Cumshots and Capitalism
Get a load of this!
Hi (No) Wonder-ers,
When I’m not pontificating on matters of sex-positivity, I’m helping people urinate. They don’t call us urologists “The Stream Team” for nothing!
In many cases, suboptimal urination is a matter of the prostate getting in the way of a good urine stream. In these cases, we offer procedures to get the prostate out of the bladder’s way: scraping, lasering, vaporizing, retracting, microwaving, embolizing… the list goes on.
No matter what modality a patient chooses to get the prostate out of the bladder’s way, any procedure that widens the prostatic urethra enough to let urine out of the bladder will also let ejaculate into the bladder.
This is called retrograde ejaculation. Patients still feel orgasmic sensation, but the ejaculate (sperm, fructose, enzymes, mucus) gets rerouted into the bladder because that’s now the path of least resistance following a prostate procedure. The ejaculate is promptly urinated out; so unless the patient is trying to conceive or earn a living in mainstream pornography, it isn’t harmful.
Nonetheless, I’ve found that patients really value their ejaculate volume. I mean, really value their ejaculate volume. When I explain the risks and benefits of prostate-opening procedures, retrograde ejaculation is the one that most often gets the visceral shudder. Some patients who urinate by catheterizing themselves opt to continue catheterizing themselves rather than get a procedure and risk retrograde ejaculation. Even though the decision is their prerogative, it fascinates me that people uninterested in conceiving would rather catheterize themselves than risk losing 2 mL of ejaculate volume.
I have a hypothesis. Because the state of sexuality education in the US ranges from abysmal to nonexistent, many youngsters end up getting their sexuality education from mainstream pornography – material designed to entertain, not to inform or accurately represent. Because of how visible it is, mainstream pornography emphasizes ejaculate volume to such an extent they call it the “money shot.”
To someone whose sexual script is heavily informed by mainstream pornography, the “money shot” might become the sine qua non of intimacy. Thus, a paucity of ejaculate volume can cause unnecessary feelings of inadequacy even when every other aspect of a sexual encounter is deeply intimate and pleasurable.
And wherever there’s a perceived inadequacy, there’s a predatory capitalist ready to exploit it.
Years ago, two urology/men’s health colleagues introduced Popstar, a supplement designed to improve ejaculate volume and taste. For the low low price of $49.99 per bottle (1 month supply), you too can have “Bigger loads, better taste” because “it’s a matter of pride and confidence.”
Who’s shaming people for having low ejaculate volume, though? Who’s implying that low ejaculate volume is a problem that requires their $50/month solution?
We’re all trying to find the guy who did this.
Capitalism sometimes rewards innovation, but much more frequently it rewards people who create artificial problems and position their products as the solutions. Predatory marketing often takes the veneer of “empowerment”… but true empowerment encourages people to accept themselves as they are, thereby obviating any perceived need to buy whatever predatory capitalists are selling.
Capitalism says, “You aren’t enough, unless you buy our product.”
Empowerment says, “You are enough, just as you are.”
If you want to drop $50/month for maybe another mL or so of ejaculate volume, I’m not going to stop you. However, I’m here to tell you this: ANY sex that is enthusiastically consensual and mutually pleasurable is wonderful and worth celebrating, regardless of ejaculate volume.
Pop Off,
Merrit