Talk:Coital alignment technique

Poor choice of image?

As I understand it, the man and woman keep their legs relatively straight. So the image chosen (which is described as "missionary" and has both participants' legs spread) doesn't seem entirely appropriate. Jonathan Harford (talk) 17:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm removing the "tiny pants" comment. Upon further investigation, the item in question is an open condom wrapper, not that this needs to be noted either. bigelectric June 30 2009

can't make heads or tails of the image. Cramyourspam (talk) 07:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Is it real?

This entry is illiterate. I also have a suspicion that it's not really a serious entry, but hey ho - each to their own. GRAHAMUK 04:54 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

A google search turned up serious discussion, so the referent does appear to exist. Hopefully, some kind heterosexual (i.e. not me - won't teach granny to suck eggs) will come along and de-stub this. - Montréalais

LOL. Hmmm, where can I get some of these here "orgasims"? Or does that mean they're faked? GRAHAMUK 05:16 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

For what it's worth, my money is on it being a serious entry. Without wanting to be too detailed, we've tried this and it pretty much works as described, though as Calieber notes this may not be true for everyone. I will work n this article as I note a few things that are worth adjusting - the image is incorrect (it really doesn't matche the description) and the description itself is far too functional to be of any interest or use. It reads like a car manual. Kouros 12:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I heard of this position way before 2000. But the article credits Cosmo with coming up with it.MrBlondNYC 22:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the Cosmo article that this article references needs to be tracked down or the reference should be removed. We don't even know what year it was published. --Beefyt 05:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Far fetch

NPOV -- it can't be stimulating to every girl, or inevitably give massive orgasms. --Calieber 03:12, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yes and no. It does physically directly stimulate the clitoris. Whether or not the woman enjoys direct clitoral stimulation or if this will generate massive orgasms is certainly an individual thing. Olias7 (talk) 17:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Subset of missionary

So CAT is basically one kind of missionary position right? I was wondering whether to include it as a variant at missionary position. It certainly looks like missionary. Sarsaparilla (talk) 14:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't necessarily have to be the missionary position. There seems to be some confusion as to this technique, perhaps revolving around the entry stating that the clitoris is stimulated by the "base of the penis". Obviously if the male is penetrating, then no part of the penis is physically able to contact the clitoris. Basically to do this technique, the male penetrates to the point where his mons pubis area is snugly against the female's clitoris, then both partners move their pelvises while maintaing that contact, rather than having these areas separate in the more usual "in-out" sort of penetration. The legs don't need to be relatively straight as mentioned above, and to specifically refer to the positions in the "List of sexual positions" entry, this could be done in the "missionary", "cowgirl" or "lotus" positions. Olias7 (talk) 17:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

File:PS-missionaire-1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:PS-missionaire-1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:PS-missionaire-1.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Reverse CAT

Flyer22 thanks for your question and for picking me up. I'm happy to concede Eichel defined CAT (I think it said devised previously). CAT can be reversed so the woman is on top, sources 1, 2, 3, 4 and the book Sex: Reference to Go: Playful Positions to Spice Up Your Love Life By Dawn Harper Flat Out let's discuss it 03:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding my statement here, thanks for this and this. I've heard of the reverse coital alignment technique, but hardly is it cited as the coital alignment technique. So, per WP:Due weight, it's helpful that you changed the text to use the word primarily so that it reads as "used primarily as variant of the missionary position." I don't think that the sites you provided above count as WP:Reliable sources, but the Dawn Harper book you cited is good enough. And, yes, the reference regarding Eichel states "devised" (well, it's meant to state that; it instead states "dervised," a typo), but devised can mean "invent." Flyer22 (talk) 04:22, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Coital alignment technique/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

I'm rather disappointed by this Wikipedia item. Usually I rate Wikipedia stuff pretty highly for both interest and accuracy but this description misses some crucial elements and the illustration is way off! I first came across CAT in an article by Philip Nobile called 'are you a CAT lover?' which I think was published in 'Cosmopolitan' in the late eighties/early nineties. (I've kept the article but there isn't a publication identity or date on any of the pages.) The article describes Edward Eichel as not only studying but having devised the technique. It also seems to be pretty accurate regarding the elements of the technique, matching other descriptions I've found on the web. The acid test will be reading Dr Eichel's book 'The Perfect Fit: How to Achieve Mutual Fulfillment and Monogamous Passion through The New Intercourse.' (published by Signet) which would appear to be the definitive text for laymen. There is also a video 'Orgasm the Natural Way' - check out www.marriagescience.com. As to whether CAT works - when I first read the article nearly two decades ago I wasn't particularly experienced and remember thinking that one would first need to find a bloke with a 'L' shaped penis! I've still not tried CAT as described by Eichel - but from other similar experiences (and a much improved knowledge of the relevant anatomy) I can say that I can't see any reason why, with a willing partner and bit of practice, it wouldn't be very effective. (Which is why I've looked it up in the first place! ;-D) Mrs40Something 20:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 12:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)