Are wet dreams like periods?

Submitted by davidphd1866 on
Printer-friendly version

Recently I read that the nocturnal emission (wet dream) is parallel and analogous to the woman's montly period. In as much as the menstrual cycle has her body ridding itself of the "old" uterine lining, the wet dream is the body ridding itself of "old" semen.

Could this be a good measure of success in Karezza?

Like in the post by Marnia about how male testosterone levels can come to match the menstrual cycle of a woman, I wonder if the wet dream cycle can come to match the menstrual cycle of the woman. Suppose we are free of porn and masturbation, might we males develop a similar "monthly cycle" like the female?

In my case (N=1) the few wet dreams that I have had in my life (as a chronic masturbator, I never had many) occured during my wife's period.

I'd love to hear everyone's opinion. But MIGHT we use the wet dream as our benchmark? Would we men be well advised to avoid "mechanically" causing an emission and instead let our bodies mesh with a woman's cycle and let Nature handle the whole ejaculation issue?



We must be careful to compare individual experiences with what Nature is gently nudging us to do. I have done a (very) informal sampling of my friends in the web world, and most of them agree that about 30 days of abstaining is sufficient to bring about a wet dream. I would LOVE to see a controlled study.

But my questions remain for the group: Do you see this as a legitimate parallel and analogue to the woman's period? And if so, might we use and rely on our own body to take care of our ejaculatory needs, thus freeing us to focus on loving our partners?

Respectfully note: I am NOT asking if YOU had this experience and whether or not you think it's valid based upon your sample size of one.

My personal epiphany is that "YES!" the wet dream is the male version of the period. As a procreative function, they seem to have the same purpose. If I woman does not become pregnant, she simply starts a cycle over again. It makes sense to me that Nature wanted the same to happen for the male.

May your wet dreams be your guide!!


There may be parallels

Certainly the ancient Daoists thought of both as (avoidable) drains on human energy. They had exercises for discouraging wet dreams and menstrual periods. The latter practice was known as "Slaying the Red Dragon." Smile

Personally, I doubt the timing of wet-dreams is consistent, especially for guys without mates. But, hey, what do I know? I always like to learn something new.

slaying the red dragon

Great points Marnia. Since BOTH male and female may have sought to limit this waste of energy, it may still be a wise decision to coordinate the flows....

I know that absent a partner, the wet dreams will come sporadically. But when two women are around one another, they tend to synchonize their periods. I am guessing that if a male allowed it to happen, over many months of no masturbation or ejaculatory sex, he'd eventually synchronize with her.

What do you think about the notion of wet dreams being an analogue to the period? Perhaps they are not scientifically tied to one another like the testosterone levels......But might they be serving the same purpose? Man! This is fascinating. I am going to find out more. Maybe the answer has been right in front of us all along....


Wet dreams

are not something I have had. I had a handful of orgasms within a dream, one specifically that was so real feeling it woke me up in the middle of the night, and I reached down because I was sure I had actually had an orgasm. But I was dry.

That said, to bring this to more generic, I suppose there are parallels that could be drawn, but also differences. One, the woman has a menstrual cycle because her ovaries release one (usually) egg a month (or there abouts). When that doesn't become fertilized, it gets ejected along with all the blood built up to take care of that egg should it get fertilized.

In the male, sperm gets produced, and once full, it slows down or stops. Sperm can be good for longer than a month and held for a long time. There is no forced creation of sperm which results in the need for sperm already there to be forced out. So I'd say biologically the processes are quite different. The first happens in response to prepare for the next egg to come down the tube. The later happens mostly in response to when it is emptied. That isn't to say there may be some hormone or something that makes you more prone to feel a need to ejaculate once full. But as I understand it, while it doesn't get totally "full" in the balls, the sperm pretty much refill within a day. Certainly by the time a week is over, you're pretty much full. It stops producing, and starts back up if you empty it. A woman has no control over that.

Parallels would be that both are getting rid of genetic material necessary for forming a new life, both are involuntary. But I'm not sure, apart from said study, that we could know that most men experience them about once a month when no ejaculation has happened in that time. I went a month without one time, but that was the longest (probably not long enough to test that out), and I've not had a wet dream to date in my life (that I'm aware of).

I do recall reading about people who abstain for a long period of time, that at some point (don't recall the time frame) the sperm will "dry up" if not expelled and the whole thing shuts down. Not that you couldn't get it rolling again, but apparently the body has a way of dealing with lack of ejaculation over long periods of time. I think there is debate over the bodies need to "clean the pipes" by having an orgasm every so often. But, depending on the time frame of the total shutdown just mentioned, one might need to have an occasional ejaculation if one wants to keep things active and flowing down there. :)


I hope others who know more will chime in.

First, it's my understanding that sperm are made constantly. But they don't take up much room. It's the rest of the ejaculate that results in volume, and it doesn't just keep increasing, despite popular wisdom to the contrary. Smile

It's also my understanding that sperm start to break up after they've been sitting around for a while. Something we just read said they aren't at their best after day seven. (Correct link: But what that would have to do with a monthly cycle, I dunno. Maybe pipe cleaning is good from time to time.

Second, I've never heard of the "dry up" theory, although I think fairly frequent sex is a good idea for lots of reasons. Not sure ejaculation is needed if someone is at peace with a karezza approach. If, instead, someone is fighting to suppress the sexual urge, he'd probably need to ejaculate to prevent prostate discomfort.


I would welcome someone with solid knowledge on the subject. Cole and I are speculating, so it would be illuminating to hear more about what happens to sperm AND semen inside of the body. I think the seminal vesicles (no one ever talks about them, they produce most of the semen) and the prostate gradually secrete their fluids and are reabsorbed by the body's lymph system. Whereas the testicles (that produce sperm, a component of semen) are not able to rid themselves of the particular cells in the same way. As such, there seems to be a need for occasional flushing. Again, I am speculating like Cole.

And as I understand things, the period is not about "built up blood", instead it is the uterine lining that is being shed as it is no longer well suited for the fertilization of the egg. In other words, old cells--just like old sperm cells.

I also wonder about the sublimation/transmutation that the Taoists and Tantrists talk about. Could that delay the onset of a wet dream? Perhaps active sorts like myself seem to have fewer of them--the muscular movements stimulating all glands, for example.

What about emotionally? Could we also think about the concurrent wet dreams as evidence of a deep emotional connection with the two partners? I could think of few more "touching" moments when the woman utters that she just started her period and the man realizes that he just had a wet dream. Talk about bodies in tune with one another....nice.


Here's an interesting tidbit

I found the following site which talks about sperm and it states the following:

It takes 65-74 days for the sperm cells to develop.

Didn't say how long they stay good in the testes once "done." But they certainly have a longer prep time than I thought. And it was interesting to read about how the body makes them, essentially by an internal cloning process, no less.

That would seem to indicate that there tends to be a continual production, that it is the semen which gets "full" within a day or so. But I would imagine if they have that long of a gestation time, they would stay good for a while. All the talk of five days is once in the womb.


a splendid detective. Interesting.

Actually what that link I INTENDED to post Smile said was that maximum fertility was 2-7 days after a previous ejaculation. From the sound of it you're pretty lucky to have all those strapping sons . Smile


It is known that sexual abstinence for 2 - 7 days is optimal for obtaining good quantity and quality of spermatozoa and that semen quality decline after 7 days of sexual abstinence.

And another note

Here's one that talks specifically about the topic, and it appears once the gestation period has happened, they don't really know how long they last, but it appears they peak to full capacity 2-3 days after the last ejaculation based on this:

Sperm production by the testicle takes about 90 days; the immature sperm are then deposited in a receptacle called the epididymis. They remain there until the time of ejaculation, when they undergo further maturation and develop their swimming ability. We do not know exactly how long they live once they reach maturity. Optimal semen specimens occur with ejaculation every two or three days. As the length of time between ejaculation increases, the percentage of normal, motile sperm in a semen sample progressively decreases.

But at least we can say one big difference. Men produce an unlimited supply of sperm while women have a set number of eggs.

Awesome info.

Thanks Cole. Great stuff. So it appears that there is such a thing as a "spoiled load". Now if we could ever find a study that says how long is too long and the body chooses to rid itself. I guess one of the salient questions that arises now is does the male body need to ejaculate EVER? If not, then there's no analogous case, if it does to rid itself of old sperm, then what is a good interval?

One more bit of info

Well, more than a bit, but here's the link:

What this talks about and I've seen at other sites discussing this, is that the production either to get it going or slow it down, of sperm is regulated by hormones. Testosterone is produced in the testes and is in high concentration there as it is the "gas" to fuel the production of sperm once the initial hormones kick the process into gear. There's a certain hormone that comes from the pituitary gland that says, in effect, "Hey guys, it's time to make some more."

What is interesting is since the maturation time is apparently anywhere from 60-90 days, immediate needs can't regulate the process. It would seem the holding spot for the sperm must reach a certain low level that kicks in the hormones to start producing more, but the level left at that point is enough to keep the guy in stock until fresh supplies can arrive.

Or maybe its when an ejaculation happens, it simply knows its time to kick in some more, but the overall supply plus what it is already producing maintains levels under normal ejaculation cycles, which from other readings can be up to 2-3 days when sperm supplies appear to peek.

A man produces up to 100,000 spermatozoa each day. According to the Mayo Clinic, an adult man who is fertile can produce over 20 million spermatozoa each time he ejaculates.

Though based on those numbers, it would take around 200 days of sperm production to replace what gets shot out in one ejaculation. If so, there must be a decent supply chain and storage since there is a 60-90 production cycle. My estimate is that there is always sperm being produced, but the question is how rapidly, and the hormones control that. One would think more frequent ejaculations would require a high-level production process. But then, other data seems to suggest sperm counts decrease after a 3 day peek of abstaining. That could be an indication of ejaculation causing an increase in sperm production, but then again, if there is a 60-90 day delay, I don't see how that would factor into it.

Interesting stuff. :)

Thanks again Cole

Here is a link that I plan on delving deeper into. I share it here initially because Cole is such a good researcher.

Your logic is flawless. Given the observed maturation cycles it would take about 200 days to completely replenish what was lossed in a single ejaculation. This supports the notion that men who ejaculate regularly seem to be continually tearing themselves down. Could this be why the "ancients" recognized how unnecessary emission of semen prematurely aged males?

Maybe our "period" for the male is some multiple of the female's.

And since hormones are the "gas", or catalyst, this might explain why Karezza and the resulting oxytocin increases help bring together the various "periods" between the man and woman. It does have me wondering. Are two people who are utterly "connected" going to converge their periods? Imagine the discovery if this is true. Men might be expected to demonstrate their love and comittment by having a period, much like she does.

I am now being humorous, but if this happened, and men had their version of a period, would we wear some form of absorbant undergarment to be prepared? Would we feel "congested" and "bloated" just before?


That first link was apparently to a monastic type setting, and not specifically scientific. That said, it does confirm what I had said previously that what I've heard reported by those who have gone long times without ejaculation report things "drying up" at some point. The cessation of wet dreams several years into it would confirm that shut down.

The second link refers to men's hormonal cycles, and I could have told them I have cycles. Whether they are about a month long, I don't know. But I've always noticed I'll go through cycles where I'm more sensative to stimulation and less. If it starts feeling good, I know it will last about three days in general, though I recall one time when it felt really good for about a week, masturbating three times a day (I think I was a teen and left in the house alone while the family was off on vacation...I had a job that I couldn't get away from, so plenty of alone time). It wasn't until toward the end of that week that it started to die off in feeling. It was highly unusual, even as a teen, for it to feel that good for that long, doing it that frequently. I was surprised at the time and I don't know that its ever happened since.

But on the hormones, I don't think oxytocin was one of the hormones listed which kicked the sperm production into gear. I'd have to go back and look, but they usually referred to them as a group name that starts with an L. Whether oxytocin is part of that group, I don't know, but it didn't sound like it was talking about that particular hormone. These hormones not only signal the testes that its time to start making sperm more, but also ramps up the testosterone to energize the sperm production.

While the logic is "flawless" as it goes to sperm produced compared to sperm expended, there's something more that we're missing. I mean, less assume for a moment that this is true. That would mean to have a continual supply and peak numbers within 3 days after an ejaculation, that there would need to be a ready supply of sperms near or right at maturity that would act as some type of regulator.

For instance, I used to work at Wendy's back in college. On the grill, you'd have the meat lined up in rows. At one end of the grill was the lower temperature, and the fresh meat would go there. On the other end of the grill was the meat ready to be put on a bun. As the meat was taken off the grill on the one end to be consumed, you would flip the patties over to the next row to further cook. Once the fresh meat side was cleared, you'd lay down another row of patties.

The trick, of course, was to regulate how much fresh meat to put down so that you neither ended up with a bunch of cooked meat, drying out, with no where to go, or customers waiting impatiently because there wasn't any meat ready to put on the bun. You had to think ahead, watch the lines, get to know how the flow worked, so that you would keep the line moving with fresh meat with no one waiting on you, but at the same time when it slowed down, to not end up with a grill of cooked patties.

There would have to be some kind of storage, for one thing. But that wouldn't totally account for someone who masturbates every day. But I would say that someone who masturbates every day, probably doesn't expel the full 2 million sperm. I'm sure the number drops off significantly the more frequently you do it. And interestingly enough, as one site suggested, that number declines the longer you wait between ejaculations. Which may mean if you do it once a week, you won't use up as many sperms at a shot, and you have more time for the system to catch up. And if I ejaculate twice in one day, I can bet the second one would have fewer sperm in it. Who knows the numbers, maybe someone's done a count and research on it. Would be interesting.

But if the sperm count peaks around three days after an ejaculation if one holds off that long...why?

I'm thinking this could be an explanation, though it is just my theory. The point where the sperm are enabled to be mobile is the point of maturity, let's say. Let's say that when one has an ejaculation, there is something in the system that not only expels the sperm ready to go, but another trigger that is pulled which tells the next batch, "get ready, you're turn's next." So the system enables them to be mobile, and that is a 2-3 day process. Which, coincidentally, corresponds to the the expected life span of sperm in a womb! Hum....ya think? Wink

Now, if you go too fast, like in my Wendy's analogy, you'll run out of meat. It simply can't keep up the pace and your body has to wait for at least 2-3 days before the next batch is in the tubes and ready to go. Likewise, if you go slow, don't ejaculate for a few days, after day 3 some of the sperm start dying off. So as they sit in the tank, ready to go, they start getting old and no longer effective, so the body has some system for taking those out of the way to make room for fresh stuff. Thus like meat sitting on the grill and getting dry and old, you eventually can't use it so you toss it in the pan to later make chili out of. Thus the reason for the declining sperm count after that day.

Meanwhile, new sperm are building up, getting ready to mature, waiting for the signal from the ejaculation that they're next. Once that ejaculation happens, the older stuff is moved out of the way, and they start the process of maturing. If someone ejaculates again before they are ready, there simply isn't as much sperm tossed out, because there's not that much available.

That said, it would seem the system would break down at some point if it took around six months to replace what was ejaculated in a standard ejaculation, assuming it was fresh. And yet I can attest after masturbating almost daily for forty years that my sperm looks as white as it does otherwise. I probably had greater volume when I was younger, but that isn't necessarily the sperm, that's the semen. But through my life, sometimes its been thick, most of the time fairly normal, sometimes thin. Sometimes a lot, sometimes not. It varies, but for one reason or another after forty years, I've never run out, which one would think I would if it took six months to replenish from one ejaculation.

So, whether my theory is right or not, something else factors into this, some type of regulator that keeps it from expelling as much based on some types of parameters. Or maybe that data reported from the Mayo clinic had a typo or was just wrong. Who knows. But there's more to this that we don't know about yet. What, I'm not sure. But things don't totally add up yet.

Couple things

First, I think it's wrong to assume that cessation of wet dreams equals "drying up." It could just be that the brain settles down and stops hollering for action. Remember, our genitals don't control us...even though it seems that way. Smile Our mating programs run on neurochemicals. Yes, there's a circular effect between behavior and neurochemical balance, but the genitals and sperm levels aren't running the show.

Here's another interesting bit of evidence to throw into your grand scheme, Cole.

When men engaged in a “ten-day depletion experience,” ejaculating
an average of 2.4 times per day, their sperm output remained below
pre-depletion levels for more than five months. What other subtle changes
might accompany this measurable one—especially in the brain, where the
experience of orgasm occurs, and where the controls for testosterone and
sperm production lie?

Running the numbers

[quote=Marnia]First, I think it's wrong to assume that cessation of wet dreams equals "drying up." It could just be that the brain settles down and stops hollering for action. Remember, our genitals don't control us...even though it seems that way. Smile Our mating programs run on neurochemicals. Yes, there's a circular effect between behavior and neurochemical balance, but the genitals and sperm levels aren't running the show.[/quote]

True. But we are talking about people who've gone years and years without ejaculation. I don't know if any of them who've gone fifteen plus years without ejaculation have ever done a sperm count (which would mess up their records, so not likely any have). And I really think there is more to wet dreams than just the body saying, "Hey, I'm full, time to empty this thing."

But at a minimum we could say after an extended period of time not ejaculating, that it would at some point *feel* as if things had shut down in there. Whether they have or not, I don't know, and would hate to say solidly one way or the other. I was only reporting what I'd heard from those who have gone without for years on end. And even if they have gone into hibernation, I think it could get fired back up and in business quick enough if activity started back up.

[quote]Here's another interesting bit of evidence to throw into your grand scheme, Cole.

When men engaged in a “ten-day depletion experience,” ejaculating
an average of 2.4 times per day, their sperm output remained below
pre-depletion levels for more than five months. What other subtle changes
might accompany this measurable one—especially in the brain, where the
experience of orgasm occurs, and where the controls for testosterone and
sperm production lie?[/quote]

This is interesting. I ran some numbers based on the 27% reduction in sperm concentration that they recorded. Taking the 20 million in a "normal" ejaculation, 27% comes to 5,400,000 sperm per ejaculation. Divide that by 100,000 (the daily output of sperm when cookin') and you get 54 days to refill time. Which is, interestingly enough, the time period, roughly, for sperm gestation. I guess if you assume it is cranking out 100,000 a day, and it takes 52 days (according to your link, I've seen different numbers on this) to reach maturity, then that means at any one time, a man has around 5,200,000 sperm in various stages of maturity that have not entered storage yet. Assuming that storage has around the 20 million and then some if it hasn't been depleted for a while, that would if you've not ejaculated recently, there's somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 - 30 million sperm in there. Maybe more if we postulate that the storage area actually holds more.

Interesting. I don't think it answers all the questions still. Much like it appears there's some factor in the dopamine and receptor levels that don't account for, at least in my case, normalization over a period of time with constant use.

Like a lot of learning, it seems this only lets you know how much we still don't know about all this. :?

Great analysis Cole

I am with you. SOMETHING is going on in addition to the dopamine hangover cycle. I keep asking myself, what would Mother Nature have had in mind for us behaviorally? I still think that this long gestation time for sperm maturation implies that the bonded pairs are better off without much ejaculation....except for procreative attempts.

I suppose another way to look at this Cole, is (aside from procreation) is there a NEED to ejaculate? What is the actual benefit? I can see none. At this point, if I had to make a choice, I'd choose to limit my ejaculations to wet dreams.


This from a PhD on the subject

Great article Marnia. I agree with you and Cole....SOMETHING is going on here. I think we'd be wise to become tuned to it.

I was corrresponding with a PhD on the subject of male sexual reproduction. He wishes to remain anonymous, but here is a quote by him. I understand his first sentence, but maybe Marnia can help decipher the rest.

"David… Spermatogenesis is indeed considered to be a 28day (moon driven, and couple driven to one intercourse per month) cycle… With yoga and pranayama, puberty of spine and all chakras matures the skukra-bindu-spermatozoa beyond semen into Ojas, Light –Reverential Bliss sensations that awaken Pineal puberty of melatonin and endorphin of Soma Rasa secretions, by which wet dreams fade away into a mere transitional phenomenon from genital puberty to these “other” puberties, of urdhvaretas, kundalini, khecari mudra, etc… "

I guess I haven't reached full puberty yet!



I'm no expert on Brahmacharya. But I know one orgasm a month is not considered an impediment to this Hindu spiritual practice.

I admire your zeal, David

I guess I think a bit more like an anthropologist. All these different traditions - suggesting cutting back or avoiding orgasm (generally) - hint that people have noticed benefits for a long time. And the fact that they ARE slightly different suggests to me that the search for hard and fast rules might be fruitless.

And as I said before, even if there is an ideal rule, whether it's "don't try for orgasm" or "once a month is no problem" - it doesn't mean that everyone is ready to strive for that right out of the gate. Rigid rules therefore may set unreasonable goals...leading to self-hatred or condemnation of others (when "failure" is projected outward to justify itself). We've seen some of this on this forum. It's not pretty. It's painful for those striving too hard for something they aren't ready for yet. So ultimately it backfires. They may give up and feel bitter - rather than finding a middle ground that will make their lives happier.

That's why I'm a bit wary of this discussion. I'm not suggesting you stop it. Smile I'm just suggesting that each person consider all the evidence, as well as his immediate past and his current circumstances before attempting to adhere rigidly to external rules. You, for example, have a committed relationship and a lot of intimate contact. You are in a different place from a single guy who could really use some affection.

That said, I'll continue to recommend a period of abstinence from p/m/o for anyone caught in an escalating porn loop. I think it speeds the necessary un-wiring. But after a couple of months, finding balance... or a sweetheart who's open to karezza :-), is a good step. Maybe for some singles, brahmacharya can work as a "balanced" path, with enough meditation and energy circulation practices. But that remains to be seen on this forum.

Marnia, Cole, Gary, et al

Marnia's point is well taken. I agree with her that a "definitive" truth will remain elusive. I also recognize my zeal for such thing does not always make for pleasing or interesting reading for everyone. Alas, my personality is what a famous polling company (Gallup) calls a "maximizer". That is, once I set off on finding a solution to my problem, I DO work very hard at finding out the "answer", even though a specific one may not exist. For me, learning is easier, more fun and more fruitful if I set about with the belief that there IS an answer to find.

Frankly, if the answer is always "it depends", there's not much point it looking is there? And if the answer is always "it depends" then what do we make of the things we really know? Do we dismiss talk of the dopamine cycle simply because how it effects us--and our subsequent efforts to manage it--"depends" on the individual?

I will speak personally, I am enormously grateful to follow Cole's efforts. His words mean a lot precisely BECAUSE he is going after the truth with zeal. Heck, I don't care if his math adds up or not as his premise may or may not be correct. But I can say with ......uh.....zeal.....that I will listen with rapt attention to those who are diligently seeking answers. Isn't this the very purpose of the forum? Or are you targeting only a specific audience who may be turned off as their status happens to be different?

Please forgive me if somehow I was carrying on disrespectully. You are the owner of this forum and your rules reign supreme. But aren't the readers utterly free to click on any forum topics they wish? I am honestly a bit stymied--but still open to suggestion.


I wasn't trying to censor you or Cole

If you think there's pay dirt to be found in this thread, by all means keep digging;-)

I just want readers whose circumstances may be quite different to think things through for themselves. Some are so desperate to feel better that they grasp at information that is purely theoretical, and then get frustrated when it doesn't work for them.

A playful attitude of exploration is great. And I, too, think it's good to assume there are answers. To say that there may be different answers for people in different circumstances is not the same thing as saying everything's relative.


will usually dictate things. It is like this.

Is there "truth" out there? Yes, I believe there is. Can I as a person know that truth 100% certain in my own mind? No, because I am a fallible human being, and I can't know everything I need to know, and use logical infallibly to arrive at a conclusion that has to be true no matter what. Even in science, which is predicated upon inductive reasoning, there is always the possibility that new evidence will present itself, not discovered previously, that will radically change the conclusions. Until one can know that all the facts are gathered, one can never arrive at a definitive answer to anything.

However, we have to live, we have to make choices based upon something, so we take what we think has the highest probability to be true, and accept the rest by faith that it will be proven correct, and then live our life based upon that truth.

But, truth isn't a rule. It is a reality upon which each of us must find where we plug into it. For one person, the truth applies to them in their situation and circumstances in this way. To another, in a different way. That two people with different situations, cultures, etc., don't experience the truth the same, doesn't equate in the truth being relative. It only means we have to treat what we believe to be truth as a reality that still needs to be applied to our lives, in our situation. When we learn new realities, new expressions, it means we may adjust our application of the truth. But it doesn't mean the truth has changed. It means I've changed.

So certainly it is good to search for the truth in a situation as long as one remembers two important rules.

1. My conclusions could be wrong. I am not infallible. That keeps one open to learning new things.

2. I conform to the truth by allowing the principles of that truth to apply itself to my life where I need it to be applied, in the areas it can change what I need changing.

As someone who is often denigrated said, paraphrased, now I see as through a glass darkly, but then we shall see face to face. (St. Paul)

People often confuse truth with the application of the truth. I'm a big-picture thinker. I like to see the bigger picture to not only understand how the pieces interrelate, but also understand when the pieces change or new data comes into the picture, I can understand where it fits into the bigger scheme of things. When I see the bigger picture, then I can see things about the pieces in how they relate to the whole that also indicates how they relate to each other.

And coming to this site is much like that. It has provided some missing puzzle pieces to understanding why it isn't good for me to daily ejaculate. And why even ejaculating with my wife is much better for me than alone, and why alone is better than with porn, etc. And because of that, I'm trying to not only learn more about this in my own particular situation, but also how I should apply it to my situation. And I still have ways to go on that as well.

Thank you both for continued support

Marnia, I think the best compliment that can be given to your work is how jealously we (ME, using the imperial "we") guard the freedom to pursue truth and knowledge in the site. You have created a forum that offers the best information on the general subject on the planet. We consider it precious and we (me) want to be careful not to underestimate any of the readers, ourselves and you the mentor.

I can really appreciate the struggles faced by those without a partner. Just as I am sure those without can appreciate the struggles those of us with partners have to face. (trust me, there are times when I wish I could just have the house to myself) But sensitivity cuts two ways. The single folks are hungry for anecdotes from regular couples--you said so yourself. But I fail to see how the line of inquiry Cole and I are following is in any way insensitive to single readers. Of course, by definition, an insensitive person isn't going to "see" it until it's pointed out to them.

I would still like to go back to the original question.....are nocturnal emissions like periods? (analogues) What drives them? If not the body attempting to cleanse itself, what on earth are nocturnal emissions for? What's a sneeze for? What is a bowel movement for? What is a period for?

Thanks again guys, I am grateful for this chance to speak with such thoughtful people.


Not insensitive

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but I think you are suggesting a wet dream a month is "ideal," because women have periods once a month. I just don't want anyone who is experiencing something different (whether more or less) to think they're abnormal.

Honestly, my view is that wet dreams are more a function of activity in the brain than a function of some involuntary monthly cycle. I just don't yet see any persuasive evidence of the latter except for your one-time (?) experience.

I think the brain explanation is why some men have a lot of wet dreams when they're changing the way they manage their sexual energy, and why some men have fewer once they increase their inner balance.

But, hey, I'm not ruling out that there could be some faint cycle also sometimes at work. I simply don't know more. And no matter how many times you ask, I personally won't be able to add to these least not yet. *giggle*

But maybe someone else WILL know, so it's a fine question.

I agree with Marnia on this.

I agree with Marnia on this. Whenever I abstain for long periods I might have a few wet dreams for a short period immediately after I start my abstinence but they always seem to wear off. I also remember when I used to view porn I'd sometimes manage not to reach orgasm or ejaculate and go to bed. I found that I'd always end up having a wet dream either that night or one of the nights afterwards. I think wet dreams are just a way to release the sexual tension we let build up inside of us instead of some sort of cycle as you suggest. Maybe it's just our bodies way of naturally releasing this tension so we don't explode.


Thanks for the clarification. That helps me be more clear. I am not trying to make a point that a monthly wet dream is ideal--nor even necessarily the cycle that exists at all. Rather, I believe that the wet dream is analogous to the period (a sloughing off of cells, so to speak) and that there MAY be SOME connection to the partner/spouse as far as the cycle goes. My question is that if we somehow managed to eliminate all of the modern influences like porn, masturbation, job stresses, etc. etc. MIGHT there be some eventual synchronization of the two "periods"? Perhaps this synchonization might be some "multiple" of her period......say, alpha males might have 4 wet dreams for every montly period the woman has...and beta males might have one wet dream "male period" every three of hers.... I am basing my questions on two observable facts: females in close and regular proximity to one another will tend to sync their periods, and the wet dream is SOME sort of cleansing mechanism. Given those two things, I feel there's gotta be some connection that we don't yet understand.

Is the "correct" amount of wet dreams a single number? Who knows. Is there such a thing as a correct amount? Who knows. But let's look at another bodily function, the humble bowel movement. Notice how pop science seems to tell us that "one a day" is healthy and "good". Where does that come from? But surely we all agree that it has something to do with how and when we eat. I feel that wet dreams have something to do with our hormonal balance within ourselves and is influenced by our partners.

Man, this is fascinating....I really hope others can chime in. If YOUR (readers) wet dreams have no apparent cycle to them, what do you attribute them to? Can they really be random when we are talking about glands doing a replenishment?


nocturnal emissions

I have read this forum for some time and realized even as I rapidly approach 50 I can not recall a single "wet dream". So when I ask the question is it possible to never have experienced a wet dream? I would think if I did I would know it. If so "no wet dreams" is it also healthy or a variation of norm assuming a bell curve? Is it possible wet dreams actually serve no functionary purpose at all? This would lend its existence to a symptom of brain function and more a manifestation of content of ones dreams. For what dictates the content of ones dreams? Can we control them? Is it possible wet dreams are no more than individual physical manifestations of ones individual dreams? I do find this discussion very interesting as I have read so much conflicting info of what is healthy for the male in reference to the prostate. It is a concern as my father was treated for prostate cancer. The treatment pretty much destroyed his sex life. Its a path I do not want to follow.

Are you talking about

how many sperm a man normally produces fresh each day?

I think the number I was using was what was reported from the Mayo clinic. Guess either the Mayo Clinic had it wrong, or the site quoting them got it wrong.

But if that much is produced in a day, that would mean one could ejaculate 15 times a day before using it up. [ok]



That gives me some

good numbers to play around with, that actually make a little more sense than the one's I'd received.

It seems my initial thoughts that both the production and the amount ejaculated can depend on several factors. Do these numbers represent variations over specific individuals, or over a number of individuals? IOW, could one person slow down or speed up production within that 100-300 mil a day, and ejaculate anywhere in the 40-600 mil range depending on circumstances, or are individual variations more muted than that, and it simply shows that person A could be a low producer/ejaculator while person B could produce and ejaculate a lot more generally speaking? I'm guessing a bit of both to a degree, but am interested in how much variation one particular individual will vary.

But these numbers make more sense as it is feasible that sperm ejaculated could be replaced within a day, or if you do it three times in a day, it wouldn't be unusual for the third ejaculation that day to be much lower sperm count than the first, though if you are ejaculating a lower amount, that wouldn't have to be the case either.

I'm wondering, if it is known, what triggers the hormones to tell the testes to start producing sperm faster or slow down? Is it frequency of ejaculations? Or maybe something in the post orgasmic chemical mix that tells the process to speed up?

Hum, just thinking. If testosterone builds up and increases as one gets to seven days, would that indicate somewhere around day 4 or 5 after orgasm that your body is telling things to heat up down there, since testosterone is stimulated when sperm production goes into full swing? That might coincide too with the data that sperm counts peak around day 2-3 after an ejaculation. After that, they start to decline, and maybe something about that fact triggers the hormones to fire up the oven and get it cooking faster, upping the flow of testosterone as well.


Peace be with you,

Nice discussion.
Here’s mine: For 4 months, I have a wet dream spaced averagely once every 28 days. Then after that, it occured after approximately 3 months. But this time, I had already practiced Tantric intimate relation--non-ejaculatory.

Then after the 3 months non-ejaculatory relations, I went back to pure sex abstinence. And then wet dream sets in again. All-in-all, it was seven months.

This experience was more than a year ago. And my partial conclusion is that, it can be a guide to how frequently one can ejaculate without a harm. I said that because as of now, I have found out with strong and obvious evidence that nocturnal pollutions/wet dreams ‘do’ contain sperms, semen, etc. It is like the one emitted in the ‘intentional’ ones.

Hope this helps. Good Day.

Thanks for chiming in

It's great to have actual experience, and what you say makes a lot of sense.

People do seem to respond differently to wet dreams. Some barely feel 'em; others really notice a dip afterward. And it may be that circumstances also alter their effects.

What happened to your partner? Sad

28 days, interesting

Hello Casey,

Thanks for sharing your experiences. I find it fascinating that your average was 28 days--same as a woman's cycle.

In my case I haven't had the wet dreams yet, but I believe that is largely because I seem to "slip up" about once every 28 days. When I look back on my various journal entries and calendars, it seems I did SOMETHING (intentional or not) to create an ejaculation. I just refuse to believe that there would be no connection between a woman's cycle and a male's. We may not know what it is, but I feel there is a connection.



Hello marnia,

Positive, *smile*.

Also David, you're welcome..I also wonder if you know someone who had exceeded 4 months or so without a wet dream. To the extend like what 'cole' term here as 'dry up' stage'

Hi Casey

I don't know of anyone personally. In my case I have always intervened in some way to violate the true wet dream cycle.

I think you are on to something with Cole's dry up stage. My guess is that if Mother Nature determines that you are not immediately necessary for procreation, there will be a dry up stage for men where the wet dreams will subside.

Let's face it, an ejaculation (at least while awake) from a male is a decidedly contrived event.

Great question that you asked.


Hi David

Not much to offer on "wet dreams" as to the best of my knowledge I have never had one. We (David and I) did have some discussion on another forum concerning ejaculation frequency for prostate health, etc. as my wife and I had some concerns about this as her dad had prostate cancer - and most of what you read leads one to believe that regularly "emptying the tank" could be beneficial in reducing cancer risk. I conducted as much research as I could find on the subject and there is no definitive answer either way. I believe there is a lack of sufficient numbers of non - ejaculatory men to perform a viable test. Not bragging here but I have always been a prodigious (high volume) ejaculator and what initially put me on the path to become non - ejaculatory was the fact my semen upset the delicate environmental balance of my wife's vagina and triggered seemingly endless yeast infections. So when life deals you a lemon you find a way to make lemonaid out of it - and I stopped ejaculating inside her - which eventually led to not ejaculating at all once we began to see the benefits. I relate this to illustrate that I have literally been from one extreme to the other - and currently approaching three years without ejaculation. From my own meandering experience my take is this is much like any other bodily function and the body reacts to meet the demand - what ever the demand might be - and we are all highly individualistic as far as what works for us and what our needs are. If one ejaculates frequently the body ramps up production, and if one goes for extended periods without then the lymphatic system removes waste. Automatically. For me at least I do not think any "drying up" occurs as I do "leak" the clear pre-ejaculatory fluid during play and since we play at the edge sometimes I do get that very "full" congested feeling if play is extended for long periods of time. But the body quickly processes out the "excess" to restore equilibruim. So all the "plumbing" appears to be working just fine in spite of a long period without ejaculating. I have found that my arousal cycle is very much in harmony with my lovely wife and when she is out of commission during menstruation my libido slows down to match hers where as during peak ovulation I "rise" to the occasion and take full advantage of her increase in "demand" so we just naturally flow together in the most delicious way.

Thanks Virgil, too

I think you are right. It IS a shame that there isn't a larger group to sample from. I remain personally convinced that for the sake of health, it's procreative effort, or the wet dream....other than that, it's best to avoid the ejaculation.