FreeMufasa
Junior Member
De gyal dem love me and I love them. That's all I need to know about drives.
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'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.
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. >.>
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.
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.
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.
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!
[...] 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
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 evopsych 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.
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.