NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTE: I have my own opinions and theories on this, but I'll keep them to myself until most of you have had your say. BTW ... how on earth does one find a job in this field??? :D


A Critic Takes On the Logic of Female Orgasm (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/17/science/17orga.html?th&emc=th)

By DINITIA SMITH
Published: May 17, 2005

Evolutionary scientists have never had difficulty explaining the male orgasm, closely tied as it is to reproduction.

But the Darwinian logic behind the female orgasm has remained elusive. Women can have sexual intercourse and even become pregnant - doing their part for the perpetuation of the species - without experiencing orgasm. So what is its evolutionary purpose?

Over the last four decades, scientists have come up with a variety of theories, arguing, for example, that orgasm encourages women to have sex and, therefore, reproduce or that it leads women to favor stronger and healthier men, maximizing their offspring's chances of survival.

But in a new book, Dr. Elisabeth A. Lloyd, a philosopher of science and professor of biology at Indiana University, takes on 20 leading theories and finds them wanting. The female orgasm, she argues in the book, "The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution," has no evolutionary function at all.

Rather, Dr. Lloyd says the most convincing theory is one put forward in 1979 by Dr. Donald Symons, an anthropologist.

That theory holds that female orgasms are simply artifacts - a byproduct of the parallel development of male and female embryos in the first eight or nine weeks of life.

In that early period, the nerve and tissue pathways are laid down for various reflexes, including the orgasm, Dr. Lloyd said. As development progresses, male hormones saturate the embryo, and sexuality is defined.

In boys, the penis develops, along with the potential to have orgasms and ejaculate, while "females get the nerve pathways for orgasm by initially having the same body plan."

Nipples in men are similarly vestigial, Dr. Lloyd pointed out.

While nipples in woman serve a purpose, male nipples appear to be simply left over from the initial stage of embryonic development.

The female orgasm, she said, "is for fun."

Dr. Lloyd said scientists had insisted on finding an evolutionary function for female orgasm in humans either because they were invested in believing that women's sexuality must exactly parallel that of men or because they were convinced that all traits had to be "adaptations," that is, serve an evolutionary function.

Theories of female orgasm are significant, she added, because "men's expectations about women's normal sexuality, about how women should perform, are built around these notions."

"And men are the ones who reflect back immediately to the woman whether or not she is adequate sexually," Dr. Lloyd continued.

Central to her thesis is the fact that women do not routinely have orgasms during sexual intercourse.

She analyzed 32 studies, conducted over 74 years, of the frequency of female orgasm during intercourse.

When intercourse was "unassisted," that is not accompanied by stimulation of the clitoris, just a quarter of the women studied experienced orgasms often or very often during intercourse, she found.

Five to 10 percent never had orgasms. Yet many of the women became pregnant.

Dr. Lloyd's figures are lower than those of Dr. Alfred A. Kinsey, who in his 1953 book "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" found that 39 to 47 percent of women reported that they always, or almost always, had orgasm during intercourse.

But Kinsey, Dr. Lloyd said, included orgasms assisted by clitoral stimulation.

Dr. Lloyd said there was no doubt in her mind that the clitoris was an evolutionary adaptation, selected to create excitement, leading to sexual intercourse and then reproduction.

But, "without a link to fertility or reproduction," Dr. Lloyd said, "orgasm cannot be an adaptation."

Not everyone agrees. For example, Dr. John Alcock, a professor of biology at Arizona State University, criticized an earlier version of Dr. Lloyd's thesis, discussed in in a 1987 article by Stephen Jay Gould in the magazine Natural History.

In a phone interview, Dr. Alcock said that he had not read her new book, but that he still maintained the hypothesis that the fact that "orgasm doesn't occur every time a woman has intercourse is not evidence that it's not adaptive."

"I'm flabbergasted by the notion that orgasm has to happen every time to be adaptive," he added.

Dr. Alcock theorized that a woman might use orgasm "as an unconscious way to evaluate the quality of the male," his genetic fitness and, thus, how suitable he would be as a father for her offspring.

"Under those circumstances, you wouldn't expect her to have it every time," Dr. Alcock said.

Among the theories that Dr. Lloyd addresses in her book is one proposed in 1993, by Dr. R. Robin Baker and Dr. Mark A. Bellis, at Manchester University in England. In two papers published in the journal Animal Behaviour, they argued that female orgasm was a way of manipulating the retention of sperm by creating suction in the uterus. When a woman has an orgasm from one minute before the man ejaculates to 45 minutes after, she retains more sperm, they said.

Furthermore, they asserted, when a woman has intercourse with a man other than her regular sexual partner, she is more likely to have an orgasm in that prime time span and thus retain more sperm, presumably making conception more likely. They postulated that women seek other partners in an effort to obtain better genes for their offspring.

Dr. Lloyd said the Baker-Bellis argument was "fatally flawed because their sample size is too small."

"In one table," she said, "73 percent of the data is based on the experience of one person."

In an e-mail message recently, Dr. Baker wrote that his and Dr. Bellis's manuscript had "received intense peer review appraisal" before publication. Statisticians were among the reviewers, he said, and they noted that some sample sizes were small, "but considered that none of these were fatal to our paper."

Dr. Lloyd said that studies called into question the logic of such theories. Research by Dr. Ludwig Wildt and his colleagues at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany in 1998, for example, found that in a healthy woman the uterus undergoes peristaltic contractions throughout the day in the absence of sexual intercourse or orgasm. This casts doubt, Dr. Lloyd argues, on the idea that the contractions of orgasm somehow affect sperm retention.

Another hypothesis, proposed in 1995 by Dr. Randy Thornhill, a professor of biology at the University of New Mexico and two colleagues, held that women were more likely to have orgasms during intercourse with men with symmetrical physical features. On the basis of earlier studies of physical attraction, Dr. Thornhill argued that symmetry might be an indicator of genetic fitness.

Dr. Lloyd, however, said those conclusions were not viable because "they only cover a minority of women, 45 percent, who say they sometimes do, and sometimes don't, have orgasm during intercourse."

"It excludes women on either end of the spectrum," she said. "The 25 percent who say they almost always have orgasm in intercourse and the 30 percent who say they rarely or never do. And that last 30 percent includes the 10 percent who say they never have orgasm under any circumstances."

In a phone interview, Dr. Thornhill said that he had not read Dr. Lloyd's book but the fact that not all women have orgasms during intercourse supports his theory.

"There will be patterns in orgasm with preferred and not preferred men," he said.

Dr. Lloyd also criticized work by Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, an emeritus professor of anthropology at the University of California, Davis, who studies primate behavior and female reproductive strategies.

Scientists have documented that orgasm occurs in some female primates; for other mammals, whether orgasm occurs remains an open question.

In the 1981 book "The Woman That Never Evolved" and in her other work, Dr. Hrdy argues that orgasm evolved in nonhuman primates as a way for the female to protect her offspring from the depredation of males.

She points out that langur monkeys have a high infant mortality rate, with 30 percent of deaths a result of babies' being killed by males who are not the fathers. Male langurs, she says, will not kill the babies of females they have mated with.

In macaques and chimpanzees, she said, females are conditioned by the pleasurable sensations of clitoral stimulation to keep copulating with multiple partners until they have an orgasm. Thus, males do not know which infants are theirs and which are not and do not attack them.

Dr. Hrdy also argues against the idea that female orgasm is an artifact of the early parallel development of male and female embryos.

"I'm convinced," she said, "that the selection of the clitoris is quite separate from that of the penis in males."

In critiquing Dr. Hrdy's view, Dr. Lloyd disputes the idea that longer periods of sexual intercourse lead to a higher incidence of orgasm, something that if it is true, may provide an evolutionary rationale for female orgasm.

But Dr. Hrdy said her work did not speak one way or another to the issue of female orgasm in humans. "My hypothesis is silent," she said.

One possibility, Dr. Hrdy said, is that orgasm in women may have been an adaptive trait in our prehuman ancestors.

"But we separated from our common primate ancestors about seven million years ago," she said.

"Perhaps the reason orgasm is so erratic is that it's phasing out," Dr. Hrdy said. "Our descendants on the starships may well wonder what all the fuss was about." [ NOTE: OMG! Nooooooo! ]

Western culture is suffused with images of women's sexuality, of women in the throes of orgasm during intercourse and seeming to reach heights of pleasure that are rare, if not impossible, for most women in everyday life.

"Accounts of our evolutionary past tell us how the various parts of our body should function," Dr. Lloyd said.

If women, she said, are told that it is "natural" to have orgasms every time they have intercourse and that orgasms will help make them pregnant, then they feel inadequate or inferior or abnormal when they do not achieve it.

"Getting the evolutionary story straight has potentially very large social and personal consequences for all women," Dr. Lloyd said. "And indirectly for men, as well."

It may be just for fun, but what's wrong with that?

They could even try to teach us guys how to have multiple orgasms.

Uh... the female orgasm is important because it increases the odds of pregnancy. The vaginal contractions and the cervix dipping into the vagina increase the amount of time the sperm stay in and increase the odds of them getting to an ovum, thus increasing the odds of pregnancy.

Uh... the female orgasm is important because it increases the odds of pregnancy. The vaginal contractions and the cervix dipping into the vagina increase the amount of time the sperm stay in and increase the odds of them getting to an ovum, thus increasing the odds of pregnancy.

Which is why I highly doubt it will be "phased out".

That article made no sense! The evolutionary advantage of the female orgasam seems super obvious to me, to encourage women to have more sex and therefore more children. I don't see why it matters if they don't have one every time. I watch football even though my favorite team does not always win. So what if you don't have an orgasm every time?

Also, if women aren't getting anything out of sex with one man, then she will either have less sex with him (thus decreasing the odds of pregnancy) or she will find someone who can please her.

I would say, their conclusions are probably ... incomplete. They don't seem to be including any effects on long term social bonds, which could insure comparatively more resources are put into the raising of children that arrive as a result. Whether the fluid, or muscle reflexes are *particularly* useful, is probably a little more up in the air, but I would say the chemical experience is nothing close to a unimportant leftover.

I would put this in the junk DNA category.

Which is why I highly doubt it will be "phased out".

There's no reason for it to, after all, how likely is it for a no-orgasm mutation to occur, and on-top of that for it to replace yes-orgasm women?
:fluffle:

I would say, their conclusions are probably ... incomplete. They don't seem to be including any effects on long term social bonds, which could insure comparatively more resources are put into the raising of children that arrive as a result. Whether the fluid, or muscle reflexes are *particularly* useful, is probably a little more up in the air, but I would say the chemical experience is nothing close to a unimportant leftover.

I would put this in the junk DNA category.
Psh. If you want to call it junk DNA, you've obviously never had multiple orgasms.

Psh. If you want to call it junk DNA, you've obviously never had multiple orgasms.
Rub it in, why don't you?

Er.

So to speak.

Rub it in, why don't you?

Er.

So to speak.

Dude.

As a man, I would like to take a moment and thank all those women that have been faking orgasms. Most of them were pretty convincing and really made me feel like a stud. I know I should be a little offended that I've just been fooled all along, but I'm not. I'm just grateful for the effort and touched by your generosity. Thanks again.

Also, if women aren't getting anything out of sex with one man, then she will either have less sex with him (thus decreasing the odds of pregnancy) or she will find someone who can please her.

It depends on what you consider "getting anything out of." Not everyone has sex solely to reap physical pleasure, you know.

Dude.
Damn UK colloquialisms. My intentions were pure.

Damn UK colloquialisms. My intentions were pure.

Sure. I believe you...

I think the article is a lie...I mean orgasms were probably 'invented' or 'placed into' the sexual scene for people to enjoy reproducing: Nymphomaniacs do exists (and people with traumas too, lol) yet i think that if you can't have orgasms then its going to sux for you when you have sex.

Sure. I believe you...
If only you could see my innocent wide eyes.

More seriously, I'd note that we're not all slaves to our genes. While the overarching evolutionary imperatives remain, there's a large degree of freedom for individuals.

Wow. Even I don't understand me. I'm really not doing very well with this thread...

Psh. If you want to call it junk DNA, you've obviously never had multiple orgasms.
Junk DNA isn't junk. The conclusions, from the article, are similar to those that lead to the description of "non-coding DNA" as "Junk DNA." No doubt they'll have their nose rubbed in it in due time, out of sight of the more mainstream press.

And no, I've never had the pleasure.

Uh... the female orgasm is important because it increases the odds of pregnancy. The vaginal contractions and the cervix dipping into the vagina increase the amount of time the sperm stay in and increase the odds of them getting to an ovum, thus increasing the odds of pregnancy.
if it were so important to reproduction wouldnt there be more than 25% of women who have orgasms from intercourse alone? wouldnt it be much closer to the percentage of men who orgasm from intercourse?

if it caused us to choose more appropriate men, wouldnt it lead to the same as above?

if it encouraged women to have more sex wouldnt the above also apply?

the extremely low incidence of orgasm from intercourse leads me to think that it has nothing to do with better reproductive outcomes.

and gartref, on behalf of all those women, you are welcome but couldnt you read up a bit??

It depends on what you consider "getting anything out of." Not everyone has sex solely to reap physical pleasure, you know.
true, but if you arent getting any physical pleasure out of it (and if you arent orgasming it can become quite unpleasant) you arent going to be doing it very often.

It depends on what you consider "getting anything out of." Not everyone has sex solely to reap physical pleasure, you know.
I know. There are people who cheat due to the lack of a pleasing sex life, and really, if all that happens in sex is I end up with a mess to clean up, then I'm not going to want it very often. You can get all the emotional stuff without having sex.

It may be just for fun, but what's wrong with that?

They could even try to teach us guys how to have multiple orgasms.
Um ... you can't??? :D

And if it doesn't confer any particular evolutionary advantage, there is a chance it could simply fade away! Talk about a disaster of monumental proportions!!! :eek:

Uh... the female orgasm is important because it increases the odds of pregnancy. The vaginal contractions and the cervix dipping into the vagina increase the amount of time the sperm stay in and increase the odds of them getting to an ovum, thus increasing the odds of pregnancy.
Not according to some of the people in the article. Did you read it??

Sure. I believe you...
well this was an interesting thing to cum over. the idea of an orgasm in wonderful. whether its real or not it makes the male feel like their doing something good. I think its One advantage us girls should have over a the male. We have orgasms, babies, periods, the guys have it good

Psh. If you want to call it junk DNA, you've obviously never had multiple orgasms.
Multiple orgasms! Yayyy! The most I ever knew of a woman to have one right after another was 27 ... after that we lost count! ROFL!

if it were so important to reproduction wouldnt there be more than 25% of women who have orgasms from intercourse alone? wouldnt it be much closer to the percentage of men who orgasm from intercourse?
An orgasm without foreplay would not happen often because of lack of arousal. Think of a guy trying to have sex when he's limp, it's not happening. We can have sex if we're not aroused, we can have sex if we're not moist (ouch though) it won't be nearly as enjoyable.

And also, when you consider it, we have separated ourselves from nature a great deal. People don't just move on to someone who can give themm orgasms, they'll try to adapt, teach their partner what does it for them, get advice from professionals et c. People stay with their partners for various reasons, even if they don't have a fullfilling sex life, hell, really sex isn't the best reason to choose a partner.

I was going to say something else but I forgot what it was.

well this was an interesting thing to cum over. the idea of an orgasm in wonderful. whether its real or not it makes the male feel like their doing something good. I think its One advantage us girls should have over a the male. We have orgasms, babies, periods, the guys have it good

Ehm... Interesting post. Anyway, I agree with you on this.

so there will come a day when men dont have nipples and women dont have orgasms?

sad sad days.

As a man, I would like to take a moment and thank all those women that have been faking orgasms. Most of them were pretty convincing and really made me feel like a stud. I know I should be a little offended that I've just been fooled all along, but I'm not. I'm just grateful for the effort and touched by your generosity. Thanks again.
This tread is hilarious! :D

Not everyone has sex solely to reap physical pleasure, you know.

NO! You mean I've been living an illusion for all these years??? :eek:

Not according to some of the people in the article. Did you read it??
Yes, other studies have shown differently...

and hell, one person mentioned in that article pointed out that sperm stays in the woman longer if she's had an orgasm.

I know more about the female orgasm than those nerds. I've actually seen one :D

I think the article is a lie...I mean orgasms were probably 'invented' or 'placed into' the sexual scene for people to enjoy reproducing: Nymphomaniacs do exists (and people with traumas too, lol) yet i think that if you can't have orgasms then its going to sux for you when you have sex.
Nymphomaniacs do not normally experience orgasms. One of the reasons for nymphomaina is that the nymphomaniac is chasing after the ever-elusive "big O."

Oh, and I was going to say that orgasms are also much different for women than men. Technically, all a man needs is stimulation. For a woman, it's different. If the mood isn't right, all the stimulation in the world won't do it. For some women, there has been some trauma so it takes a lot of time and effort to be able to orgasm... some women are convinced that it is not something that good girls ever do. Some men are convinced that it isn't necessary to please their woman sexually.

This tread is hilarious! :D

It's just a joke anyway, look at the name of one of the "experts"

For example, Dr. John Alcock, a professor of biology at Arizona State University, criticized an earlier version of Dr. Lloyd's thesis, discussed in in a 1987 article by Stephen Jay Gould in the magazine Natural History.

so there will come a day when men dont have nipples and women dont have orgasms?

sad sad days.
Given that we're nearing the point at which we can artificially manipulate the human body in pretty much any way we desire, I don't think there's any need to fear the arrival of such an awful day.

Oh, and I was going to say that orgasms are also much different for women than men. Technically, all a man needs is stimulation. For a woman, it's different. If the mood isn't right, all the stimulation in the world won't do it. For some women, there has been some trauma so it takes a lot of time and effort to be able to orgasm... some women are convinced that it is not something that good girls ever do. Some men are convinced that it isn't necessary to please their woman sexually.
This is very true. It's also true that male orgasms are not always very pleasurable, something that I've never really seen acknowledged before.

I know more about the female orgasm than those nerds. I've actually seen one :D
ROFLMAO!!! Wow! Reeealy??? :D

An orgasm without foreplay would not happen often because of lack of arousal. Think of a guy trying to have sex when he's limp, it's not happening. We can have sex if we're not aroused, we can have sex if we're not moist (ouch though) it won't be nearly as enjoyable.

And also, when you consider it, we have separated ourselves from nature a great deal. People don't just move on to someone who can give themm orgasms, they'll try to adapt, teach their partner what does it for them, get advice from professionals et c. People stay with their partners for various reasons, even if they don't have a fullfilling sex life, hell, really sex isn't the best reason to choose a partner.

I was going to say something else but I forgot what it was.

i dont know.
it makes sense today but there remains the statistic that 25% of women orgasm from intercourse alone. i dont think that suggests that she wasnt aroused to start with, just that no extra stimulation occurred that might lead to orgasm.

how common it has been in human history to use "techniques" i have no idea. i think the researchers are assuming that its fairly recent. it may be that throughout human history it has been a matter of course that one adds in clitoral stimulation during intercourse. maybe the reason homo erectus died out is because homo sapiens learned the value of "lending a helping hand".

maybe the researchers are prudes?

As a man, I would like to take a moment and thank all those women that have been faking orgasms. Most of them were pretty convincing and really made me feel like a stud. I know I should be a little offended that I've just been fooled all along, but I'm not. I'm just grateful for the effort and touched by your generosity. Thanks again.

I find this surprising. I would think a man would want to know how he might be able to improve. I personally have never faked it.

Oh, and I was going to say that orgasms are also much different for women than men. Technically, all a man needs is stimulation. For a woman, it's different. If the mood isn't right, all the stimulation in the world won't do it. For some women, there has been some trauma so it takes a lot of time and effort to be able to orgasm... some women are convinced that it is not something that good girls ever do. Some men are convinced that it isn't necessary to please their woman sexually.
yeah women need to learn how to have an orgasm; men need to learn how not to.

Oh, and I was going to say that orgasms are also much different for women than men. Technically, all a man needs is stimulation. For a woman, it's different. If the mood isn't right, all the stimulation in the world won't do it. For some women, there has been some trauma so it takes a lot of time and effort to be able to orgasm... some women are convinced that it is not something that good girls ever do. Some men are convinced that it isn't necessary to please their woman sexually.
After many years of intensive personal research, I have concluded there are basically three reasons for the female orgasm:

1. Strong vaginal contractions are not only good for your health, but also encourage the male to release more semen, which increases the chances of pregnancy.

2. Mutal orgasm is not only one of the most intense experiences a human being can have, it tends to bond women and men at more than just a physical level.

3. Women will sometimes seek orgasm, not only for the pleasure involved ( although that is certainly an adequate reason in and of itself! ), but to please her partner, especially if her partner has expressed a desire for her to have one ... or more than one.

i dont know.
it makes sense today but there remains the statistic that 25% of women orgasm from intercourse alone. i dont think that suggests that she wasnt aroused to start with, just that no extra stimulation occurred that might lead to orgasm.

how common it has been in human history to use "techniques" i have no idea. i think the researchers are assuming that its fairly recent. it may be that throughout human history it has been a matter of course that one adds in clitoral stimulation during intercourse. maybe the reason homo erectus died out is because homo sapiens learned the value of "lending a helping hand".

maybe the researchers are prudes?
ROFLMAO!!! Hmmm ... could beeee! :D

I find this surprising. I would think a man would want to know how he might be able to improve. I personally have never faked it.
What a wonderful first post! You I like! :D

Wow this was an intriguing conversation for one to stumble over. Well from a chicks minds eye it is a wonderful heads up on the male. View it like this: The man gets Sex with little to no consequence. Perusing sex is “natural” and they have practically no responsibility concerning the opposed sex, during sex. The female on the other hand has, Periods, yeast infections and pregnancy. Also Sex has always been given the males the upper hand. I think the orgasm is ! That’s 1 thing us gals should have.
:fluffle:

i dont know.
it makes sense today but there remains the statistic that 25% of women orgasm from intercourse alone. i dont think that suggests that she wasnt aroused to start with, just that no extra stimulation occurred that might lead to orgasm.
Well, it also depends on position and level of comfort with the partner.
There are many aspects to this they haven't explored... for instance, perhaps the women in the 25% group aren't having sex in the missionary position, while the women in the group of sometimes orgasms do. Perhaps the women in the always group play games with their partner, vary their sex routine to keep it exciting, or their partner is experienced and good enough to give them an orgasm every time.
Perhaps the women who never have orgasms are inhibited, not comfortable with the idea of having an orgasm, aren't aroused by their partner other than through physical stimulation prior to intercourse et c.

Hell, some women have never learned to orgasm. There are still women who have never masturbated and are unwilling to try, even in this day and age. If you can't give yourself an orgasm, and especially if you aren't even comfortable with the idea of giving yourself an orgasm, what odds do you think you have of someone else giving you an orgasm?

how common it has been in human history to use "techniques" i have no idea. i think the researchers are assuming that its fairly recent. it may be that throughout human history it has been a matter of course that one adds in clitoral stimulation during intercourse. maybe the reason homo erectus died out is because homo sapiens learned the value of "lending a helping hand".
Considering that other primates engage in oral sex, manual stimulation, masturbation (I think chimps even use toys) I doubt it's a recent or even human-only thing to do.

maybe the researchers are prudes?
Maybe their subjects are?

yeah women need to learn how to have an orgasm; men need to learn how not to.
In some of the more advanced forms of Tantric Yoga, men are taught how to hold back, and even avoid having orgasm. As with women learning how to have a "spontaneous" orgasm, the key lies in the puebogynococal muscle and its development into an effective control mechanism.

Well, it also depends on position and level of comfort with the partner.
There are many aspects to this they haven't explored... for instance, perhaps the women in the 25% group aren't having sex in the missionary position, while the women in the group of sometimes orgasms do. Perhaps the women in the always group play games with their partner, vary their sex routine to keep it exciting, or their partner is experienced and good enough to give them an orgasm every time.
Perhaps the women who never have orgasms are inhibited, not comfortable with the idea of having an orgasm, aren't aroused by their partner other than through physical stimulation prior to intercourse et c.

Hell, some women have never learned to orgasm. There are still women who have never masturbated and are unwilling to try, even in this day and age. If you can't give yourself an orgasm, and especially if you aren't even comfortable with the idea of giving yourself an orgasm, what odds do you think you have of someone else giving you an orgasm?
Most, if not all, women can not only be taught to reach orgasm, but can also be taught to have multiple orgasms, how to make themselves have "spontaneous" orgasms, and how to have an orgasm any time they wish.

The key is a patient, knowledgable and understanding partner.

If the female orgasm didn't exist, why would women ever have sex? Its purpose seems obvious to me.

On a side note, evolution sucks! Phasing out the female orgasm, then phasing out men? I mean will life as a human even be worth living in 500,000 years?

yeah women need to learn how to have an orgasm; men need to learn how not to.
Do you think this is cultural? After all there is a certain unspoken patricarchal hangover that women are not supposed to enjoy sex as much as men. Do you think that girls are conditioned from an early age not to orgasm?

Most, if not all, women can not only be taught to reach orgasm, but can also be taught to have multiple orgasms, how to make themselves have "spontaneous" orgasms, and how to have an orgasm any time they wish.

The key is a patient, knowledgable and understanding partner.
Yeah, that would be true. If neither party is experienced however, it may also take some outside advice to attain such a goal... how's a guy going to teach a woman to orgasm if he's new to sex himself?

Yeah, that would be true. If neither party is experienced however, it may also take some outside advice to attain such a goal... how's a guy going to teach a woman to orgasm if he's new to sex himself?
Very true. But as with learning of any sort, the highly motivated and persistent student can acquire the knowledge he or she needs regardless of the quality of instruction. :)

If the female orgasm didn't exist, why would women ever have sex? Its purpose seems obvious to me.

On a side note, evolution sucks! Phasing out the female orgasm, then phasing out men? I mean will life as a human even be worth living in 500,000 years?
wwelllll

before the link between sex and babies was known (most of the time that humanity has existed), no reason i can think of. either its fun or its coerced.

after the link is established, women have sex to get babies (in the absense of orgasm, i mean). there was a study several years back on the involuntary reactions that people have to certain sights (measured by pupil dilation i think). men react strongly to sexy young women, women have that same reaction ONLY when they see babies.

I think that the female orgasm helps show the female if her partner is genetically capable. Such as women are genetically programmed to look for qualitys in their partners that they want their sons to have. An orgasm for a female might be a clue that her partner has superioir genes. Such as if her partner can give her an orgasm then it is likely that her son will give other women orgasms increasing the probability of continuing reproduction. Orgasms, in females especially, are proven to be pshycological. Maybe it is instincts where females attain orgasm. Such as maybe his personality, or body type, and perhaps penis size.

Do you think this is cultural? After all there is a certain unspoken patricarchal hangover that women are not supposed to enjoy sex as much as men. Do you think that girls are conditioned from an early age not to orgasm?

no i think the female orgasm is an art. like dakini said, the wrong day, the wrong mood the wrong god-only-knows-what and it just doesnt happen. a woman needs to learn her own sexual responses before she can reliable reach orgasm. men dont have that problem but they can acheive much greater pleasure through learning about their sexuality.

Errr isnt it obvious? Seems obvious to me that a female has an orgasm so shes more likely to have sex and in turn more likely to get preggo and have children 0_o....why does certain things taste good? Because it makes you eat more of them and they are usually thing shigh and fat and calories so your body has energy...why does it feel better when you finally allow yourself to piss after holding it for so long? So you know your suppose to let it out.

Um ... you can't??? :D

Damn you!! Damn you!!! * shakes fist *

I know more about the female orgasm than those nerds. I've actually seen one :D
Or at least a very convincing imitation :D

Uh... the female orgasm is important because it increases the odds of pregnancy. The vaginal contractions and the cervix dipping into the vagina increase the amount of time the sperm stay in and increase the odds of them getting to an ovum, thus increasing the odds of pregnancy.

I believe the Female Orgasm is a left over from Embryotic development however it increases the odds of having children so phasing out is going to be silly, besides in the future wouldn't we have the ability to alter our genes and keep it around. As a male I have experienced multiple orgasms, usually after a "dry" one. It just doesn't happen as often as with women. The point of sex in our society has to be kept in context. Remember that with sentience its not all about evolution and procreating.

Wouldn't a lack of orgasm not mean a lack of pleasure? I mean... even if female orgasms phased out somehow, there's still the whole thing with the clitorus and all its nerve endings...

Then again, I don't really know much about female sexuality. I've never been arsed about my own.

Oh, and I was going to say that orgasms are also much different for women than men. Technically, all a man needs is stimulation. For a woman, it's different. If the mood isn't right, all the stimulation in the world won't do it. For some women, there has been some trauma so it takes a lot of time and effort to be able to orgasm... some women are convinced that it is not something that good girls ever do. Some men are convinced that it isn't necessary to please their woman sexually.

Very true. In some circumstances, women can have an orgasm just by thinking about it. Specialists think it has a link to how a woman forms a relationship with their beau...

I just think they're fun...

My analysis: Orgasms for all!

ROFLMAO!!! Wow! Reeealy??? :D

It's called pornography. Although a girl told me she got pretty close once

Nymphomaniacs do not normally experience orgasms. One of the reasons for nymphomaina is that the nymphomaniac is chasing after the ever-elusive "big O."

Thay should come to the nation of Kinky Fetish. We use Big Os as currency!

no i think the female orgasm is an art. like dakini said, the wrong day, the wrong mood the wrong god-only-knows-what and it just doesnt happen. a woman needs to learn her own sexual responses before she can reliable reach orgasm. men dont have that problem but they can acheive much greater pleasure through learning about their sexuality.
It is to a certain extent society though. In some places, women are brought up believing that nice girls don't masturbate, that nice girls don't really enjoy sex, that it's only the sluts and whores who enjoy it and who touch themselves et c. There are some people who are exposed to a stigma against it.
That combined with the fact that some men don't feel it necessary to give a woman an orgasm (I haven't come accross any of those fortunately, lots of guys also seem to pride themselves in their ability to produce orgasms) plus you have women who just want to make their man happy (or don't feel comfortable with him et c) so they fake an orgasm.

Very true. In some circumstances, women can have an orgasm just by thinking about it. Specialists think it has a link to how a woman forms a relationship with their beau...

I just think they're fun...
I can do it by thought. It comes in handy during boring classes.

I don't see why some men don't want to please the woman, I feel that is a requirement of sex, to make sure the other party is happy. They helped you, why not help back. Of course this may just be that I grew up in a Chinese family so sharing and the idea that borrowing should be returned and any favor should be returned ASAP.

I live in the city so I haven't come across any of these sort of girls who find a stigma to it, I think that society has come to a point where we allow ourselves to have physical pleasure because why else would God make such things, if we aren't to enjoy them. If we are responsible I dont see it interfering directly with their spirituality. Though I have run into girls who don't believe Masturbation is real, we got 100 some odd people to sign something saying that they do masturbate, fun collecting names, a few teachers signed. ;)

Yeah, that would be true. If neither party is experienced however, it may also take some outside advice to attain such a goal... how's a guy going to teach a woman to orgasm if he's new to sex himself?

And this is why people should NOT be encouraged to wait till marriage to have sex with their partner...

I saw this program once about this couple late teens, rushing into marriage because they both wanted to wait till they were married to have sex, the next morning, they were interviewed. As predicted, the guy was, like, 'Oh yeah, it was great!', while the girl sat back, legs crossed, nose scrunched up, trying, unconvincingly, to tell us she was glad she waited, and it will get better with time.

Everyone can teach you something new about their body and yours. I don't condone sleeping around in this day and age, but experimentation, and in monogamous relationships with the use of condoms can increase the possibility of orgasm in a woman.

Also, if women aren't getting anything out of sex with one man, then she will either have less sex with him (thus decreasing the odds of pregnancy) or she will find someone who can please her.

I'm thinking thats a guy thing too




She analyzed 32 studies, conducted over 74 years, of the frequency of female orgasm during intercourse.


Good lord......how old was this doc when she/he started "analyzing"?

I can do it by thought. It comes in handy during boring classes.
Damn. Meanwhile I'm stuck thinking I'm playing Freecell.

I'm thinking thats a guy thing too

Yeah, the difference is that guys are waaay too easy to please.

I can do it by thought. It comes in handy during boring classes.

Hope you aren't a disruption in class. ;)

I can do it by thought. It comes in handy during boring classes.

Dreams are cool, disappointing though that you wake up having missed the best bit ;)

It is to a certain extent society though. In some places, women are brought up believing that nice girls don't masturbate, that nice girls don't really enjoy sex, that it's only the sluts and whores who enjoy it and who touch themselves et c. There are some people who are exposed to a stigma against it.
That combined with the fact that some men don't feel it necessary to give a woman an orgasm (I haven't come accross any of those fortunately, lots of guys also seem to pride themselves in their ability to produce orgasms) plus you have women who just want to make their man happy (or don't feel comfortable with him et c) so they fake an orgasm.
yeah. one wonders if there was a female orgasm during the entire reign of queen victoria. ..... well maybe just that lucky 25%...

yeah. one wonders if there was a female orgasm during the entire reign of queen victoria. ..... well maybe just that lucky 25%...

Apparently, the Victorians were rampant nymphos, kinda like free love in the sixties. She banned gay sex between two men, but didn't ban it for women as she couldn't imagine how two women could have sex. But, I'd suggest watching 'Tipping the Velvet' for a full rendition of how things were done...

acutally now that i think about it....

i wonder if that 25% arent the women who convince themselves of that old chestnut of the superiority of vaginal orgams and so they LEARN to have orgasms from intercourse alone. if you can have an orgasm just from THINKING you can teach yourself to have an orgasm with only the stimulation of intercourse. (not that they would not have orgasms from other kind of stimulation but that they know the secrets to also having one from intercourse alone)

I can do it by thought. It comes in handy during boring classes.
:eek:

How?

Very true. In some circumstances, women can have an orgasm just by thinking about it. Specialists think it has a link to how a woman forms a relationship with their beau...

I just think they're fun...
Can men learn to do this? :cool:

lots of guys also seem to pride themselves in their ability to produce orgasms
I can't think why a man would not care about giving his partner an orgasm. It's not only good for her but gives him an emotional high too. I think that the only type of men who don't care are the low self-esteem types who are just using a woman to masturbate themselves (if that makes sense).

If I could have an orgasm just from thinking, I would have to stop wearing pants.

Apparently, the Victorians were rampant nymphos, kinda like free love in the sixties. She banned gay sex between two men, but didn't ban it for women as she couldn't imagine how two women could have sex. But, I'd suggest watching 'Tipping the Velvet' for a full rendition of how things were done...
im not gonna have to go to one of those "adult" stores in albuquerque to find that am i??

acutally now that i think about it....

i wonder if that 25% arent the women who convince themselves of that old chestnut of the superiority of vaginal orgams and so they LEARN to have orgasms from intercourse alone. if you can have an orgasm just from THINKING you can teach yourself to have an orgasm with only the stimulation of intercourse. (not that they would not have orgasms from other kind of stimulation but that they know the secrets to also having one from intercourse alone)

True, it all goes back to knowing how to pleasure yourself though

Apparently, the Victorians were rampant nymphos, kinda like free love in the sixties. She banned gay sex between two men, but didn't ban it for women as she couldn't imagine how two women could have sex. But, I'd suggest watching 'Tipping the Velvet' for a full rendition of how things were done...
That was set in my home town. It was based on a novel by Sarah Waters, who also wrote Fingersmith, which is also going to appear on our screens some time soon.

im not gonna have to go to one of those "adult" stores in albuquerque to find that am i??

No, it's quite tasteful actually. Saw it on C4 (British TV channel), shown at something like 9pm. It's a mini series. Really good...

im not gonna have to go to one of those "adult" stores in albuquerque to find that am i??
Nah, it was a fairly tame Beeb comic drama. The most controversial scene involved a golden dildo, but it wasn't like they gave it to you in graphic detail.

Men can do it by thinking, I have tried several times and with appropriate thoughts it can work. However, men has a problem with "wet" orgasms and the smell permeates clothing easily. I suggest before trying this in any sort of public situation to wear a condom.

ok i put "tipping the velvet" on my netflix list, with luck ill watch it this weekend.

Nah, it was a fairly tame Beeb comic drama. The most controversial scene involved a golden dildo, but it wasn't like they gave it to you in graphic detail.

Was it golden? I thought it was a wooden one?!?

Yeah, the difference is that guys are waaay too easy to please.


very true Izzy....very true ;)

Was it golden? I thought it was a wooden one?!?
My memory is hazy on this. Oddly.

Hang on, the lead character was painted gold at some point, I may be confusing the two scenes.

My memory is hazy on this. Oddly.

Hang on, the lead character was painted gold at some point, I may be confusing the two scenes.

Probably for one of her mistresses fantasies, yeah, but I do distictly rememer it being wooden, and thinking,'God, that has GOT to be painful'...

Damn you!! Damn you!!! * shakes fist *
ROFLMAO!! Now, now! No need to get yer bowels in an uproar! Tsk! :D

My analysis: Orgasms for all!
Yayyyy! "Hydrogen-Land" for President! :D

Thay should come to the nation of Kinky Fetish. We use Big Os as currency!
Oooooooooooo! Where do I start earning??? :D

Hope you aren't a disruption in class. ;)
ROFLMAO!!!!!! Aaahahahahahahaha! :D

Can men learn to do this? :cool:

I can't think why a man would not care about giving his partner an orgasm. It's not only good for her but gives him an emotional high too. I think that the only type of men who don't care are the low self-esteem types who are just using a woman to masturbate themselves (if that makes sense).
Yes, men can have a "spontaneous" orgasm without touching or being touched, but it's almost always possible only for men who are young and healthy. It's pretty much out of the question for us older types.

The lack of interest in your partner's pleasure comes both from extreme self-centeredness and, to a lesser degree, from disfunctional socialization. And the really tragic thing about it is that these guys will probably never know what they're missing. :(

Probably for one of her mistresses fantasies, yeah, but I do distictly rememer it being wooden, and thinking,'God, that has GOT to be painful'...
I'm assuming it was checked for splinters.

Nnng.

I'm assuming it was checked for splinters.

Nnng.

Geez, I hope so :D

Geez, I hope so :D
If not then, "Well DAY-UM!" :D

:eek:

How?
Active imagination?

1) I think it's already been made clear that there is an evolutionary reason for the orgasm.

2) I think we can agree that at least a portion of the women who have not had orgasms in the normal fashion have OTHER issues getting in the way of that.

3) I think that, if anything might be driving the notion of orgasms being evolved out of the species, it's the damned anti-sexual religions who breed unsexual people like rabbits, which is screwing with natural selection like mad.

4) It doesn't take tantric to hold back orgasm, just some will power and a few muscle tricks.

If not then, "Well DAY-UM!" :D


Oh stop, my eyes are watering just thinking about it!!!

Oh stop, my eyes are watering just thinking about it!!!
I'm sorry I ever mentioned it!

<snip>
how common it has been in human history to use "techniques" i have no idea. i think the researchers are assuming that its fairly recent. it may be that throughout human history it has been a matter of course that one adds in clitoral stimulation during intercourse. maybe the reason homo erectus died out is because homo sapiens learned the value of "lending a helping hand".

maybe the researchers are prudes?
In the middle ages the Catholic Church taught that you couldn't have sex for any reason other than to get pregnant.
They also taught that a woman couldn't get pregnant if she was 'cold'.
The solution?
Her husband was obliged to warm her up (foreplay) until she started to 'babble', then they could have intercourse.
I'd say that female orgasm was probably more common in the past than today.
In the early 20th century there were no female orgasms, but some women did suffer from "hysterical paroxysms" the cure for which was to go to your doctor who would put a big vibrator between your legs until the "paroxysms" had passed. Modern medicine didn't recognise that women could orgasm until the 1970's!!!
I would agree with Dakini that it is social, there are probably a lot of hang ups left over from the above mentioned stupidity.
Does anyone know if these sorts of studies have been performed in other cultures? I recall one Japanese study that would disagree with this one but I can't remember any details.

Where the heck did you find all the info in the first post??? lol
And why were you looking in the first place??? :p
Not saying it was a bad thing, just a little curious about why...lol

Hmmm...

Dr. Randy Thornhill
Dr. John Alcock

I am so immature...

Hmmm...

Dr. Randy Thornhill
Dr. John Alcock

I am so immature...

We'll let it go 'cause you're young.

We'll let it go 'cause you're young.

Next time insult me about something genuinely insult-able... that's not a word, but anyway, the point stands...

As a man, I would like to take a moment and thank all those women that have been faking orgasms. Most of them were pretty convincing and really made me feel like a stud. I know I should be a little offended that I've just been fooled all along, but I'm not. I'm just grateful for the effort and touched by your generosity. Thanks again.

You shouldn't, they probably only did it to get you to stop. ;) As in "It's allright, you can stop now. I'm finished." It's very nice and polite of them, though! :) (I have never done it, in case you wondered.)

I remember being taught that during female orgasm, the cervix actually opens a bit more than usual. The odds of pregnancy are enhanced.

One argument I had heard for this was that a female WOULD cheat in a group of men - finding one man to be an excellent provider, but finding another man who might make smarter or stronger children - and "choosing" to have the child of one man over another.

IIRC, that was a UK science show where I saw that.

I remember being taught that during female orgasm, the cervix actually opens a bit more than usual. The odds of pregnancy are enhanced.

One argument I had heard for this was that a female WOULD cheat in a group of men - finding one man to be an excellent provider, but finding another man who might make smarter or stronger children - and "choosing" to have the child of one man over another.

IIRC, that was a UK science show where I saw that.
What an excellent survival characteristic. Especially when you see how calm and reasonable men (and women) who have been cheated on are!
I love the way they take these behaviours which are very socially destructive and then try to rationalise them until they are acceptable, irrelevant of the observable reality.

What an excellent survival characteristic. Especially when you see how calm and reasonable men (and women) who have been cheated on are!
I love the way they take these behaviours which are very socially destructive and then try to rationalise them until they are acceptable, irrelevant of the observable reality.

Well, it does open during orgasm. Incontrivertible. And women don't always orgasm. And a more open cervix does raise the odds of pregnancy.

So, let's hear you rationalize why that is. Is the woman selecting the potential father in more ways than one?

Here is an interesting paper that examines the evolutionary roll of the female orgasm:

Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. 1993. Human sperm competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female orgasm. Animal Behavior 46: 887-909.

Here are some of the highlights of the paper:

Female orgasm between 1 minitue before and 45 minutes after male ejaculation results in substantially greater sperm retention.
Retaining sperm due to orgasm reduces the amount of sperm retained from other copulations for up to eight days.
During a monogamous relationship, less sperm is retained (does this increase the odds of retilization?).
A female having sex with a male other than her normal mate will alter her orgasm pattern to favor the other male (advantageous in having more genetically diverse offspring).


Just something for you boys to think about the next time you decide that a woman's orgasm isn't important to you. ;)

Here is an interesting paper that examines the evolutionary roll of the female orgasm:

Baker, R. R. and Bellis, M. A. 1993. Human sperm competition: ejaculate manipulation by females and a function for the female orgasm. Animal Behavior 46: 887-909.

Here are some of the highlights of the paper:

Female orgasm between 1 minitue before and 45 minutes after male ejaculation results in substantially greater sperm retention.
Retaining sperm due to orgasm reduces the amount of sperm retained from other copulations for up to eight days.
During a monogamous relationship, less sperm is retained (does this increase the odds of retilization?).
A female having sex with a male other than her normal mate will alter her orgasm pattern to favor the other male (advantageous in having more genetically diverse offspring).


Just something for you boys to think about the next time you decide that a woman's orgasm isn't important to you. ;)


This is exactly what I said.

BTW, it's not only important for a man to make sure his woman is really enjoying herself - it's a really really good idea to find out if the orgasms are REAL.

Without having to ask her.

The female orgasm is important to sexual reproduction. Plus for the fun side, when a female has an orgasm she gets a very excited feeling. So it is helpful! :fluffle:

You know...it dosn't have to have a function. Everyone has an appendix (unless they already got apendicitis and had it removed), and that's not only useless, it's even dangerous (apendicitis operations with stone knives have a very low survival rate). If it has a function, it gets more likely to be passed down to the next generation, but if it's (from an evolutionary standpoint) useless it's not less likely to. The fact that women don't always experience orgasm would tend to indicate that it may be another appendix-albeit a more pleasurable one.

I remember being taught that during female orgasm, the cervix actually opens a bit more than usual. The odds of pregnancy are enhanced.

One argument I had heard for this was that a female WOULD cheat in a group of men - finding one man to be an excellent provider, but finding another man who might make smarter or stronger children - and "choosing" to have the child of one man over another.


But why would there be a link between being able to give a woman an orgasm and producing smarter or stronger children? And why should that link be stronger than the one between being an excellent provider and producing smarter or stronger children? :confused:

I remember being taught that during female orgasm, the cervix actually opens a bit more than usual. The odds of pregnancy are enhanced.

One argument I had heard for this was that a female WOULD cheat in a group of men - finding one man to be an excellent provider, but finding another man who might make smarter or stronger children - and "choosing" to have the child of one man over another.

IIRC, that was a UK science show where I saw that.


I was taught the same thing. Also-I dont know if its been mentioned yet, but apparently there are also "killer sperm"-if a woman has multiple sex partners, one's sperm can actually defeat the other's in an effort to fertilize.

I will continue to study this with my wife, who is lucky enough to be extremely multi orgasmic.

My wife says that if you haven't experienced "rolling thunder" (her term for rolling from one orgasm to the next until she's exhausted) with a man you're deeply in love with, you haven't lived.

But what do I know.

Well, it does open during orgasm. Incontrivertible. And women don't always orgasm. And a more open cervix does raise the odds of pregnancy.

So, let's hear you rationalize why that is. Is the woman selecting the potential father in more ways than one?
I was talking about the whole "cheating is great" thing.

I was talking about the whole "cheating is great" thing.
If it results in better offspring, with more genetic variation (and avoids inbreeding), then technically it's a good thing.

Science isn't dealing with the morality - just the biological outcome here.

If it results in better offspring, with more genetic variation (and avoids inbreeding), then technically it's a good thing.

Science isn't dealing with the morality - just the biological outcome here.
Perhaps. But if the provider catches her cheating on him he'll probably walk, leaving her pregnant and isolated. Assuming he doesn't commit a crime of passion. So in that light it is not a survival characteristic. Also, if the parents of each generation are unclear, that would make inbreeding more likely, not less. Ever hear of GSA?
Anyway, another study showed that the vast majority of women will stay faithful to their provider because they wan't their sons to have the same characteristics and so be more successful in finding a mate.

Of course if you take a more comprehensive approach to the study you would get in to the psychology of the women who cheat, their cultural background etc. Only researching from an evolutionary anthropology perspective will bias any outcome.

My wife says that if you haven't experienced "rolling thunder" (her term for rolling from one orgasm to the next until she's exhausted) with a man you're deeply in love with, you haven't lived.

But what do I know.


My wife will never leave me.

Good thing I dont experience that myself-what a freaking mess.

My wife will never leave me.

Good thing I dont experience that myself-what a freaking mess.

That has left an image I will be hard pressed to forget.

That has left an image I will be hard pressed to forget.


Sorry. I wouldnt have a place to store a bucket and a squeegee in the bedroom. And those big cotton bats they use to clean up hazardous spills

Sorry. I wouldnt have a place to store a bucket and a squeegee in the bedroom. And those big cotton bats they use to clean up hazardous spills
Gah! Noooo! Now it's more detailed!
*runs away*

Gah! Noooo! Now it's more detailed!
*runs away*
My wife and I do the "rolling thunder" thing almost every day.

It's odd, though. I've never been able to make any other woman come multiple times - most never came at all (well, a fair number tried to fake it).

It's not like I come multiple times, though. So it's really not as messy as you think.

My wife and I do the "rolling thunder" thing almost every day.

It's odd, though. I've never been able to make any other woman come multiple times - most never came at all (well, a fair number tried to fake it).

It's not like I come multiple times, though. So it's really not as messy as you think.


Thats what I meant. I hadnt heard it called Rolling Thunder yet, but it makes sense. We havent yet found a limit to my wife's orgasms yet.

Now if I were to enjoy that distinct benefit myself, we would have to hire a cleaning service. I'm happy just being her hero though. And then getting some much needed sleep.

Thats what I meant. I hadnt heard it called Rolling Thunder yet, but it makes sense. We havent yet found a limit to my wife's orgasms yet.

Now if I were to enjoy that distinct benefit myself, we would have to hire a cleaning service. I'm happy just being her hero though. And then getting some much needed sleep.

Well, considering how rarely I've seen female orgasm in the past, I'm convinced that they ARE making a selection. And that if your woman is NOT experiencing orgasm on a regular and satisfying basis, she WILL wander.

It may be just for fun, but what's wrong with that?

They could even try to teach us guys how to have multiple orgasms.
Its clear that evolution favores women.

Well, considering how rarely I've seen female orgasm in the past, I'm convinced that they ARE making a selection. And that if your woman is NOT experiencing orgasm on a regular and satisfying basis, she WILL wander.


you missed my point-she does experience orgasm-many, many times. Sometimes one right after the other, some take a little more effort. She has had a dozen before we just quit. And its been like this since I met her over 20 years ago. I think shes been satisfied. And I'm not worried about her wandering because she walks funny for a while. *L*

Perhaps. But if the provider catches her cheating on him he'll probably walk, leaving her pregnant and isolated. Assuming he doesn't commit a crime of passion. So in that light it is not a survival characteristic. Also, if the parents of each generation are unclear, that would make inbreeding more likely, not less. Ever hear of GSA?
Anyway, another study showed that the vast majority of women will stay faithful to their provider because they wan't their sons to have the same characteristics and so be more successful in finding a mate.

Of course if you take a more comprehensive approach to the study you would get in to the psychology of the women who cheat, their cultural background etc. Only researching from an evolutionary anthropology perspective will bias any outcome.

The problem this is getting into is assuming that all social customs have an evolutionary explination. This is not necessarily so. It could be argued that people who want to justify a particular mating system will insist that it is "natural" or "evolutionary." The fact is, orgasms predate knowledge of how babies are made. For that mater, orgasms predate humanity. The environment under which current human orgasming patterns evolve may no longer be relevant. Furthermore, the rate at which customs change is probably on a much shorter time scale than human evolution.

One must also wonder what a loss of function mutation for female orgasm would be. How many genes are involved? Contrary to intution, there is a growning body of evidence that more more complex a system, the more robust it is to pertubations. Would loss of female orgasm also correspond to a loss of male orgasm? Would it be due to the failure of the clitoris to develop (which might affect male development with the same alleles)? Loss of neural sensitivity (at least the guy wouldn't ejaculate prematurely)? Inability to respond to stimuli (Viagra, anyone)? Maintaining sexual dimorphisms generally requires selective pressure. For there to be a loss of female orgasms without a matching loss of male orgasms, there has to be selection for the woman not to orgasm with selection for the male to orgasm.

Something tells me these scientists read WAY too much Penthouse.

The female orgasm is important to sexual reproduction. Plus for the fun side, when a female has an orgasm she gets a very excited feeling. So it is helpful! :fluffle:

People seem to forget that some (many) couples have chosen to forego children. It has been proven that lions have sex a lot purely for pleasure when they aren't in a fertile state.

I know this isn't exactly a biological standpoint, but there is definitely "sex purely for enjoyment".

I think humans have evolved further sociologically, and I do believe that overrides the biological, even in the subconscious. People don't choose a mate strictly because of their sexual prowess or their ability to "provide" for a child. The psych and it's socialization overrides biology, or there would be a hell of a lot more unmarried people out there.

Orgasm for it's own sake doesn't necessarily have to have a biological function
(That part is my own opinion.)

Is there a point to all this testing? Or is it just that this woman scientist has never had an orgasm?

Is there a point to all this testing? Or is it just that this woman scientist has never had an orgasm?
Or it might very well be that she is having waay too much fun with her research grant.

The problem this is getting into is assuming that all social customs have an evolutionary explination. This is not necessarily so. It could be argued that people who want to justify a particular mating system will insist that it is "natural" or "evolutionary." The fact is, orgasms predate knowledge of how babies are made. For that mater, orgasms predate humanity. The environment under which current human orgasming patterns evolve may no longer be relevant. Furthermore, the rate at which customs change is probably on a much shorter time scale than human evolution.

One must also wonder what a loss of function mutation for female orgasm would be. How many genes are involved? Contrary to intution, there is a growning body of evidence that more more complex a system, the more robust it is to pertubations. Would loss of female orgasm also correspond to a loss of male orgasm? Would it be due to the failure of the clitoris to develop (which might affect male development with the same alleles)? Loss of neural sensitivity (at least the guy wouldn't ejaculate prematurely)? Inability to respond to stimuli (Viagra, anyone)? Maintaining sexual dimorphisms generally requires selective pressure. For there to be a loss of female orgasms without a matching loss of male orgasms, there has to be selection for the woman not to orgasm with selection for the male to orgasm.
given the researchers theory that women have orgasms for the same reason men have nipples, wouldnt it suggest that women will lose orgasms at about the same time men do? and wouldnt THAT spell disaster for the human race? (and what a disaster it would be if men lost nipples and women lost breasts)

or is that what you said?

Its clear that evolution favores women.
Yes, but they're so damned attractive! :D

My wife and I do the "rolling thunder" thing almost every day.

It's odd, though. I've never been able to make any other woman come multiple times - most never came at all (well, a fair number tried to fake it).

It's not like I come multiple times, though. So it's really not as messy as you think.
:eek: WAY too much information! LOL!

Has anyone considered that orgasm may have social advantage.

There is no logical evolutionary advantage to verbal communication except for its impact on social groups. The same may be true for the orgasm.

Humans have sex for longer than most animals. Most just put it in and three seconds later they are done.
Humans can, with effort, have sex for many hours. There is no reproductive advantage. In fact, humans engrossed in sex are more liekly to be killed by predators and enemies. Three second intercourse makes sense from a purely mechanical standpoint.
The only posible advantage to prolonged sex is emotional bonding. Such emotional bonding is helpfull when offspring take decades to raise.

Also, humans are very closely related to a group of primates called Bonobos. Bonobos live in matriarchal tribes. When two bonobo tribes come into conflict their leaders settle the dispute by having lesbian sex.
Sometimes young members of one tribe will wonder off and try to join other tribes. This makes sense from a genetic diversity stand point. If the leader decides to welcome the newcomer she will do so with sex and then the newcommer will be an official member of the tribe.

Now, it makes perfect sense if humans once had a smilar society that women would have orgasms since the primary form of political negoation would be lesbian sex.



As for male nipples. Men, if the produce the right hormes hormones, will lactate. Male newborns will often lactate due to the transfer of hormones through the placenta. Some men can be induced to produce these hormones through external stimuli such as a suckling baby. Some men can lactate enough to feed a baby.

This would be very useful for stoneage single fathers when their wives die in childbirth. Thus, nipples aren't just an artifact of. Male nipples can serve a purpose. It is prejudice that prevents them from doing so.

Has anyone considered that orgasm may have social advantage.

There is no logical evolutionary advantage to verbal communication except for its impact on social groups. The same may be true for the orgasm.
That's what I was trying to say earlier, that as they only studied orgasm from an evolutionary perspective they have limited their options and biased their research.

Humans have sex for longer than most animals. Most just put it in and three seconds later they are done.
Humans can, with effort, have sex for many hours. There is no reproductive advantage. In fact, humans engrossed in sex are more liekly to be killed by predators and enemies. Three second intercourse makes sense from a purely mechanical standpoint.
The only posible advantage to prolonged sex is emotional bonding. Such emotional bonding is helpfull when offspring take decades to raise.

Chimps have a bone in their penis that enables them to have more erections, enabling them to impregnate more females. Humans don't have this suggesting that male humans should not be as promiscuous as male chimps.
However, as you said human males last a lot longer than apes and their genitals are also ridiculously large (in comparison to other primates). Which is why anthropologists think sex serves a social function in humans, human males are far better equipped to please their partner than any other primate.


Also, humans are very closely related to a group of primates called Bonobos. Bonobos live in matriarchal tribes. When two bonobo tribes come into conflict their leaders settle the dispute by having lesbian sex.
Sometimes young members of one tribe will wonder off and try to join other tribes. This makes sense from a genetic diversity stand point. If the leader decides to welcome the newcomer she will do so with sex and then the newcommer will be an official member of the tribe.

Now, it makes perfect sense if humans once had a smilar society that women would have orgasms since the primary form of political negoation would be lesbian sex.
<snip>
Problem is that humans are also closely related to chimpanzees, who solve problems by beating the hell out of each other.(Of course chimps and bonobos are more closely related to each other than they are to us) So if you limit your study to evolution and ape behaviour you're going to end up with a lot of confusion.

Yes, but they're so damned attractive! :D


And they smell and taste good too!