe I was so excited in the beginning.. over this.

Looking back at it now, I think I was so dissapointed that I was ready to try anything.. even KSMO. I started as a non-believer, but it only took me one session to begin having some faith in KSMO and one week to become a believer. I would be lying if I said I already experienced a KSMO orgasm after so many months, but I feel good about that, the pace feels right (most of the time ), I keep improving and I really enjoy the near-orgasmic feelings I have in my sessions. At this point I can tell you that my life has already been greatly enriched by this practice. Even regular orgasms feel more powerful than ever (mind blowing!) and that's even without using the Key Sound.

I understand your reasons for putting KSMO at the last spot in your list, but why would you wait for the perfect methods to achieve perfect bliss, if you can already achieve just that with an arguably still rough (but simple) method named KSMO?

Regarding the 2nd part of your post I have to say that a strong PC muscle does in fact improve the quality of regular orgasms. However, when using the PC Squeeze method, things start to get unpredictable. One time I kept delaying the final orgasm.. and when I finally let go (huge buildup), I felt nothing.. absolutely nothing. Even weirder, I didnt ejaculate at all.. all that hard work for nothing! I was very disturbed by that.

Luckily KSMO helps even more than a strong PC muscle, even when not using any Key Sounds at all. I never thought orgasms could become as intense as they are for me now.

 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 5:52 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I'm glad we've reached a point of mutual understanding here.

  "I agree it shouldn't be a major discussion how Jack Johnson runs his business, it was just a point I wanted to make, as a consumer, since you were in defense of the way in which he does it. My frustration was simply that you didn't seem to be listening."

    I understand. I guess I should offer you what I know of Jack's reasoning behind his business practice.

    Jack originally started his business with the intent of making the opportunity to learn MMO's affordable not just to people in the U.S., but in less wealthy countries as well. I'm sure you know, $30 is a lot more to spend in many places than it is here.

    In keeping with that goal, he realized that, although the majority of practitioners achieve their desired results within 1-3 months by the average, some require much more time and assistance to experience MMO's. He decided he wanted to make the lessons free, partially because not everyone would be able to afford a long-term investment for extended assistance. And he wanted everyone to have a chance to learn it successfully. It also takes the pressure off the customer to "hurry up and have multiples" before they have to pay for another 3 or 6 months of coaching.

    Another reason why he sells the shoes and not the lessons, is because KSMO is highly scrutinized. Jack isn't blind to the fact that achieving orgasms through sound is unorthodox to say the least. And yet, at the same time, the benefits of practicing KSMO are often so profound, especially compared to what one usually hears from techniques like PC squeezes, that it sounds almost too good to be true. For this reason, he wanted to offer the public the opportunity to observe the process and the benefits of learning KSMO through the experiences of it's practitioners, rather than what he had to say about it. After all, who are you more likely to trust, the vendor or the people who bought the vendor's product?

    It's true, Jack might stand to make more money if he gave away the shoes and charged for private lessons, not viewable by the public. But then people wouldn't know what KSMO was all about unless they paid first. He's offering folks the chance to make an informed decision without risk, and most of the people who buy the seminar, say they chose to do so after reading a few posts in the KSMO Forum.

  Finally, our culture is already inundated with MMO techniques that promise everything and deliver very little. Only a lucky few seem to achieve anything close to what they hope for with most methods. Many of us guys, myself especially, bought the books and videos and felt cheated in the end, because even if the technique works in theory, there's no one there to ask if you have difficulties learning it. For that, they want you to spend much larger amounts of time and money for personal instruction and weekend seminars.

  Jack wanted to do more than sell a product, he wanted to actually help men achieve their desired results, because he strongly believes that the more we are able to find self-satisfaction, the more it will benefit society. So he didn't want to limit through money, our opportunity to learn and accomplish this goal. He wanted to prove that the technique is effective and show that he personally stands behind KSMO.

  Mantak Chia and Margo Anand, and a whole host of others are all too happy to take our money and promise success, but they're no where to be found when we need their help, unless you have several hundred dollars to spare. Jack has been personally available to his customers for nearly a decade. It may not be good business sense, but I think it's better than that, it's honest and trustworthy behavior.

  I hope that helps clarify his reasoning a bit. Please feel free to comment.

  "I'm not a big fan of psychology as it is codified these days. I am morally opposed to all psychologically prescribed drugs, and I feel the practice of psycho-analysis is a sham that projects a preconceived and dogmatic analysis onto the patient."

  Well said, we have much more in common than I realized!

  "Good philosophers are better psychologists because they undrestand human nature better."

  I couldn't have said it better myself! I was a Philosophy major in college.    ; - )

  "You're centered on me--or at least you were in your first post. And, it's understandable, because I talked about you in my post, rather than about KSMO. Which was a terrible mis-centering on my part."

  Agreed. For my part, I realized something important yesterday, the past 5 years of (militantly) defending KSMO, often from highly beligerent posts fraught with mis-directed anger, has lead me to become hyper-defensive and a bit sarcastic. I realize I wasn't really responding to you, but to a build up of many unpleasant Forum exchanges from the past. This has given me pause to consider a new perspective on the situation. Thanks for that.

  "Thanks for your reflection upon your previous posts, apologies if I centered the argument on you versus on the ideas you were speaking of in my original post.
H"

  It's cool man. I'm actually glad things finally came to a head for me. Sorry you happened to be the catalyst. If you'd like, we can start over from your original goal, modestly increasing sexual pleasure with a partner. I have a couple suggestions aside from KSMO, that you may find helpful.

  Cheers

     




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 11/30/2004 6:01 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Hey Edwin,

  Good to see you again! I was still writing my previous post when you made yours. I just wanted to say thanks for jumping in here with your comments. I'll step aside now and let H respond.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If ya wanna ride those waves, you better wax your board!
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
H
Anonymous
Guest 

 

 

  Date Posted: 12/01/2004 9:08 PM           
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, not much to respond to! Seems like one of those rare times where a human being actually experiences some degree of closure...

I'd be glad to hear any suggestions you have w/r/t my 'incomplete orgasms' as I am putting them--which is the real thing that compelled me to look into MMO; and as my previous posts indicated--I have other things, that require no money, that I will be trying; both PC and trying to get used to vocal release of emotions. If, after I've gone as far with these as I can, I find that either I am still experienced decreased orgasmic pleasure or that I've made leaps and bounds and am game for making more of them, I will purchase the Jack's CD (through your link if I can still find it at that point), and I'll let you know my thoughts on it as well [after I've given it a fair trial]).

Thanks--
H


[I understand the tradeoffs in the two business models, of course. My argument was half-business half-ethics. I still feel that, in the name of science and human progress, ideas shouldn't be copyrighted. I understand the complications of trying to also make enough money to live off of, though. Which is where ethics becomes a personal thing, and a third party can't objectively say what's right or wrong, without knowing the exact circumstances in which a person is making a decision... But, I will say, overall I still think the needle leans towards "make the information, sound, so forth as public domain as possible so as to allow more people to try it and competition to make it more validated--this would then eliminate the 'wierdness' people feel about this one guy with his one magic CD, and perhaps make the thing popular and demonstrated enoguh by multiple teachers, books and varying methodologies, so as to attrack researchers who may be able to shed light on the why/how and improve the future of human sexuality." -- but, that's my view from my side. No more discussion would benefit either of us, in my opinion.]
 
| Report to admin | Speaking message |     
 
 
 
PanDragon
 
Golden Member 

Posts : 73
Reg : 07/13/2003

 

 

  Date Posted: 12/04/2004 9:32 PM               
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hey H,

  pardon the delay in my response. I've been a bit busy here. By the way, thanks for saying you'd use my link if you decide to try KSMO. I appreciate that.

  As for my suggestions, I think these could be beneficial in addition to whatever path you choose in learning MMO. I consider them to be supplements, rather than techniques in and of themselves.

  The first is Amygdala Clicking as taught by Neil Slade at www.neilslade.com.  The only thing you would require to get started is his first book, "Frontal Lobes Supercharge." It's only about $17. I started "clicking forward" as he calls it, about 11 months ago, and I've been really surprised at the results.

  There's a number of benefits to learning this simple technique, but for sexual purposes, I've found it not only enhances pleasure during sexual acts, but once I got really good at it, I could enjoy a continuous orgasmic state by using a simple visualization technique he teaches in the book, without any physical stimulation. My guess is, even if you decided not to try any MMO techniques, learning to click forward would at least enhance your enjoyment of sex as well as your ejaculatory orgasms

  I should mention a couple things about this, first I learned it after learning KSMO, so I'm not sure how much that affected my learning curve. But I assume it helped to some extent. Neil has mentioned that the learning curve is different for everyone, so if you decide to try it, don't expect instant results. It may take awhile. It was about a month of daily practice before I really felt what he was talking about.

  Second, although I think Neil is doing a great service by teaching this technique, I also think it's important to point out that some of what he says in his books and newsletters is, well...unorthodox to say the least. I consider myself to be open minded, but some of his opinions and claims are pretty far out there, even for me! So, just giving you fair warning, that although I think the science behind his method is sound and more than worth the effort to learn, a fair amount of his book is rather bizarre in my opinion.

  My other suggestion is more general: hypnosis. There's all kinds of ways in which hypnosis can enhance sexual pleasure and performance. I think it's truly underestimated by most folks. The thing is, there's all kinds of ways in which to become hypnotized and nearly all of them are a cause for debate in the hypnotherapy community.

  Some hypnotherapists claim self-hypnosis is easy to learn and effective, others will tell you self-hypnosis is impossible and effective hypnosis can only be achieved with the help of a professional. Personally, I've always been interested in self-hypnosis, bought a lot of books on the subject, but didn't have much luck until the past couple years. The two techniques that have worked best for me are:

  -DASH (Dynamically Anchored Self Hypnosis). This is the quickest and easiest way to use self-hypnosis I've ever found. Here is a free tutorial:  http://hypnos.co.uk/hypnomag/lundholm.htm  That should be enough for anyone to get started, but if you find it helpful and want to learn more, I recommend LundHolm's book available here: http://brainpower.8k.com/DASHManual.html

   I'm don't know how interested or well read you are regarding hypnosis, but I always recommend learning as much as possible about how to safely and effectively phrase suggestions/affirmations before attempting self-hypnosis. It's important to understand how the subsconscious receives messages before attempting to influence it.

  Anyway, DASH is easy to learn and use (it takes like 5 minutes, twice a day). You just need to have a clear idea of what suggestions will be most effective to achieve your desired results. That's where it may take some time and effort, working out just the right way to tell your subsconscious what you want.

  -The Ecstasy CD. Technically, this is just a brainwave entrainment CD, using Alpha and Theta waves and some lovely new-age style music. It contains no verbal instructions or hypnosis. However, I have found it's highly effective for raising endorphin levels and if used daily for at least a couple weeks, it will most likely enhance libido noticably. But more than that, the combination of brainwaves in this CD is an excellent way of placing your mind in a highly suggestable state, as well as making it easy to vividly imagine erotic experiences.

  Most hypnotherapists agree that the subconscious is more receptive to visualization than simple suggestions in word form. I find that using this CD as form of visualization training wheels, helped to steer my body toward the experiences I wanted to have in reality. And since the combination of brainwaves releases a higher concentration of endorphins into your system while you listen, it also happens to feel really good too.

  My suggestion would be to listen to this CD while visualizing with as much detail as possible, how you want to feel while having sex, from beginning to orgasm(s). Include all your senses in your visualization, not just sight, but also sound, smells, etc. Make it a "dream come true" in your mind, and with practice, it just may happen.

  For the record, I have a number of friends who are using Amygdala Clicking and the Ecstasy CD and they have all had varying degrees of success, but all agree they are effective and fun additions to their sex lives. As for DASH, so far I'm the only person I know who's using it. So I can only say it been effective for me.

  Anyway, those are my two suggestions for now without recommending any specific MMO path. They also happen to work well in combination. You can "click forward" while listening to the CD to enhance the listening experience. I've also found that listening to the CD makes it easier to click forward. I hope you find one or more of them helpful. Please drop a line here and tell us about it if you decide to try any.

  Good Luck!
Logged
69andCOUNTING
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2009, 07:19:46 AM »

Hi all - I'm a Newbie and this is my maiden message here.

My search found five years ago PanDragon posted that hypnosis may be able to increase orgasmic capability. I'd go much further than that and say that a degree of trance state is ESSENTIAL to orgasm.

Some time ago I attended training courses to become a hypnotherapist. Although I never put it into professional practice, the knowledge I gained on the course, and resulting life experiences I have had since have been invaluable.

Before taking the course in my 40's I had been fascinated by what causes arousal and orgasm - why were some women more easily aroused and orgasmically capable than others? One day during the course the tutor carried out a typical example hypnosis on a lady from the class. He sat next to her as she laid on a couch and gently talked her through induction into a trance. Watching this it was almost embarrassingly obvious that it was parallel to seduction! - and then almost immediately I had the reciprocal realisation that Arousal Is A Trance State. - And here I was being trained how to do it! It was life changing.

I tried to discuss my realisation with the tutor during a break, but he went into aloof professional mode and said "Well I'm not sure about that" - and gave me a wry smile.

I now regularly use informal hypnotic induction and suggestion to increase my partner's mental and physical arousal (wetness, sensitivity of clitoris, fantasy scenarios etc) and orgasmic capacity. Using this technique it's easy for women to "orgasm on demand" - a typical suggestion might be that I'm going to count to 10 in time with your breathing, and with each breath you will get more horny and closer to orgasm, and when I say 10 you will have a wonderful intense orgasm that will go on for as long as YOU want it to.

Basically when in a trance we will do or imagine anything we WANT to, and most women WANT to orgasm - right?

A technique for producing multiple orgasms - and infinitely climbing arousal, is to get her too imagine that she's slowly climbing a beautiful staircase or arousal, and that each step is an orgasm. After cumming her arousal does NOT go back to rest-state, but climbs with the next orgasm - again & again & again. This can have astounding results in my experience.

Orgasm starts and finishes in the brain.

If anybody wants to know more about this subject please ask in reply.

Many thanks

Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!