The most effective communication of all, a functional marriage bed, has been made immediately available and the security of intravaginal ejaculatory response has been established for both partners. The fact of an ongoing consummated marriage in itself immeasurably facilitates marital communication.
Five men diagnosed as incompetent ejaculators developed symptoms of secondary impotence as their ejaculatory dysfunction continued without symptomatic relief over an average period of eight years. Three of the five men were handicapped by the psychosocial dominance of severe religious orthodoxy.
Also developed for the man refusing ejaculatory experience to his wife in order to prevent the possibility of pregnancy and accomplish revenge against a dominant mother. The man whose marriage had been annulled because he was afraid to bring himself to ejaculate intravaginally, was the fifth male with symptoms of impotence developing as an involuntary component to longstanding ejaculatory incompetence.
Inevitably, when impotence develops as a complication of either premature ejaculation or ejaculatory incompetence, the concerns of the impotent state must be treated before those of the ejaculatory dysfunction. When therapy for the impotent state is successful and erective adequacy is secured, the individual male again returns clinically to his prior status as premature ejaculator or incompetent ejaculator.
Must be treated in their turn, but always secondary to the primary attack on the state of impotence.
In all five instances, the symptoms of impotence developing secondary to those of an incompetent ejaculator were relieved with application of standard therapeutic techniques. Again, it is interesting to note the parallel between premature ejaculation and ejaculatory incompetence when existent for long periods of time. When a man's sexual competence is questioned over an extended period by a woman demanding sexual satisfaction, symptoms of ejaculatory dysfunction may retrogress toward impotence under the pressure of fears of performance.
There were three episodes of failure to reverse the symptoms of ejaculatory incompetence among the 17 cases referred to the Foundation. This is a failure rate of 17.6 percent, which certainly should be improved with more experience in dealing with this relatively rare syndrome.
The first failure was that of the orthodox Jewish male overwhelmingly traumatized in his premarital years by his one fall from grace during which he sexually approached a menstruating woman. The symptoms of secondary impotence that had developed after years of ejaculatory incompetence were relieved during therapy and have since continued under control, but he has not been able to ejaculate intravaginally.
His haunting fear of vaginal menstrual contamination and his reflex response of ejaculatory rejection could not be neutralized.
The second couple to fail to reverse the symptoms of ejaculatory incompetence was that of the husband surprising his wife in the physical act of adultery. Subsequently, whenever attempting to ejaculate intravaginally, he was faced with the vivid but castrating mental picture of the lover's seminal fluid escaping his wife's vagina.
Therapeutic effort could not reduce the rigidity of this man's concept of the intravaginal ejaculatory process as a personally demeaning event. To ejaculate intravaginally during coition with his wife carried with it an implication that he was voluntarily mixing his seminal fluid with that of his wife's lover. He could not or would not, forgive and forget.
The final clinical failure to reverse the symptoms of ejaculatory incompetence involved the man with no personal regard for, no interest in, and no feeling for his wife. His refusal to ejaculate intravaginally was a direct decision to deprive her of the pleasure of consummating the marriage.
This man historically had numerous successful sexual encounters outside marriage. This unit had escaped the culling protection of the screening process as described. They should not have been seen in therapy, as there really was no specific ejaculatory dysfunction. This was only a case of a man's complete rejection of the woman he married.
Once the depth of the husband's personal rejection of his wife was recognized, the unit was discharged from therapy. Divorce was recommended to the wife, but her immediate reaction was to hold on to her concept of a marriage.
Of interest is the fact that of the 17 men with ejaculatory incompetence, there were only 3 cases in which steps toward legal separation were taken, and in one of these 3 cases therapy reunited the marital partners. One of the men had been divorced for a period of eighteen months before both former husband and wife agreed to be seen as a unit in therapy.
His wife remarried him shortly after termination of a successful therapeutic experience. This husband and wife currently has two children. The man with a year-old marriage plagued by the symptoms, of ejaculatory incompetence leading to an annulment was treated with the aid of a partner surrogate. This man ultimately married another woman, and for the past three years has conducted himself as a sexually functional male in a successful marriage.
Those with religious orthodoxy as an etiological handicap (4 of the 5 men) acquired intravaginal ejaculatory function. Follow-up records report pregnancies for three of these five couples. There was no increase in the levels of sexual responsivity of the three non orgasmic wives in this group.
Two of the three units with male rejection of his female partner as the primary factor in the development of ejaculatory incompetence were reversed in therapy. Of interest in this group is the husband and wife with the homosexually oriented husband.
Once intravaginal ejaculation was accomplished, the husband continued to function effectively in this manner with his wife while also maintaining his own homosexual commitment with her full knowledge and consent. There have been two children born of this marriage.
Three of the four men developing ejaculatory incompetence after years of successful sexual functioning in marriage were returned to effective ejaculatory performance during therapy. These marriages have continued in a successful vein after termination of the acute phase of the therapy. One pregnancy has ensued.
It is obvious that the incompetent ejaculator can be treated effectively if both husband and wife wish reversal of this clinical dysfunction. This clinical syndrome of ejaculatory incompetence will be explored in depth in years to come as more material becomes available.
Previously, ejaculatory incompetence has been considered a variant of erective inadequacy. Now there is sufficient knowledge to categorize the syndrome as the direct counterpart of premature ejaculation. Neither of these forms of ejaculatory dysfunction should be considered an integral part of the clinical picture of impotence because neither is necessarily associated with erective incompetence.