Rachel has just informed me (mid revision cram) that the field of ‘Adaptive Behaviour’ (psychology) has still not decided whether female orgasms serve any adaptive purpose.
It’s quite an interesting question. Since:
- Not having an orgasm /doesn’t/ stop women from initiating sex, and more importantly:
- Not having an orgasm -certainly- doesn’t stop conception
It reminds me of the time Marc told me about some guy in the ‘evolutionary psychology’ lecture giving his wonderful opinion that “orgasms in women are a social pressure, since everyone else is having one so they decide to have orgasms too..” ( I can’t believe he said that in a predominately female course..)
But still.. it’s got me thinking now. Probably a little bit too much, and almost certainly in a ‘I feel like I’ve been up all night because my brain hurts’ way.
I mean, yeah, once you -have- an orgasm it’s kinda an incentive to have sex again. But there are still a good proportion of women who ‘don’t know if they’ve ever had one’ (=no) and an even greater proportion of men who don’t have a clue. (hint: be a lesbian)
..in which case, assuming it’s possible to get *more* orgasms from homosexuality (or self-manipulation, or use of toys which -don’t- go floppy) (note: I’m **really** brain fried so this train of thought is derailed and probably flying away by now) then if *anything*, female orgasms have an anti-adaptive purpose… (since if they’re that good, and you don’t need men (in fact it’s better not to) then why bother with the whole mating-for-kids thing in the first place??)
As I said to Rachel “It’s just one of those things god put there to make things fair” (which brings into question thoughts of higher power which I REALLY am not going to touch on right now..)
So yeah. Evolution theory and female orgasms? Any idea? (over to you)