Women have no sexuality

[Girth girl]

This is utter hogwash and no doubt peddled by men who wouldn’t know how to bring a woman to orgasm if they had the best cock and vibrator on the planet.

When will we throw off this Christian bullshit, and realise women are sexual and loving beings, and not bloody playthings for the "great" male desire...

I can't believe people even get funding for such bullshit.

I'm a woman and I have a healthy sexuality, and find both men and women attractive. I have my types... but that doesn't mean I have no sexuality.

He forgets that particular sexualities are socialised into children and that if women seem to have no sexuality it's because she's taught not to have one so she can be a man's servant.
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

 

[abvavrg]

This is utter hogwash and no doubt peddled by men who wouldn’t know how to bring a woman to orgasm if they had the best cock and vibrator on the planet.

When will we throw off this Christian bullshit, and realise women are sexual and loving beings, and not bloody playthings for the "great" male desire...

I can't believe people even get funding for such bullshit.

I'm a woman and I have a healthy sexuality, and find both men and women attractive. I have my types... but that doesn't mean I have no sexuality.

He forgets that particular sexualities are socialised into children and that if women seem to have no sexuality it's because she's taught not to have one so she can be a man's servant.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with the hostility of your response here...

I think, as has been elucidated in other posts, "sexuality" is not the term actually used. "Sexual preference" is the appropriate phrase. I'm not sure if that'd change your opinion on the matter or not, but maybe it might make a difference.

As far as sexuality being socialized into people (at least men), there's quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. "The most direct evidence comes from a handful of cases, some of them circumcision accidents, in which boy babies have lost their penises and been reared as female. Despite every social inducement to the opposite, they grow up desiring women as partners, not men." So for men, at the very least, sexuality seems to be hardwired from the beginning.

Apparently, however, women are different. I don't think it's fair to attack the researchers like you did, given the aim of the study. It merely showed that women respond sexually to more diverse stimuli.

Here's the original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/h...d=1&adxnnlx=1176663759-9Fw5BUvOj7xDeSIO64WU+A

 

[Kassokilleri2ff]

Human sexuality is still a mystery in the world of science. I like the fact that people are researching it, but then again, only competent people should. Whoever made this study had the right intentions, but his poor use of the proper words exposes him as only a psuedo scientist lol.
I would like very much to find out the origins of our sexuality, one reason, because christians think its a choice to be gay, and if science could prove that wrong, then that would be another point in my long list of reasons why im athiest lolz.

 

[rob_just_rob]

I'm not a woman, of course, but this sounds like the kind of misogyny-dressed-up-as-psychology that we've all seen before.

 

[sdg475]

This is ridiculous...just because sexuality is more complex than straight or gay does not mean it is non-existent.

 

[B_big dirigible]

IMHO, men do separate sexual arousal from emotional arousal. And I think it's fair to say that women have a tough time understanding that.

Interesting observations; you may be on to something. Evidently, you're not just another pretty shirt.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

Not true and a silly study............

 

[D_Kay_Sarah_Sarah]

Sorry but i see this theory as being completly backwards.

The fact that i can get aroused from a man or a beautiful woman in my mind makes me all the more sexual. If i had NO sexuality i would be A sexual and wouldnt be aroused by anything, no matter how erotic or subdued it is.

And turned on by animals...Thats just wrong

 

[the_reverend]

When will we throw off this Christian bullshit, and realise women are sexual and loving beings, and not bloody playthings for the "great" male desire...

well, i do have to take some issue with dismissing this as "Christian" bullshit. how does religion enter into this at all? i agree that there is a hypocrisy at work in our more patriarchal societies that demands women be sexual objects for men, but not sexual beings in and of themselves which is ridiculous but targeting Christianity for this is rather unfair and unnecessary. yes, there are elements of the church that are infected with this backwards mentality, but the mentality was not created by the church or the religion.

I am a Christian. I've dated Christians. I have friends who are Christians. And the one thing i can assure you is that being a Christian doesn't necessarily keep you from being a sexual being or exploring your sexuality hand in hand with your spirituality.

 

[Aplus]

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with the hostility of your response here...

I think, as has been elucidated in other posts, "sexuality" is not the term actually used. "Sexual preference" is the appropriate phrase. I'm not sure if that'd change your opinion on the matter or not, but maybe it might make a difference.

As far as sexuality being socialized into people (at least men), there's quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. "The most direct evidence comes from a handful of cases, some of them circumcision accidents, in which boy babies have lost their penises and been reared as female. Despite every social inducement to the opposite, they grow up desiring women as partners, not men." So for men, at the very least, sexuality seems to be hardwired from the beginning.

Apparently, however, women are different. I don't think it's fair to attack the researchers like you did, given the aim of the study. It merely showed that women respond sexually to more diverse stimuli.

Here's the original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/h...d=1&adxnnlx=1176663759-9Fw5BUvOj7xDeSIO64WU+A

Sounds more like theories and opinions to me. Can't say I saw much fact in it, or any proof the supposed studies took place. I flat out don't believe women are more responsive to sexual images then men are. Well I could easily believe it, but I'd need a lot more than theories or opinions to actually believe it. This study seems more like wishful thinking or delusions IMO. I'd agree with Uncut that it's a silly study.

 

[CPearl]

i've found that the women i've met, in general, have a much more fluid sexuality.

That's actually what a study recently cited in the NY Times concluded. These researchers claim their research shows that women don't have as rigid a sexual orientation as men. I don't think the poster meant to say that women weren't actually sexual.

 

[Girth girl]

well, i do have to take some issue with dismissing this as "Christian" bullshit. how does religion enter into this at all? i agree that there is a hypocrisy at work in our more patriarchal societies that demands women be sexual objects for men, but not sexual beings in and of themselves which is ridiculous but targeting Christianity for this is rather unfair and unnecessary. yes, there are elements of the church that are infected with this backwards mentality, but the mentality was not created by the church or the religion.

I am a Christian. I've dated Christians. I have friends who are Christians. And the one thing i can assure you is that being a Christian doesn't necessarily keep you from being a sexual being or exploring your sexuality hand in hand with your spirituality.

[FONT=&quot]
Christianity is inherently linked with the creation and perpetuation of Western patriarchy.[/FONT]

 

[Girth girl]

I'm not a woman, of course, but this sounds like the kind of misogyny-dressed-up-as-psychology that we've all seen before.

Bingo!

 

[the_reverend]

[FONT=&quot]Christianity is inherently linked with the creation and perpetuation of Western patriarchy.[/FONT]

i'd say it's the other way around, that the perpetuation of the patriarchy glommed itself on to Christianity, along with several other not so flattering traits when the Church became overly institutionalized and politicized. there is nothing inherently misogynistic about the faith itself or of its believers, so blaming the ill logic and/or wording of this study on Christianity is rather inaccurate, particularly since the faith of those doing the study is not known. and its relevance to this subject is suspect at best.

 

[Girth girl]

i'd say it's the other way around, that the perpetuation of the patriarchy glommed itself on to Christianity, along with several other not so flattering traits when the Church became overly institutionalized and politicized. there is nothing inherently misogynistic about the faith itself or of its believers, so blaming the ill logic and/or wording of this study on Christianity is rather inaccurate, particularly since the faith of those doing the study is not known. and its relevance to this subject is suspect at best.

[FONT=&quot]Pfft, apologists. No historian in his or her right mind would say that Christianity is not inherently linked to patriarchy.
I guess history is suspect!
[/FONT]

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

I'm calling dibs on the TARDIS!

Never really thought of women as omni-sexual before. Might explain some things though!

Any science researchers on LPSG?

 

[the_reverend]

[FONT=&quot]Pfft, apologists. No historian in his or her right mind would say that Christianity is not inherently linked to patriarchy. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I guess history is suspect![/FONT]

again, there's a difference between the Church and the faith it espouses. so kindly don't lump us all together is all i'm asking. yeesh...

 

[ClaireTalon]

I'm not sure whether I completely get this. Just because women got aroused by more things than men, they shall not have a sexuality? I doubt this. Clearly, there are straight women who don't get turned on by seeing another naked woman or by the thought of having lesbian sex, and lesbians who get sick by the thought of having sex with a man. So I think yes, women do have a sexuality.

On my personal account, I have some experimenting experience with girl-girl-sex, some 20 years and more ago. It was that, experimenting, it didn't mess with my appetite for men, didn't turn me lesbian or something. It neither disgusted me nor did it arouse me more than a man could have. When I see a naked woman today, I have no special feeling for that (except maybe if Mme. Zora would jump my bones with her strap-on :wink.

I am straight, I'd say a 100 %. Probably not by dividing all my sexual partners into male and female (I'd be about 99.99 % then), but by my desires and appetite, I'm completely straight.

Recently I read a comment from a researcher investigating sexual preference, who said that he wasn't "even sure if women have a sexuality."

The reason, apparently, is that (most?) women become aroused by photos of naked men, women, sexual action, or even animals having sex-- while most men responded to either gay or straight porn (though this was not always in line with their verbalized sexual preference).

So as a woman on a site about large penises, what are your thoughts on this statement? If you identify as 100% straight, do you think this statement is appropriate? What are your opinions on your *own* sexuality?

 

[B_capslock]

My GF gets turned on by romantic scenes. A male paying attention to a female. We have two ducks, drake and a hen, that nest on our property. This time of year he has sex with her in the water next the house. He holds her underwater and bangs the back of her head with his bill as he mates with her. She is basically submerged and can't even come up for air as he hits her dozens of times while on her back.

My GF thinks his "ducky" style reminds her of my technique when I grab her pony tail and slam her doggy. When she sees the duck doing his thing, she will get a grin on her face and make me promise to do it "ducky" style when we get to bed.

Women like attention a lot, men like to orgasm a lot.

Women like to see females getting attention, men like to see orgasms. Porn with out a pop shot? It would never sell to men.

IMO

"ducky" style... I luv that.... one of those funny secret moments that couples share... Too funny... Thanks for the story....

 

[dreamer20]

Recently I read a comment from a researcher of sexual preference, who said that he wasn't "even sure if women have a clearly defined sexuality.

...while most men responded to either gay or straight porn (though this was not always in line with their verbalized sexual preference).

I added the words cleary defined as the researcher has learned that there are individuals who respond to all of his erotic stimuli. Instead of saying that his results were inconclusive for them, and women in general, he draws an errant lack of sexuality conclusion.