[Paleopsych] NS: The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution by Elisabeth A Lloyd

Premise Checker checker at panix.com
Fri Jul 1 01:32:38 UTC 2005

The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution by Elisabeth A 

      * 14 May 2005
      * Gail Vines

    SEXUAL climax for the male is, evolutionarily speaking, rather dull.
    Its raison d'être seems crystal clear. Orgasm fosters men's
    reproductive success, because it is linked to the ejaculation of
    sperm. Only devotees of tantric yoga, apparently, can achieve orgasm
    without ejaculation.

    But women too are able to experience orgasm. Sexologists have
    documented the "clonic contraction of pelvic and abdominal muscles
    initiated by a spinal reflex", and, in Elisabeth Lloyd's favourite
    definition, the "combination of waves of a very pleasurable sensation
    and mounting of tensions, culminating in a fantastic sensation and
    release of tension". What has puzzled generations of thinkers,
    however, is why women, as well as men, should have evolved the
    capacity for such sexual pleasure.

    Over the past century, scores of biologists have sought an answer in
    natural selection. In The Case of the Female Orgasm, Lloyd, who is a
    professor of biology at Indiana University, has totted up 21
    alternative explanations. All these "adaptationist" theories share one
    thing: the belief that women have evolved the capacity for orgasm
    because it fosters their reproductive success. In one of the most
    popular accounts, female orgasm is the cement in pair bonds: mutual
    pleasure fosters happy monogamous couples who share childcare ever
    after. The latest idea, "sperm competition", is more hydraulic in
    tone. It argues that orgasmic contractions of the uterus are designed
    to suck up sperm from the vagina, fostering the reproductive success
    of the male who gives pleasure to his partner.

    There is one big problem with all these ideas: no study has ever
    established a reliable link between a woman's orgasmic capabilities
    and her fertility or fecundity. And that, says Lloyd, should
    immediately set warning lights flashing.

    And there's another problem: the glib assumption that female orgasm is
    designed to happen during heterosexual intercourse. In fact, the data
    shows that many women struggle to climax during conventional
    penetrative sex, and usually do so only with direct clitoral
    stimulation. Yet during masturbation both women and men can achieve
    orgasm in about four minutes.

    The conclusion, Lloyd argues, must surely be that the female orgasm
    has no biological function. Rather, it's on a par with the male nipple
    - an accident of shared developmental pathways in the early embryo.
    Because women need nipples to suckle their babies, men end up with
    rudimentary versions too. They may not give milk, but like the
    female's they have erotic sensibilities.

    As for genitalia, because men need ejaculatory penises, women end up
    with clitorises capable of similar sexual pleasures. Lloyd reckons
    that biases in evolutionary thinking have blinkered generations of
    mostly male biologists. It is time to give up the adaptationist's
    fallacy and face facts. The late Stephen Jay Gould, who encouraged
    Lloyd's long-standing investigation, must be cheering from above.

More information about the paleopsych mailing list