Amazing Scientific Discovery

[Dru]

Sure to win a Nobelle Prize

[Dechristo]

I live by the credo "women always come first".

 

well... most of the time.

[Dru]

I'm curious about the 21% of women that keep on working away solo with no result

[Dechristo]

Guess, for them, it's like rubbing their elbow.

[Dechristo]

...or shining the bald pate of the little man in the boat.

 

I've found shining his head from side-to-side most effective.

[Stonehead]

Yeah,... 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.

 

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.

 

A Critic Takes On the Logic of Female Orgasm

[Dave_Schuldt]

Women who fail to orgasm during sex may be genetically programmed to weed out unreliable men who are a flop between the sheets, according to new research.

 

So is this you Dru? A flop?

[Dru]

YOU will never find out... you're the wrong sex.

You will have to hope for a juicy "kiss and tell" TR. And goats can't type.

[Dechristo]

The female orgasm... has no evolutionary function at all.

 

I believe that to be little consolation to women who want/need to "get-off" now...

 

... or, at least, sometime in the next one hundred millenia.

[Stonehead]

If I understand correctly from the standpoint of evolutionary theory, there is no reason for a woman's ability to orgasm to be selected for during reproduction.

 

Although I don't subscribe to ID, maybe this is a argument for ID and that God is a woman .

 

Uh, well...for the women who do orgasm.

[Dechristo]

Dr. Elisabeth A. Lloyd... argues...the female orgasm... has no evolutionary function at all.

If I understand correctly from the standpoint of evolutionary theory, there is no reason for a woman's ability to orgasm to be selected for during reproduction.

 

Although, the evidence I cite is admittedly anecdotal, I believe there is cause to assert that a woman's ability to orgasm has evolutionary function in selective reproductory processes.

 

In general, men more often desire to engage in coitus with women excited by the act; this produces the potential for multiple couplings by a man with the same woman. The more a woman enjoys sexual intercourse, the more likely she is to perform repeated acts - not with the same man, necessarily. Both factors increase the probability that women who enjoy coitus (polyphiloprogenitive), more than their female competitors, will successfully reproduce.

[minx]

oh good dog this is the lamest orgasm discussion ever!

[Dechristo]

What... you want more details of engorged, lubricious, and tingly sexual organs massaging each other?

 

The discussion wasn't meant to bring you to orgasm, butt, we can go there if you want.

 

[minx]

no thanks, other people have that handled.

 

what i meant is that it all sounds a bit like bunk to me. good grief when we take things like orgasms to finite scientific conclusions it sort of ruins the whole thing eh?

[Kitergal]

"Women who orgasm very easily may be more likely to be satisfied with poor quality men. "

 

Christ....That explains it all!! spam!!

[thelawgoddess]

[Dechristo]

"Women who orgasm very easily may be more likely to be satisfied with poor quality men. "

Christ....That explains it all!! spam!!

 

That engenders one end of the subject, butt, does not preclude the assertion that orgasmic women may procreate more readily than non-orgasmic females. As an aside, I doubt the sybaritic women described in the quote have a complaint in sexual satisfaction; they have other complaints, no doubt.

 

Are some uncomfortable with this discussion? Why is that so?

 

What blocks objective discourse on this subject with allowance for instances of wryness?

 

Too personal? The ubiquity of the subject and its evolutionary implications allow for unprejudicial inclusion of all in the discussion. The internet format allows various degrees of incognito participation; any modicum or height of prudence can find accommodation.

 

Indiscernible uncomfortableness? Could the lack of comfort be due to personal issues of control? In a culture where control of every aspect of life is heralded, treatment of a subject where individuals experience the loss of control will produce discomfort, uneasiness, and annoyance in many; the same effect can be recognized in those that experience embarrassment in the act of sneezing in public.

 

Relevantly, the issue of control finds pertinence in the subject of this website: the activity of climbing is inherent with the experience of the dynamic of control. Whether climbing at the limit of one’s ability or the uncontrolled forces of the environment, the climbing participant will experience the lack of control. We love the epic tale, rarely do we surrender the need for control to enjoy the epic experience. Still, it is the gamble of control that is part of climbing’s lure.

 

Personally, the physiology of human sexuality is one of many awesome marvels we may experience. The discussion of this topic is no less salient to our lives than any other topic of science, politics, religion, or health (although, I allow that a moderator may disagree).

 

After all, this is Spray… the thin-skinned, timorous, and wan with trepidation are warned. Pity and irony: the lack of callous promotes sensitivity which is a requisite factor in the subject orgasm.

[Kitergal]

"the same effect can be recognized in those that experience embarrassment in the act of sneezing in public."

 

do you know there is a direct relationship between how loud a person sneezes and how they orgasm? It's true!

[Mr._Natural]

really? medical journal reference please.

[Dechristo]

Pray tell.

 

Give it up on the correlation.

[jmace]

"Women who orgasm very easily may be more likely to be satisfied with poor quality men. "

 

It goes both ways, tapping somethng that finished 15 minutes ago aint that great either.

[ChrisT]

The study seems to suggest, for women anyway, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Kitergal]

google it. you'll find more than you want to know!!

[jordop]

.

Edited June 4, 2021 by jordop

[jmace]

Tim Spector of St Thomas's hospital in London, who led the research, said: "The theory is that the orgasm is an evolutionary way of seeing if men can prove themselves to be likely good providers or dependable, patient and caring enough to look after the kids."

 

First of all Tim Spector obviously has the best job possible

 

Second how come most of the women I meet want to wait at least a few dates or more before sex to find out all of the above when according to Tim, these matters could be quickly assesed within 45 minutes??

 

Do the women out there think they may need to re-asses their dating strategy??