Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geek" data-source="post: 2585183" data-attributes="member: 246624">I think I know why science does not understand the female orgasm.&nbsp; It is because science excels when it breaks free of context, history, human complexities and anthropology, but when a topic requires one to grasp context, history, human complexities and anthropology, then science, especially the hard sciences, can fall short.&nbsp; Also, the nature of the female orgasm is a comparative question, but human sexuality is highly (but not entirely) derived; It is difficult to make a sensible graph or table comparing aspects of sexuality across mammals that usefully includes humans.&nbsp; It is not as impossible as making such a graph or table with &quot;language&quot; (which is entirely unique to humans) but still, it is difficult.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.researchblogging.org" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></a>There is another problem as well.&nbsp; Female orgasm is actually a lot like male orgasm, and probably serves the same evolutionary role with one small but important difference.&nbsp; But, that one small but important difference, the ejaculation of seminal fluid by males, blinds researchers to any other function of male orgasms.&nbsp; Seminal fluid is distracting.&nbsp; Male ejaculation and female ovulation are rough homologues, but entirely different in their physiology and timing.&nbsp; Were it the case that female ovulation could only happen together with orgasm&nbsp; ...&nbsp; well, the human world would be a very different place but at least science would not be fumbling around in search of an answer for this enigma.&nbsp; The reason I bring any of this up is because of a paper1, just published, that makes the claim that the &quot;byproduct&quot; theory of female orgasms is unsupported. So, I&#039;d like to take a moment to explain the byproduct theory, to explain why this paper does not really address it let alone refute it, and then we&#039;ll get back to the question of what female orgasms really are for.&nbsp; The byproduct theory will not survive this discussion.&nbsp; &nbsp; The byproduct theory originates with the following observations:&nbsp;<a href="http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/09/coming_to_terms_with_the_femal.php" target="_blank">Read the rest of this post...</a> | <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/09/coming_to_terms_with_the_femal.php#commentsArea" target="_blank">Read the comments on this post...</a><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/GregLadensBlog/~4/erx3X9mZRtk" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geek, post: 2585183, member: 246624"] I think I know why science does not understand the female orgasm. It is because science excels when it breaks free of context, history, human complexities and anthropology, but when a topic requires one to grasp context, history, human complexities and anthropology, then science, especially the hard sciences, can fall short. Also, the nature of the female orgasm is a comparative question, but human sexuality is highly (but not entirely) derived; It is difficult to make a sensible graph or table comparing aspects of sexuality across mammals that usefully includes humans. It is not as impossible as making such a graph or table with "language" (which is entirely unique to humans) but still, it is difficult. [URL="http://www.researchblogging.org"][IMG]http://www.researchblogging.org/public/citation_icons/rb2_large_gray.png[/IMG][/URL]There is another problem as well. Female orgasm is actually a lot like male orgasm, and probably serves the same evolutionary role with one small but important difference. But, that one small but important difference, the ejaculation of seminal fluid by males, blinds researchers to any other function of male orgasms. Seminal fluid is distracting. Male ejaculation and female ovulation are rough homologues, but entirely different in their physiology and timing. Were it the case that female ovulation could only happen together with orgasm ... well, the human world would be a very different place but at least science would not be fumbling around in search of an answer for this enigma. The reason I bring any of this up is because of a paper1, just published, that makes the claim that the "byproduct" theory of female orgasms is unsupported. So, I'd like to take a moment to explain the byproduct theory, to explain why this paper does not really address it let alone refute it, and then we'll get back to the question of what female orgasms really are for. The byproduct theory will not survive this discussion. The byproduct theory originates with the following observations: [URL="http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/09/coming_to_terms_with_the_femal.php"]Read the rest of this post...[/URL] | [URL="http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/09/coming_to_terms_with_the_femal.php#commentsArea"]Read the comments on this post...[/URL][IMG]http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/GregLadensBlog/~4/erx3X9mZRtk[/IMG] [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…