quote:

---

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.

. . . .

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

. . . .

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

. . . .

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."

---

quote:

---

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.

---

Och, Jonathan Swift would have loved these people -- as raw material.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
I laughed all the way through at the shorter version of this report that ran this a.m. in the G&M, and it is even funnier in full. Y'all must read page 2 of the NYT version. Watch the academics pull each other's hair!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raos:
Um, I remember watching a show, I think it was either sex files or sexual secrets, about the orgasm, and they said on the show that the female orgasm actually does help promote conception, if it occurs after a male has ejaculated into her. The orgasm causes the cervix to be dunked down into the pooled semen at the cervix, and actually sucks some of the semen through the cervix and into the uterus.

---

This is discussed in the article:

quote:

---

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."

---

quote:

---

Y'all must read page 2 of the NYT version. Watch the academics pull each other's hair!

---

quote:

---

In a phone interview, Dr. Alcock said that he had not read [Dr. Lloyd's] new book ...

---

quote:

---

In a phone interview, Dr. Thornhill said that he had not read Dr. Lloyd's book ...

---

And so forth. Hilarious!

And a perfect example of why strict Darwinism can't explain everything:

quote:

---

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.

---

quote:

---

I dunno. If I conduct an experiment, that isn't scientific because of too small of a sample size, it's simply inconclusive. If I test gravity by dropping one penny, just because is based off of one trial, it doesn't disprove my findings, they can still be true.

---

quote:

---

I've never seen anybody bob for apples with anything near the vigor the footage showed.

---

quote:

---

Actually just stay up 'til about 3am and keep your set tuned to TLC. They're all science by day, but once the sun goes down they break out the soft-focus filters and the "wokka-cha" soundtrack.

---

quote:

---

CAMBRIDGE, MA -- Announcing 'a major advance in the age-old quest to unlock the secrets at the heart of human sexuality', researchers at Harvard's Center For The Graphic Depiction Of The Human Sexual Act confirmed Monday that, with the aid of experimental new high-speed photographic technology, they have successfully captured the elusive male orgasm on film.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by brebis noire:
me + whoosh =

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
Ask your local Blockbuster if they carry "Semen-Dipping Cervixes of Spring Break vol. 7"

Actually just stay up 'til about 3am and keep your set tuned to TLC. They're all science by day, but once the sun goes down they break out the soft-focus filters and the "wokka-cha" soundtrack.

---

Damn you! I'm a work and I had to leave the room after reading this. My Pepsi went through my nose. I think my coworkers thought I was crying.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raos:
I dunno. If I conduct an experiment, that isn't scientific because of too small of a sample size, it's simply inconclusive. If I test gravity by dropping one penny, just because is based off of one trial, it doesn't disprove my findings, they can still be true.

---

But then, more to the point, what size of sample would you be using?

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: Cueball ]

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by brebis noire:
[Orgasm + whoosh X (etc., etc.)

---

OK, I'll bite. Assuming we know the values of the smilies*, or that they're simply constants, and similarly with (whoosh) and (me again) -- at least, from your point of view, you're presumably not an unknown -- we have

[Orgasm + whoosh X / ] = 2( X ) - [me again + ¾whoosh]

giving

Orgasm = 2( X ) - [me again + ¾whoosh] - whoosh X /

But somehow that doesn't look right. It tells us that to have Orgasm, you need (confused), which is plausible, but you have to subtract (me again). That is, you won't be there. Doesn't seem fair, somehow. Or have I made an algrebraic error?

*had to delete some, because UBB allows only eight per posting.

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Contrarian:
In other words; how big is your sample size? Once again a thread about women suddenly becomes all about men.

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]

---

Quite right. I am sorry.

Q: How can you tell when a woman has an orgasm.

A: Who cares?

After personally conducting hundreds of experiments over the years, with several women, I have found no evidence of this so called "female orgasm".

But, just to be sure, I'll do it once more.

quote:

---

(psst... Tommy... it doesn't work if the woman is present only in your imagination...)

---

Nor does it if you can be "back in 5 minutes"

quote:

---

Originally posted by 'lance:

Orgasm = 2( X ) - [me again + ¾whoosh] - whoosh X /

But somehow that doesn't look right. It tells us that to have Orgasm, you need (confused), which is plausible, but you have to subtract (me again). That is, you won't be there. Doesn't seem fair, somehow. Or have I made an algrebraic error?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
Hey, I'm 46. I think it's enough to be responsible for my own orgasms without being held accountable for someone else's.

At some point, female sufferage and equality has to include personal responsibility, don't you think?

---

And if your partner decided that from now on as soon as s/he has come, sex is over and if you're not done you'll have to finish yourself off, you'd be OK with that?

quote:

---

However, that's only a mathematical form representing transcendence...I'm there, but not there, don'tcha know. Mysterium tremendum, if you like.

---

Fair enough. I was about to say, sounds like female orgasms really are more powerful, but then thought back to one or two, er, near-transcendent experiences, and...

... uh, y'all will excuse me a moment, I trust?

[ 18 May 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]

WHAT IN HELL ARE ALL YOU YOUNGER PEOPLE WRITING ABOUT????

Little birds dipping their beaks in glasses of water...
people bobbing for apples...
and algebraic smileyfaces...

all make more sense to me than anyone expecting a pack of academics to have any idea at all about orgasm.

it's a japanese paperfolding art form, right?
or is it an herb added to spaghetti sauce?

or the person who plays the organ in church (I always thought that was kind of tacky, myself. I mean pray in your bedroom, yes, but quit with your organ in church)

I'll bet you that the journalist completely misunderstood (or deformed) whatever it was the academics were talking about.

[ 19 May 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]

quote:

---

So academics shouldn't study orgasms? Who should study orgasms? Should orgasm study permits be given away?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anne cameron:
orgasm.

it's a japanese paperfolding art form, right?
or is it an herb added to spaghetti sauce?

or the person who plays the organ in church (I always thought that was kind of tacky, myself. I mean pray in your bedroom, yes, but quit with your organ in church)

---

I always thought it was the stuff you thought was pot but bought anyway.

Give me a C! Give me an L! Give me an I! Give me a T! Give me an O! ... Well. You get the idea.

(I hope, EA, that you've at least mentioned this wonderful word to your son? So many young men today, so sadly uninformed... As long as he doesn't just go stampeding for it .)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hailey:

The person having them. I really can't see them as a matter of public interest.

---

Well, Cosmo mag clearly doesn't agree with you!

And academics have orgasms too, you know! You shouldn't believe those nasty rumours going 'round.

[ 20 May 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Well. My nipples don't connect directly to my wee wee. However, I have had a number of women tell me that their nipples connect directly to the center of all things that a good and wonderful in the world.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Surferosad:
And academics have orgasms too, you know! You shouldn't believe those nasty rumours going 'round.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Granola Girl:
Give me a C! Give me an L! Give me an I! Give me a T! Give me an O! ... Well. You get the idea.

(I hope, EA, that you've at least mentioned this wonderful word to your son? So many young men today, so sadly uninformed... As long as he doesn't just go stampeding for it .)

Academics. Always making things more complicated than they need to be. Who cares why??? Just enjoy....

---

Yes GG, he's gotten the John Cleese lesson a few times.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Contrarian:

Alone... in their offices... with computers...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Agent 204:

That actually makes more sense than anything. Many aspects of our anatomy and physiology are evolutionary leftovers- look at the appendix.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
Once again, I'll have to play the role of wet blanket skeptic.

After personally conducting hundreds of experiments over the years, with several women, I have found no evidence of this so called "female orgasm".

But, just to be sure, I'll do it once more.

Back in five.

---

Here Tommy....lemme give you a hand.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Avans:

And why do guys have nipples anyway?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hailey:

The person having them. I really can't see them as a matter of public interest.

---

quote:

---

The ability of a woman to enjoy sex to the full has more to do with her genes than her partner, according to a study indicating that the female orgasm has a strong genetic basis.

. . . .

What these results show is that as well as this wide variation, there is clear evidence of a biological, underlying influence here that we can't purely attribute to culture, upbringing, religion or race. There is something biological that's determining some of this large variation between women and if something is heritable it is unlikely to be by chance."

---

quote:

---

skdadl: There's another thread around here, started yesterday, I think, about that report.

---