Incorrectly positioned clitoris???

OK,

Here’s something that has been bothering me for a while, and reading TT’s sex tips for men from a gay woman thread reminded me of it again.

The human female is the only animal on earth with an organ purely for pleasure, right? The clitoris. So, you would think this would have evolved so women like sex and orgasm etc to facilitate breeding.

Question 1. - Do no other female animals orgasm? Do male animals orgasm?

Now the real question…

Question 2. - If the clitoris is to make women like sex to promote breeding, why do most women not come from intercourse? Surely this kind of defeats the evolutionary purpose?

I have also read studies which point to the fact that if a women orgasms during intercourse she is more likely to get pregnant than if she doesn’t, so then again, why do most women not come through intercourse????

Well, chew on that guys….

Question 2: Our ancestors had much bigger balls than today’s poor excuses for men. Together with the fact that doggy style was even more popular than today… see? :)

Female chimps have clitorises. When scientists strapped vibrators to them, they demonstrated signs of orgasm. I assume this is true for many other animals, as well.

Why isn’t vaginal sex more pleasurable? I think it’s because female orgasm is not required for reproduction. Female orgasm is probably essentially a social adaptation that helps keep women interested in men, and men interested in pleasing women.

Yeah - only the men hunt for sex in the wild, mostly on the discovery channel you see the women trying to run away, lmao.
Also, I have heard that only us and dolphins have sex for “fun”. Do they have something similar to a clit?

Also, I don’t think any male animal apart from us enjoys it - its just intincts to release semen into some hott ass. (not that I personally find the asses of different animals to be attractive)

I would not want to be the scientist that strapped vibes on monkey clits for a living. What would you tell your kids? Father’s day at school and explaining what you did for a living to their classmates would be real amusing.

That’s some interesting thoughts, BigJ.

It’s funny, but last night I was thinking along similar lines of thought. My main question being, what is the ‘right’ position for the human animal to have sex? Haven’t really done much study on other animals, but when you see animals having sex on National Geographic or other nature shows, there’s never any variety of position. The male usually mounts the female, does his thing, and then it’s over.

I mean, there must be one scientifically correct position for humans, right? I believe the missionary position has a religious basis to it. Any ideas?

Yes. Doggy style. Big ball sack pounding against the clitoris, provoking so called “vaginal orgasms”. That’s my idea of a scientifically correct position.

I remember seeing something (might have read it, might have been on tv) which said that missionary was evolutionary as well, as it creates a deeper bond when the partners are looking into each others eyes and we were walking upright instead of all fours etc.

It also put this forth as the origin of breasts, being a mimick for the buttocks if your going at it missionary. It would also make more sense for the clit being where it is to get more stimulation. However, we’re back to the fact that the majority of females don’t orgasm through penetration.

I wonder if any research has been done on this?..

#8

Chimps don’t need large mammalian protruberances (anybody recognize the quote?) to breastfeed, neither do women. There are various - and contradicting - theories on the evolution of breasts. The one I prefer is that we are the only ones to predominantly walk erect; most other primates have their partners behinds in eyehight. Once we started standing up on the plains, breasts evolved as a clear signal to the rather daft males that “yes, this is a female, see the bumps? What do they remind you of?”

#6

History has it that the missionary position got its name from the practices of the missionaries - that it was the preferred style used by the european missionaries.

Chimps again - regular chimps apparently make love from behind, whereas the dwarf chimp is the only primate that regularly has intercourse facing each other. But I’ve seen nature films where gorillas faced each other - joined groin to groin, leaning away from each other (up in a tree actually, pretty acrobatic stuff) - so they it can happen among other primates as well.

#1, 8

I have a theory for you: if the female was easily satisfied, that would encourage quickies. Since the male has to work for it, to satisfy her I mean, he shows concern and caring. That is a good characteristic for the one to choose as mate and father of your offspring, thus a benefit in evolution.

Pretty good theory, huh? It should even be appealing to the other sex!

It probably is valid in the average relationship as well - she is difficult to please, in proving you can do so she evolves into something even harder to please and so on…

regards,

Excellent theory, mgus! This would mean that the harder it is for her to get orgasm, the more selective it works. She has to go through a lot of guys to find the right one for her. The only difficulty with the theory is that in ancient times, this search process would lead to become pregnant with many different fathers, thus having many kids. Few of them would survive without quickly finding that trusting partner to support them.

Nowadays with contraceptives we are less likely to see this, we just see the end result: the long lasting relationship. Maybe it is possible to verify scientifically that the serious relationships tend to last longer if the woman does not orgasm very easily. She will have a lot of short test drives in the beginning of her sexual career of course, then settle for the one that can satisfy her. Intriguing to speculate about the wider consequences. When she finds that ‘unique’ man who is able to get her to orgasm she tend to become emotionally attached to him for life, and is less likely to cheat - she believes from experience that no other man can satisfy her like her life partner.

Who is that guy? We already know that he is enduring, skillful and caring, maybe he also has a heavier ball sack than the rest as useful instrument of making her reach orgasm. For us PE’ers, however, the critical question is how big penis he is likely to have.

Is he likely to be extremely well endowed? Probably not. With a large piece and the importance that is attached to it, that guy finds it tends to attract girls with little effort from his side. He can pick and choose. There is always another one if she turns out to be ‘lousy in bed’, i.e., unable to enjoy his valued equipment and get orgasm. Besides, she will not feel satisfied either.

If this reasoning is correct, the guy in long lasting relationships is likely to have an ‘average’ penis, broadly defined. In principle it would be perfectly alright with a really small one, but since that affects confidence negatively due to the value that HE attaches to it (not she because she knows better from experience), he will not be able to be the secure life partner she seeks.

Conclusion: next time you see a girl that tells you she have had guys with larger dicks, smile. Since she obviously didn’t stay with any of them, she might have be looking for just the qualities you have to get her satisfied.

Wrt clit, could it be anything to do with the nature of erection in humans compared to most (all?) other primates? It’s a pretty big unit compared to our relatives, so maybe the vagina needs an ‘on’ switch to open the doors rather than the male just grabbing hold, extend the telescopic unit and off load in 10 seconds flat.

Unicorn,

Yes, she’d have to go through a few males before she found the caring one - on the other hand she’d know he was caring, and stick to him in the future. If she was easily satisfied by anyone / everyone she’d not really know (from that at least) until it was to late. And not every screwing results in a pregnancy, after all. So I feel there is some merit to my theory after all! ;)

Also, in some species the females can control pregnancy I believe; at least I’ve read that female wolves can regress (not abort, regress - up to a certain limit) the fetus in case there is a sudden change in conditions, such as shortage of food, that would be negative for offspring. So if there’s barely enough food for her to scrape by herself, she can’t afford to waste energy on a pregnancy if the offspring has no chance of survival anyway. I do not know if primates can (or have been able earlier) do this or control pregnancy in other ways than to say “no” (grunt “no”?).

regards,

Very comforting thought!

regards,