Support NeoGAF

[FreeMufasa]

De gyal dem love me and I love them. That's all I need to know about drives.

 

[Veal]

*eep!*

 

[TheLight]

Will women be able to handle us when they find out that men, can indeed, handle it?

 

[Face it Tiger..]

Great Evi has offered him mercy T-T

be proud

 

[Seance]

Evilore fuels my sex drive.

 

[Mumei]

That was interesting.

Anyway!

Are we still arguing this? Opiate ended this charade a few pages ago with actual evidence showing that men have stronger sex drives than women.

I was actually discussing this with him on IRC a few days ago, and I think he would also agree that it is entirely possible that the conclusions are wrong because of cultural effects - though the differences between gay men and lesbians is probably the safest evidence for clear-cut biological differences, since lesbians are perhaps less affected by moral strictures against female sexual expressiveness. I suppose you'd have to ask lesbians to know that, though!

There are also differences between, say, your sexual behavior, your sexual drive (as well as how you experience it), and your physiological responsiveness to arousal. I got the impression that the book the article was talking about was focusing on physical responsiveness to arousal, with the way it was repeatedly talking about evidences of physical arousal and the organs affected by it. So perhaps they mean that women have a strong sex drive in that they show signs of arousal from a wider range of visual stimuli than men and not necessarily that their subjective desire to act on their arousal is as high as men's is.

 

[BrightEyedPanic]

This "study" might have been true for me a couple years ago. Now I have a very eensy weensy teensy sex drive. I think for different people you'd get different results. I want to say people are just applauding girls for admitting to having a sex drive because it's more celebrated now than it was probably 10 years ago.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

I think the issue for many women has been cultural believes and a general perception that women should be reserved.

If you look at Victorian times, sexual repression was very evident. Those that did want to express themselves were left to visit the 'seedy' areas of town were some pretty depraved stuff (even by today's standard) occurred. It's clear that this wasn't a minority either, but fear of being branded a whore or being shunned by their community was enough of a barrier.

Today I think society has become much more tolerable of women who have an 'eager' approach to sexuality, mainly due to the rise of the celebrity and exposure to all forms of media (magazines, music videos, internet) that deliver it.

Great reply by the way EvilLore, you could have just banned him without a retort but you give a very reasoned response.

 

[akira28]

I've never really thought of Evi as an 'international playboy' before. That's kind of fitting for the legendary narrative story. Or at least the webcomic parody.

 

[braves01]

I've never really thought of Evi as an 'international playboy' before. That's kind of fitting for the legendary narrative story. Or at least the webcomic parody.

Very few people can just say fuck it I'm going to Thailand to train Muay Thai for a month, or I'm going to Europe to sightsee on a whim. That's intl playboy stuff.

 

[InfiniteBento]

Ahahahahaha.....

So true. So true.

 

[Satchel]

Can someone show me the way to this imaginary reality where woman want it as much or more than men?

All the women I know in relationships, including my wife, don't want anywhere near the amount of their partners. Not even close.

 

[InfiniteBento]

Can someone show me the way to this imaginary reality where woman want it as much or more than men?

All the women I know in relationships, including my wife, don't want anywhere near the amount of their partners. Not even close.

I don't think it's imaginary. It's really depending on the women but there are so many variables that come into play here. Some of us embrace that side of us, some of us don't. I can't say that most women want it more than men but I can say those of us that do actually exist somewhere out there. We're just far and few between, it seems.

The men which I've slept with couldn't keep up with my demand for it, personally.

I guess It's really depending on the person. >.>

 

[EscoBlades]

I don't think it's imaginary. It's really depending on the women but there are so many variables that come into play here. Some of us embrace that side of us, some of us don't. I can't say that most women want it more than men but I can say those of us that do actually exist somewhere out there. We're just far and few between, it seems.

The men which I've slept with couldn't keep up with my demand for it, personally.

I guess It's really depending on the person. >.>

Interesting.

Personally i've only been with one woman who's drive matched mine. I've met lots of women who talk up a good game, so to speak, but i get the sense that the reality for them would be quite different.

 

[FartOfWar]

That was interesting.

Anyway!



I was actually discussing this with him on IRC a few days ago, and I think he would also agree that it is entirely possible that the conclusions are wrong because of cultural effects - though the differences between gay men and lesbians is probably the safest evidence for clear-cut biological differences, since lesbians are perhaps less affected by moral strictures against female sexual expressiveness. I suppose you'd have to ask lesbians to know that, though!

There are also differences between, say, your sexual behavior, your sexual drive (as well as how you experience it), and your physiological responsiveness to arousal. I got the impression that the book the article was talking about was focusing on physical responsiveness to arousal, with the way it was repeatedly talking about evidences of physical arousal and the organs affected by it. So perhaps they mean that women have a strong sex drive in that they show signs of arousal from a wider range of visual stimuli than men and not necessarily that their subjective desire to act on their arousal is as high as men's is.

I'm about to finish the book and will share my thoughts on it later I hope, but I am amazed by its dishonesty (Bergner's as opposed to the credible researchers whose work he's capitalizing on with his own unsupported conclusions). I expect the Amazon reviews to reflect as much in the coming weeks as scientists get around to reading it and start seeing the corner cutting and sensationalism that typified Lehrer.

 

[Dizzy]

No shit. Women still downplay it, but men have known for a long time....

 

[InfiniteBento]

Interesting.

Personally i've only been with one woman who's drive matched mine. I've met lots of women who talk up a good game, so to speak, but i get the sense that the reality for them would be quite different.

Being female, I find myself talking with lady friends about sex pretty often. I noticed that most talk a big game yet when it comes to the real dirt, they grow timid or don't actually know what I am talking about. Most women tend to be like "oh yeah, i love sex. I absolutely love it. I'm a dirty whore. etc, etc..." and then when confronted with it because of the statement, they aren't really into it or their significant others, whom I usually am great friends with, tell me a completely different story.

I don't run into many female friends who are legit when it comes to it. It's fun to talk about sex but I find most women really just boast and can't back it up.

It seems like it's almost the equivalent of when males boast to get a female, females boast about sex to get the guy then can't keep up with the expectation they built up for themselves.

It's even worse when you're a female who is absolutely comfortable with your sexual preferences or don't mind discussing it and other females find you disgusting for it. It's pretty harsh but absolutely hilarious to witness.

 

[Future]

In history/present, has there ever been a woman in power known to abuse this power with sex shenanigans? Lots of men known for harems, prostitutes, etc. But never heard of that sex crazed queen or rich woman using their power to get men every minute of the day.

Hard to believe they typical woman can match the typical male sex drive. I will say, though, from my experience that when a woman is horny it seems they are ready for it 10x more than a man. It's almost like for men, at any point they could be rejected so they are used to shutting themselves down if needed...even when clothes are being ripped off. When women are horny though, its from the attitude that sex is happening whether anyone likes it or not .

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

after last night, i can say op is true

 

[EscoBlades]

It seems like it's almost the equivalent of when males boast to get a female, females boast about sex to get the guy then can't keep up with the expectation they built up for themselves.

It's even worse when you're a female who is absolutely comfortable with your sexual preferences or don't mind discussing it and other females find you disgusting for it. It's pretty harsh but absolutely hilarious to witness.

You've hit the nail on the head right here! The last bit especially - i think is as much a factor of societal pressures.

My female friends who, like you, have high sex drives and are comfortable talking about it tend to have more male friends than female ones. Or at least, hang out with us guys more. I've also noticed that other women label them as "fake", pretending to like sex so as to get guys fawning over them. Its like the whole "fake geek/ gamer girl" debate all over again.

 

[Mumei]

I'm about to finish the book and will share my thoughts on it later I hope, but I am amazed by its dishonesty (Bergner's as opposed to the credible researchers whose work he's capitalizing on with his own unsupported conclusions). I expect the Amazon reviews to reflect as much in the coming weeks as scientists get around to reading it and start seeing the corner cutting and sensationalism that typified Lehrer.

Boo.

What Do Women Want? Adventures in the Science of Female Desire

Looks like this is no longer on my list. I am interested in your thoughts, though!

 

[scar tissue]

Boo.

What Do Women Want? Adventures in the Science of Female Desire

Looks like this is no longer on my list. I am interested in your thoughts, though!

[...] as women, men, sexologists, bonobos, erotic gurus, and many others provide frank, vivid answers to the question that has haunted [us] for far too long

This line in the description should've tipped you off. Sounds like bs alright.

 

[unsmashable]

That was interesting.

Anyway!



I was actually discussing this with him on IRC a few days ago, and I think he would also agree that it is entirely possible that the conclusions are wrong because of cultural effects - though the differences between gay men and lesbians is probably the safest evidence for clear-cut biological differences, since lesbians are perhaps less affected by moral strictures against female sexual expressiveness. I suppose you'd have to ask lesbians to know that, though!

There are also differences between, say, your sexual behavior, your sexual drive (as well as how you experience it), and your physiological responsiveness to arousal. I got the impression that the book the article was talking about was focusing on physical responsiveness to arousal, with the way it was repeatedly talking about evidences of physical arousal and the organs affected by it. So perhaps they mean that women have a strong sex drive in that they show signs of arousal from a wider range of visual stimuli than men and not necessarily that their subjective desire to act on their arousal is as high as men's is.

Without actually reading the book, it is hard to make a judgement on the quality of the research it is based on. With these type of books there is often a tendency to cherry pick studies based on the desired preconceived narrative. It is not as if it it is presenting itself as a comprehensive meta-analysis anyway, so I suppose one would not expect that level of scientific rigour.

I can't say I find the studies on these topics that convincing one way or another. There is always a substantial level of uncertainty in what the best way of measuring sexual desire/urges. The more traditional evo-psych studies mentioned linked by Opitate previously in the thread tends to rely on self-reporting in surveys. This type of data doesn't really give any insight into WHY any given result is obtained. It is impossible to make any distinction between societal and biological contributions, and you are relying on the fact that people are actually honest about and/or self-aware of their sexual desires. The conclusions are usually drawn via tenuous allusions to behaviour observed for other primates, and sweeping generalisations are made based on what comes across more as a common sense rationalisation of the status quo, than a well-founded argument backed by solid scientific evidence. There is a reason why the majority of evo—psych research falls into the realm of pseudo-science.

On the other hand, there are the more empirical attempts of actually measuring arousal through blood flow and vaginal moistness etc., but I really cannot see how this could be sufficiently standardized, and certainly not enough to make any substantiated comparison across genders.

 

[Mumei]

Without actually reading the book, it is hard to make a judgement on the quality of the research it is based on. With these type of books there is often a tendency to cherry pick studies based on the desired preconceived narrative. It is not as if it it is presenting itself as a comprehensive meta-analysis anyway, so I suppose one would not expect that level of scientific rigour.

I can't say I find the studies on these topics that convincing one way or another. There is always a substantial level of uncertainty in what the best way of measuring sexual desire/urges. The more traditional evo-psych studies mentioned linked by Opitate previously in the thread tends to rely on self-reporting in surveys. This type of data doesn't really give any insight into WHY any given result is obtained. It is impossible to make any distinction between societal and biological contributions, and you are relying on the fact that people are actually honest about and/or self-aware of their sexual desires. The conclusions are usually drawn via tenuous allusions to behaviour observed for other primates, and sweeping generalisations are made based on what comes across more as a common sense rationalisation of the status quo, than a well-founded argument backed by solid scientific evidence. There is a reason why the majority of evo—psych research falls into the realm of pseudo-science.

On the other hand, there are the more empirical attempts of actually measuring arousal through blood flow and vaginal moistness etc., but I really cannot see how this could be sufficiently standardized, and certainly not enough to make any substantiated comparison across genders.

You make an excellent first impression. Please make it to Member or I'll be sad.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

e.g.: In a study where male researchers approached women and female researches approached men and asked them if they were DTF, men were still a lot more willing to fuck a total stranger than women. Can't remember the percentages but IIRC the difference was huge.
Might be social conditioning, might be innate, probably a mixture of both.

I really dislike it when people cite this study as evidence of innate differences in sex drives.

To put it mildly, a woman has much more to be concerned about being alone with a strange man than does a man with a woman. The study is only proof of what we already know: that women face a far greater threat of sexual violence than men.

 

[wanders]

I think my woman has a bigger sex drive than me