My theory on how prostate play really functions.

Thought I`d post some info on the connection between the male prostate and the female G-spot. Then do a comparison and post some info about fetus development and how these two have come to be known as the male and female prostate.


The female G-spot


The urethra runs just above the roof of
your vaginal canal, kind of like a ceiling pipe, and is surrounded by erectile
tissue called the urethral sponge, sort of like outer insulation. This sponge
houses a number of “paraurethral” (meaning near the urethra) and “periurethral”
(meaning around the urethra) glands and ducts which secrete and expel fluid (or
female ejaculate) respectively. While the G-spot has never been anatomically
mapped by a body of medical professionals who can agree, it’s popularly known as
the part of the urethral sponge which may be felt through the ceiling of the
vagina, approximately one-third to one-half of the way in — it’s usually an
oval area or ridge (sometimes called the “G-crest”) about the size of a
elongated dime or quarter. (However, some consider the G-spot to actually be
the entire urethral sponge.)

http://www.emandlo.com/2009/08/what-is-the-g-spot-where-is-the-g-spot-how-does-it-work/

The Skene's gland, also known as the paraurethral gland, found in females, is homologous to the prostate gland in males. However, anatomically, the uterus is in the same position as the prostate gland. In 2002 the Skene's gland was officially renamed to female prostate by the Federative International Committee on Anatomical Terminology.^[8]
The female prostate, like the male prostate, secretes PSA and levels of this antigen rise in the presence of carcinoma of the gland. The gland also expels fluid, like the male prostate, during orgasm.^{[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate}


The male prostate
The prostate gland is a male reproductive organ whose main function is to secrete prostate fluid, one of the components of semen. The muscles of the prostate gland also help propel this seminal fluid into the urethra during ejaculation .
The prostate is a muscular gland that weighs about three-fourths of an ounce (20 grams) about the size of a small apricot. It surrounds the urethra just beneath the bladder .
During ejaculation, millions of sperm move from the testes through tubes called the vas deferens into the area of the prostate. At this point, the prostate contracts, closing off the opening between the bladder and the urethra, releasing fluid into the urethra and pushing semen on through.
http://www.livescience.com/32751-what-does-the-prostate-gland-do.html
The function of the prostate is to secrete a slightly alkaline fluid, milky or white in appearance,^[5] that usually constitutes 50–75% of the volume of the semen along with spermatozoa and seminal vesicle fluid.^[5] Semen is made alkaline overall with the secretions from the other contributing glands, including, at least, the seminal vesicle fluid.
A healthy human prostate is classically said to be slightly larger than a walnut. The mean weight of the "normal" prostate in adult males is about 11 grams, usually ranging between 7 and 16 grams.^[10] It surrounds the urethra just below the urinary bladder and can be felt during a rectal exam. It is the only exocrine organ located in the midline in humans and similar animals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate

Fetus development

During the first few weeks of fetus development, your baby's internal
and external genital structures are the same, regardless of whether you are
ultimately going to have a boy or a girl.

They have two sets of organs:o ne
that can develop into the female sex organs (Mullerian duct) and one that can
develop into the male sex organs (Wolffian ducts).

The
gonads will become ovaries or testicles, the phallus will become a clitoris or
a penis, and the genital folds will become labia or scrotum. Which sex organs
develop depends on the presence of the male hormone testosterone (in humans,
the default sex is female).


First we have a fetus that has yet to seperate the male and female reproductive organs:

Completion of the male reproductive organ

Completion of the female reproductive organ

http://www.baby2see.com/gender/internal_genitals.html

The interconnection
Now you can all see how our reproductive organs go forth creating themselves from the point where we are convieved and our sperm determines the baby`s sex.
The similarities are enormous, yet they function so differently when connected to our hormone production, glands and mind. Still, we react to stimuly in the same way if we consider what substances the body releases that makes us feel pleasure and drives us to a bonding "feeling".
It is no wonder the G-spot has been defined as the female prostate. The production and secretion of PSA is the same. They both are located around the urethera. They both react to physical stimuly and can result in an orgasm.

How this relates to my theory
What I have proposed is merely a theory of how we go forth to achieve this. I propose that we can use our subconsious aware state to trigger and help the process. What I`m saying is that the location of our prostate has disconnected us from it and my theory is based upon how we can "connect" with the prostate through our subconsious aware state.
The females have their G-spot located in the vaginal canal and has through the generations been succeptable to stimuly, I believe this is why they can have G-spot orgasms much more easilly without a rewiring process. It would be nice to see some statistics of how long it takes a woman from a sexual debut and until she experiences one - if she ever does - and the statistics of how many women achieve them at all.
I do agree that the rewiring process is also done by our consious acts and mental focus / learning. But I also believe we do go through our subconsious mind while doing so. I also propose that we add info to our DNA through memories and experiences. It would be fun to see how later generations of male prostate play react to the stimuli. I think their subconsious connection to the prostate will be heightned so that the rewiring process might not be needed - given that enough generations do the same kind of prostate play. I believe the male body will adapt to our prostate play in coming generations as the taboo slowly fades away.
Wouldn`t that be something 🙂
Alex

I dont have any science to back this up, just my personal experiences with a few women. But of the women I have been with, having a g-spot orgasm, while pleasureable, was difficult without serious concentration. Just my 2 cents.

@ineverknew

Hmm.. never actually experienced that. Every woman I`ve ever been with have either been able to have them, had them all the time (did a record of 35 in one round of sex - she was exhausted), or almost never got them.

Maybe it is like you say for those who have never had them, that they need to focus/concentrate on them.

@alex_xxx, I should say i was actually striving to give the women squirting g-spot orgasms, which i was never able to succeed at, they would usually say it was extremely pleasureable and different from clitoral stimulation. My memory is kinda sketchy about those days of being single, im old and married now LOL.

That's interesting about our prostate and women's skene's gland developing from the same kinds of cells, and diverging into male and female g-spots. I didn't know that. I know little about female anatomy and especially, female hormonal physiology which always seemed much more complicated than men's. Thanks for that information.

"I also propose that we add info to our DNA through memories and experiences. It would be fun to see how later generations of male prostate play react to the stimuli. I think their subconsious connection to the prostate will be heightned so that the rewiring process might not be needed - given that enough generations do the same kind of prostate play. I believe the male body will adapt to our prostate play in coming generations as the taboo slowly fades away."

Maybe. I still don't know of any evidence that we can access information in our DNA through our subconscious mind or that we add information to DNA during our lifetime, thus altering it. I've heard anecdotal accounts and theories that this happens and a whole mythos has developed in New Age circles that kind of rationalizes the subconscious-DNA connection.

I'd like to think that later generations of boys will grow up with this information available to them but think it more likely that our fathers or other men will transmit the information and experience. I look forward to that day.

"When you sleep, you disconnect your consciousness to let your brain relax (as well as your body). No consciousness means no real feeling of time, so a nights sleep seems way shorter than being awake for the same duration of time. And when you really connect with your subconscious during an aneros session it`s more like being in a dream where you are aware, but not aware enough to recognize the time that goes by"

I happen to know something about sleep and dreaming, as I work in a sleep lab and have attended classes in dream interpretation at the Jung institute in Boston and undergone analysis with a Jungian analyst. Non-REM sleep is indeed restorative but our minds and bodies are actually very active during REM sleep. I know that some claim that we can consciously decide what to dream and enter the dream as a conscious participant, so-called lucid dreaming. I haven't seen any evidence that this happens and one can consciously change the outcome of the dream without analysis while awake.

Jung proposed an analogous practice called Active Imagination where one enters a daydream, looks around, and tries to figure out what is going on. Dreams are very slippery phenomenon. Jung would say that dream contents are made available to the part of our brains that processes sensations and are chosen for us by our subconscious mind based on our waking experience and needs. So we don't choose our dream, it chooses us.

The erotic trance that accompanies prostate orgasm is not a dream physiologically. In REM sleep where most dreaming happens, hormones paralyze most of the body except the eyes which deflect back and forth as if one were reading lines on a page. Some studies suggest that dreams somehow help us to resolve problems in our waking life and others dismiss dreams as psychic trash. But there's not much good knowledge yet about dreaming. I watch people dreaming and ask them what they dreamed about in the morning but it's hard to get a grasp on them.

The posts here have been great reading, misspelled words and all. When we consider that it was once believed that the world was flat, and that the sun revolved around the earth, it is not a great stretch to think that there are many misconceptions about reality, and some who dispute the ideas of absolute truth and reality.

I find the discussion of fetal life interesting. I am against abortion because I think it disregards the fact that a fetus is a real human being who has organs in development. We know, scientifically, that these organs begin their development as soon as conception starts the process, and the determination is made about which sex the child will be. All of the discussion of these facts still leads many to conclude that fetal life is not rally a human being, but something less, due to the fact that the fetus is not viable until the development has reached an advanced level. Scientist are researching to determine at what stage in the fetal development the fetus feels pain.

Ultimately, we humans choose to believe what we have chosen to believe, in too many cases, and do not want to be confused with facts or radical theories. But that is how science has advanced through the centuries, by having lively debate of theories, and by testing them empirically. I am glad that for the most part, this forum has been about tolerance, and healthy discussion, and humble disagreement. I detect a lack of humility in some of the posts that makes the thread difficult to read, as well as the lack of spell checking, lol.

For those who think abortion has no place in the discussion, I apologize. Some think abortion is always a bad topic, just as there are those who think discussion of the male anus, rectum, and prostate as pleasure palaces is always taboo.

I have been rambling, so please forgive me. Yet I want to make it clear that I think that one day, science will prove that an "unviable" fetus is a real human being, in development, and should be given all rights accorded viable fetuses. A viable fetus is a fetus capable of surviving outside of the womb.

I would like to point out that English is @Alex_xxx second language. Given that fact, he is doing a remarkable job explaining himself.

I would like to point out that English is @Alex_xxx second language. Given that fact, he is doing a remarkable job explaining himself.

Hai faiv xtimedt69......! or was it high five....!!???

pun intended 🙂

@diem
@imp
@euphimistic

You all requested scientific data that proves my theory.

@diem even went as far as to ask me to stop spreading my harebrained pseudo scientific theory.

Well, science is actually now proving parts of my theory about DNA stored memory correct.
So here you all have a new study that is now making quite a few tremors in the scientific field of memory studies.

http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/16/decapitated-worms-regrow-heads-keep-old-memories/

Now.. How do you propose that a beeing could keep its memories after its brain is removed? 🙂

Hello, Alex.

Interesting OP and comments. The entire mind-body connection is not well understood and may never be. Considering that English is not your first language, you do very well with it. One semantic thing you might want to change in your discussions is the word "theory," which should only be applied to concepts proven by the scientific method. Prior to proof and independent confirmation, the correct term for a new concept is "hypothesis," and we're all entitled to hypothesize anything about anything. Getting from there to theory is a steep climb. Good luck.

Cheers,

Dave

@imp even went as far as to ask me to stop spreading my harebrained pseudo scientific theory.First, I think you owe @imp an apology as he didn't say "Do yourself a favor and stop spreading harebrained pseudo scientific theory." @diem said that! To make false assertions about others is rather rude don't you think?You all requested scientific data that proves my theory.
Well, science is actually now proving parts of my theory about DNA stored memory correct.
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/16/decapitated-worms-regrow-heads-keep-old-memories/ Now.. How do you propose that a beeing could keep its memories after its brain is removed? :)I agree with @ten_s_nut. I would also add the flatworm decapitation experiment did not prove your hypothesis correct at all. That experiment made absolutely no reference to memory being encoded in DNA. Rather what it really validates is a concept called Swarm intelligence or "hive mind" wherein the individual's (in this case each cell) memory contribution aggregates with others to form a collective "sense memory", a kind of holographic information storage mechanism. It is this collective "sense memory" retained by the surviving cells after decapitation which is then restored across the entire organism during regeneration. This is consistent with 'BF Mayfield's idea for utilizing "sense memory" as part of the arousal amplification process leading to Super-O's.

For the flatworm experiment to show support for memory encoded DNA the experimenters would need to test the behavior of the offspring of the trained flatworms as compared to the behavior of their non-trained biological siblings. In a sense all instinctual behaviors are encoded in our DNA as that is the way evolution works, organisms which best survive due to their particular behaviors pass the genetic basis for those behaviors to their offspring. Nature, however, is always experimenting and creating genetic variants when the DNA gets slightly scrambled in the reproductive process creating mutants. So here we are, a mutant species dominating a world full of other mutant species, waiting for the next celestial event to wipe the world's evolutionary slate clean for the process to start all over again.
Good Vibes to You !

@rumel
I agree. Wrong nick entered there. It was of course diem. I appologize to @imp and edited the post. 🙂

As for how the reconstruction of MEMORIES of the flatworms (what they were taught) really happened, the test is inconclusive on that point. My understanding of how this works leads me to believe that it rather is in the dna. The dna is the blueprint, and all the data is stored there. Even if it is by swarm intelligence on a cellular level as you propose, then the info used to grow the limb with memories must be from dna blueprint with new memories attached.

Your thought about how this validates swarm intelligence on a cellular level being able to regrow something like a brain including recent memories..... Please point me to the research that says that this is the case, or even possible!

And although it is true that nature creates mutations, and some believe these mutations are what drives evolution... I am not one of those that believe this is the case. I believe evolution is driven by change in all kinds of environment, and this has slowly driven adaptions to be made...slowly.. The idea is the same as what I propose, the DNA you pass on is continuingly added to or rewritten by experiences, and this drives altercations in the the next generations. Instinct is one of the clear indications of this.

Now, to be more specific here.. i do actually propose that some cells alter their dna by learning, and that this can be relayed to them through our subconsious mind 🙂 this way, you will not need to conduct the experiment on the offspring. That would however give you another type of result.

Do you really think it will take a celestial event to wipe us out this time? Seems were well on the way already:)

Hello, Alex.

Interesting OP and comments. The entire mind-body connection is not well understood and may never be. Considering that English is not your first language, you do very well with it. One semantic thing you might want to change in your discussions is the word "theory," which should only be applied to concepts proven by the scientific method. Prior to proof and independent confirmation, the correct term for a new concept is "hypothesis," and we're all entitled to hypothesize anything about anything. Getting from there to theory is a steep climb. Good luck.

Cheers,

Dave

Thank you:)
The use of the word theory is correctly applied (I think) when it is used by a layman / common man like myself. If I was a scientist I would agree that hypothesis would be more appropriate. But I am not a scientist 🙂 http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm

Apology accepted. :"> And although it is true that nature creates mutations, and some believe these mutations are what drives evolution... I am not one of those that believe this is the case. I believe evolution is driven by change in all kinds of environment, and this has slowly driven adaptions to be made...slowly.. You are entitled to believe what you want, just like the folks who believe the earth is flat and the planet is only about 9,000 years old. @-)

@imp

1. I'm not religious, and if I were I still wouldn't believe that.

2. If you actually believe that the difference between radical mutations and environment driven DNA change is that big then there is nothing I can say that will change your mind. But keep in mind that we've seen this happen as recently as a couple of centuries ago. English coalminers kids were born smaller with each passing generation. Adapting to their environment. Such differences in people are also differences in DNA. Small adaptions over time.. Characteristica of the sliiightest "mutations" by reason rather than by chance. So slow that I really don't feel that the word mutation can be used for it since the common man thinks of mutation as a radical change. Maybe you've seen x-men to many times:)

diem said:
Alex_xxx,

"What you`re reprogramming is the actual physical writing on the DNA level"

Do yourself a favor and stop spreading harebrained pseudo scientific theory.

If
you have interest in neuroscience, study. When you will understand in
the first place how the body work and how little we know, you might be
able to formulate theory based on real and proved facts, not by fruits
of your imagination.

Well.. we`re all
entitled to our own theories and opinions. If we were only to rely on
proven facts then there would be no theories to prove or disprove. As
for "harebrained" - I decided to let you rot in your own rude behaviour
instead of engaging in meaningless hackery with you.

If
you think you know better I challenge you to disprove my theory,
starting with my quote. I based this upon my theory of how we are able
to inherit instinct. It`s implemented in our DNA, based on that - our
memories must be some extent be stored in our DNA. Otherwise there would
be no evolution. Just look at the crocodiles, what`s the first thing
they do?

------

@diem
@imp
@euphimistic

You all requested scientific data that proves my theory.

@diem even went as far as to ask me to stop spreading my harebrained pseudo scientific theory.

Well, science is actually now proving parts of my theory about DNA stored memory correct.
So here you all have a new study that is now making quite a few tremors in the scientific field of memory studies.

http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/16/decapitated-worms-regrow-heads-keep-old-memories/

Now.. How do you propose that a beeing could keep its memories after its brain is removed?

DNA is very stable to not change. We do not rewrite it. DNA change are unlikely to happen during a lifetime. That's what I learned. I believe there are minor DNA change beside the mutations during your life. It's possible and your article seem to show us it's possible (but that's probably a result to thousands of generation of worms having the head cut and regrown, to keep vital information the organism needed something more durable than neurons). DNA is used to store information but that information is not like the one in your brain, going through your nerves as your prostate is being stimulated.
That information is used to carry through the next generation some of what you were. You reproduce if you are successful.
DNA is like the CPU, it has many many function "pre-made" and they are activated in presence of the right components. These functions are made to give you with a certain input an unique result (like 1+1=2).
Your eye is there, your nose there, your hair brown, you are a boy, etc. You stimulate a part of your body, you start to learn how to use it, it's not DNA its neuroplasticity.

As for the adaptation to environment, it's not specifically called adaptation but acclimatisation such as the skin color.

@diem
I agree that we learn how to use a bodypart under neuroplasticity. This is not my point or how it relates to the thread. Personally I do see the DNA more like a backup harddrive, not a cpu. And we've just barely touched the surface of DNA mapping, so it's not in any way disprooved.

The article does not say that thousands of generations of worms were needed. It says that a group (multiple), were taught something. Then had their brains removed, and when it grew back what they were taught was still there. The brains memories were stored somewhere. A total blueprint of the brain from the moment before decapitation. I simply propose that my theory includes how this might be.

The point of the thread regarding DNA was merely to point out that the prostate is like the g-spot, but not "active" because of gender. In females it does however contribute alot more to making reproduction a pleasant event. And out of this I proposed that I believe our subconsious "communicates" with our DNA in a way not yet understood by science. If the DNA is directly rewritten or it it contains a "sub-routine" of some kind I don't know. That is purely speculation on a basis of my layman theory / scientific hypothesis. This would explain alot of things we do not yet understand though about evolution, dreams, subconsious making instinctive routines, instincts of newly hatched amfibians like crocs and turtles, placebo effect, mind over body experiences, etc etc.

Anyone still want to discuss the point I made of DNA storing memory? 🙂

http://themindunleashed.org/2014/01/scientists-found-memories-may-passed-generations-dna.html

interesting read. Amazing how much we dont know about our own brains!

I find this to be a phenomenal theory and i definitely think you're onto something, i love it! just my 0.02 😉

I appreciate that! 🙂

More sience backing up the theory:
http://naturalsociety.com/gene-expression-changes-meditation/