What is he thinking of? Temperature and friction.
and
You get an erection. You place it in slot "V" and move it back and forth until reaching orgasm.

Both made me wonder whether we've been conned by the rationalists who, in schools, are responsible "that so many kids today are taught/told far more about 'sex' tan they are about 'love'."

Lizzie's concern is one I share but it seems that schools are required to teach (or at least subscribe to the notion that they're teaching) on the basis of rationality rather than of feelings and or emotions, so I doubt schools will change much or soon. And the above quote is the only one of LH's on this thread that I'd question. Even for blokes there is a clear distinction (in my experience) between ejaculation and orgasm; perhaps it was because of my emotional engagement that I was able to experience the difference.

From Richard's posts on the thread I get the impression of an ultra-rationalist, and I confess (and hope) I may be completely mistaken. He may be thinking, though, of the following.

A hand reaches out
to another.
A helping hand can
be strong, firm, gentle.

A tentative move
of one to another
can send
so many signals.

The first touch
can be electric
in its impact;
such power!

The world hangs
by a thread;
twisting, turning
on that touch.

Is the first move
rejected,
the other's hand
withdrawn?

Is the touch
received
with cool
reserve?

Is the touch
returned
with growing
warmth?

Hands gently
wrap,
entwine;
rapt.

Fingers interlocked
show intent,
however far away
in future,
of love's
consummation.

Cheers, Rowan