♥Tantric Orgasm for Women

Aphrodites Chela's picture
Submitted by Aphrodites Chela on
Printer-friendly version

I'm working through Tantric Orgasm for Women by Diana and Michael Richardson
Great ideas for meditation (as in all of their books) and I'm looking forward to some of the couple's work
I'm thinking there might have been an error in my thinking (do ya think?) I'm re-examining my Izzy's passivity. I've been quite anxious about it....creating all kinds of paranoia. They are my thoughts and I am able to do them differently. Instead creating anxiety about her lack of response, I can redefine the experience (it's all my creation). I can act as though she's into stillness, big time, and maybe I've got to just catch up.
The Richardson's also talk about the active female being masculine. I've wanted my Izzy to want sex and act in sex, like a man. I've felt the only time she engages me is when she climbs on and wants to cum. Well now, the R's are suggesting that I'm expecting her to act like a man. OK, I'm gonna work on appreciating what we have together; shift my focus to appreciate the feminine that is her.
Instead of asking her for sex, I'll ask to do some of those Richardson meditations
6 days post O and all is well. Day 3 was a challange (as usual) but I did a cranio-sacral therapy session with a friend and that took care of things.
Much love



[quote=Aphrodites Chela] ... my Izzy's passivity. [/quote]

A.C. Can you please explain what you mean by passivity? Passive during sex? Passive about wanting sex? Passive about initiating sex? or something else?

I'm looking for possible parallels to our relationship.


of the above.
This AM I joined her in her bed. I think I'm getting it. I held her, stroked her, kissed her. I held no expectation. I did not try to get her excited. I checked myself every time the touch was in the old way, seeking to get her hot. I checked myself every time the touch drifted toward exciting me. I stayed with the love and appreciation. As paranoia arose (is she into this? why isn't she doing anything? when is she going to show up?) I shifted to the Golden Tree meditation. http://www.reuniting.info/node/2381 Ya know, if I'm gonna do something with my mind, why indulge in fear when I can go to enlightenment. So nice to focus on me and not worry about her. Orgasm was never considered. I maneuvered us into the scissors position and eventually entered her. OMG! half erect! who would've thought? Just the head in and stillness. She mentioned being hungry and I got up....must have been 20 minutes.....awesome!
It's only taken me 2 years to get it. It's not about her at all.

I'm confused. What do you

I'm confused. What do you mean by it is not about her? I would think that this is about you being comfortable and present with yourself so that you can give to her and enjoy that in yourself regardless of what she does. As long as she doesn't totally reject your giving, you can give and feel good. Wanting won't work because you won't feel good unless she gives and you can't control that.

I may not be understanding you~

But after reading the Richardsons' books (but not the one you are talking about here), I started being completely passive or receptive. I stopped trying to "entertain" my lover with my vagina and my movements.

It has been the best thing I've ever done. He loves it as much as I do. This is the way making love should be, IMO.

(and congrats on your morning!!)



Confusing two people at once. Am I lacking clarity? It's been known to happen.
It's not about her=I'm unhooked from co-dependency and trying to be inside her head and striving to get her to act the way I want
"I would think that this is about you being comfortable and present with yourself so that you can give to her and enjoy that in yourself regardless of what she does." YES!!!!
"Wanting won't work because you won't feel good unless she gives and you can't control that." Yes indeed.
RD: I'm not sure if there is a question I can answer
nos amo

No question

Just wanting to make sure your definition of "passivity" is the same as the way I describe it (I tend to call it "being receptive" rather than passive).


You see passive as neutral

You see passive as neutral and receptive as doing something...perhaps allowing another in as opposed to wanting another in. Are you doing something other than allowing in? Are you welcoming in somehow? Is that possible without any want? Is receptive a reactionary want? Or receptivity regardless of whether another gives?

Yes, Freedom~

Exactly~~being receptive means you want them in and welcome it. Being passive (to me) says you might merely tolerate it. That perhaps your thoughts are anywhere but in the moment. That you might just be having sex with someone because you feel you should, rather than truly wanting it.

I am welcoming in him by doing a lot of things~~concentrating on his genitals and mine through focused thought, breathing with him, kissing him, creating the nectar we talked about in another thread, remaining completely relaxed and open to him, as well as telling him what I am feeling and how he makes me feel. There is no doubt in *his* mind that I want him very much.


Interesting. So you try to

Interesting. So you try to separate your wants and gives. You give your wants to him so he knows you want him, but that the want is for him as opposed to you. Is there still some want that is still for yourself?

If someone wanted sex but for themselves I presume none of this would work even if they really wanted sex with that particular partner. There has to be some non-verbal communication that the want is to give to the other?

Can you tell when this isn't working? There must be days when one of you is off and something feels very different. Does that impact both of you?

Tolerate is kind of negative, but I get what you are saying.

I wouldn't say

I wouldn't say I separate my wants and gives. I just tell him whatever is on my mind (such as, that feels really good, I love touching you, etc.). It's just a stream-of-consciousness as it happens. I do always make sure to tell him when I am ready for him to be inside me--whether it is initiated by me or a confirmation of his desire to do so.

We only are able to see each other once per week on the weekends and in over a year's time, I can honestly say we have never been "off" sexually. It just keeps getting better and better as we continue to "practice" lol.


Perhaps a genuine

Perhaps a genuine expressiveness of wants together with a lot of gives? A surrendering of any wants to full disclosure somehow removes any selfishness as we of course all have wants but are normally not fully open about them? Does this carry over to the overall relationship? Your interactions with others? At some point genuine openness should become the norm unless one compartmentalizes it to be just with a partner.

Do you notice any differences in either of you when dealing with wants versus gives? Or is there a complete blending at some point?

Can you guess at how things might be different without time apart?

I don't mean to harp on this, but there are not many words with which to try to understand this. Maybe English isn't the best language in which to discuss these ideas.


I don't think either one of us is aware of whether what we are doing or saying is a want versus a need. It just happens. So I would say it is definitely a complete blending.

We are very, very open and will pretty much do and say anything to each other. No inhibitions either sexually or emotionally. (and actually, he is a member of this forum and can read what I write, although he never posts here--he's private that way and I am not, lol).

As far as our relationships with other people, I hope that others find us to be fun to be around. (we think we are, lol!) We both can be very zen-like and I do think we project a very positive attitude and enthusiasm for life.

I can only guess what we would be like if we were together on a daily basis and having the tools in my belt that I do (thank you, Marnia!), I see no reason why it wouldn't be wonderful.

And you're right about the English language falling short when it comes to describing this!



Guess that's my point; I'm reworking, because of reading the Richardson's, my definition of passivity. I'm shifting from projecting that she is "just putting up with me" or "could care less" to the possibility of passive receptiveness. Seeing as how I making it all up in my head, there is some positive potential in the latter.
Of course, the best thing to do is not project anything.


I think that's a great way to frame her behavior. She may even grow into greater receptivity as a consequence of your willingness to see things that way. Yay Richardsons!!


Finished the book. I love the meditations at the end of each chapter.
I don't see the problem with homosexuality that Diana does (and Marnia in PBTS). The old tantric stuff is hetero and takes some tweaking for the same sex tranticas. Her advice is ok but her struggle is too complicated.
Allow me to offer a simple solution. Energy is VERY fluid. It travels every which way. I don't know if I am unusual in this (I have been guilty of naivette) but I can easily direct energy from perinium to heart/breast or the other way. I can exchange energy with my partner without penetration. There is a particular delight in being connected through penetration but there is a whole lot more to tantra that can be shared by loving couples of the same sex.
love y'all


thanks for the casual mischaracterization, AC. You create a rather false picture of both books. Let's let the same-sex folks work it out for themselves...which was the point of my remarks in PBTS. There's more to sexual orientation than theoretical, liberal, hetero, political correctness. Grrrr..... Wink

Passivity, Receptivity, Responsiveness

Perhaps another useful word in this discussion of passivity and receptivity would be responsiveness. I think that Rediscovered is describing responsiveness: [quote]I just tell him whatever is on my mind (such as, that feels really good, I love touching you, etc.). It's just a stream-of-consciousness as it happens. I do always make sure to tell him when I am ready for him to be inside me...[/quote] Responsiveness could also be physical, not verbal.

For some reason the question, "Are your eyes open?" occurred to me as well. So much is communicated through the eyes, including subtle energies. It is difficult to stay attuned to body sensations with open eyes but well worth learning to do so. The connection with my lover is stronger as a result.

Finally, this discussion sounds like the boat and pilot image from Taoism. I checked the index of CPA but couldn't find any more about it. Vajrayana [Tibetan] Buddhism has a similar image of woman as a bell, conjuring space or emptiness, and man as a vajra, conjuring skillful means. I can supply more information about Vajrayana. Does anyone else have more information about the boat and pilot image?

"Adopt the pace of nature; her secret is patience."
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Soft Eye Gaze

There's a type of gaze that's described in "Tantric Sex for Men" - that's a "soft receptive gaze", eyes just open enough to see and connect with the eyes of your partner, but not so much that you're flooded with so much visual information that you lose the ability to stay in contact with your inner energies. Some texts I've read say to shift your focus to the left eye, since it's connected to the right brain, the less analytical of the two sides.


Pretty sure

the boat and pilot image came from Taoist Secrets of Love: Cultivating Male Sexual Energy, but it's not in the Contents, or in an obvious place. And there is no index. Sorry.


When I started here, I knew instantly that karezza was the path for me. Without a willing partner, I had no idea what to do. The Exchanges are beautiful but I couldn't manage to get my Izzy interested. The Richardson's have given me the tools I've wanted. I've been very accomodating (a good way to get laid in my youth).
Our boat has been without direction. Pleading and bargaining don't count. I think I'm ready now to pilot the boat, step into my captainhood. I'm going to become her meditation teacher. Does she want such a teacher? dunno, I'll let ya know