?

Log in

Now for something completely different... - See the Amanda, Feel the Shine! [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Amanda

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Now for something completely different... [Apr. 13th, 2006|08:11 am]
Amanda
[Current Mood |deviousopinionated]



It seems that countless textbooks I've read in the past, as well as Wikipedia.com, keep discussing the ongoing "mystery" about the purpose of the female orgasm. Apparently it's a heated debate among tons of people in the scientific community. I have come across the following arguments:
-it's an evolutionary relic which had a purpose in the past but no longer does
-it increases absorbtion of sperm and therefore fertility
-it ensures that enough women mate

This is when I began to think, "wtf?!". What kind of egocentric bastards would debate the purpose of a woman being able to get off? To me, it obviously has a VERY important purpose, which seems to closely fit the third, and possibly the second. Common sense would divulge as much--I don't need a frickin' degree to know that. So why does there need to be a debate in the first place?? It's like arguing about why cats have claws.
Obviously, if such blinding pleasure can come from sex in the first place, who wouldn't want to do it (in the evolutionary scheme of things)? Why do males have an excuse, when it's the same exact thing for them? But, I guess they fudge the excuse since sperm is released during orgasm and so that's why theirs is important to humanity and so damn needed. Women shouldn't do that--it's pointless! What idiot pricks, seriously.

In conclusion! The scientific community needs to have a prolongued, government-funded orgy. Hands-on experience answers everyone's questions!

So! Your thoughts?
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: rewhite
2006-04-13 08:51 am (UTC)
Add this to the listt of useless scientific studies that just prove things we already know in the hardest possible way.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: minuetcat
2006-04-15 05:27 pm (UTC)
Yes! In conclusion: scientists are bored and need inspiration.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arbitration
2006-04-13 09:48 am (UTC)
Not that I'm a science major, but one part of this debate is that a male erection is necessary for reproduction, while female arousal does not have a singificant impact on the changes of conception.

It also may be a little unfair to group the 'mystery' of the female orgasm as a misogynistic debate. It is established that there is or was a reason for the female orgasm in reproduction, that is not a debate. However, considering that the female orgasm is not a *necessary* part of reproduction, it is difficult to establish what its exact role is/was. Yes, it is most liley that your explanation for it is correct (it makes the most sense to me personally), however, if there is discovered to be some other reason for it, it may explain a bit in the fields of evolutionary biology and fertility studies.

If it can help people, or increase our understanding of greater scientific systems, I'm in favor of such research. Just my take on it, anyway.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: minuetcat
2006-04-15 05:25 pm (UTC)
True--though how can an orgasm (or the lack of one) affect reproduction if reproduction is hindered from taking place in the first place? That's how I see it...sure, women have sex without orgasm because they are forced, feel obligated or don't care either way (or any number of other reasons). Still, the reason that so many women mate and conceive is undoubtedly because they enjoy it at least a bit.
The same for men--why was the release of sperm made to accompany orgasm? Because why else would men expel all that energy if the act was just "blah"? The fact that it's accompanied with pleasure makes it something that EVERYBODY is driven to do, hence making enough babies for the population to be stable.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arbitration
2006-04-15 10:52 pm (UTC)
I agree with you entirely, that it is likely that the female orgasm helps the mating process and encourages, however, unlike the male orgasm, it is not necessary for a stable population.

Yes, it would be more difficult and uncomfortable to mate without it or female stimuli, but still possible for the population to reproduce at a rate similar to what it has been doing for the past several centuries.

I think you're right, but I also think the purpose of the orgasm is not as clear cut as it might appear. Other possibilities do exist.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: glacier_kitty
2006-04-13 02:24 pm (UTC)
Hands-on experience answers everyone's questions!

LMAO!!! That was great ;)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: minuetcat
2006-04-15 05:19 pm (UTC)
Yay! I'm glad you enjoyed it. I think everybody could use some hands-on experience :P
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: raven89
2006-04-14 06:29 am (UTC)
Actually if you think about it kinda does have a significant role. Considering when a woman becomes aroused she becomes wet, which allows the sperm easier access to swim to the egg. And yea I think the contracting has something to do with the absorbing of sperm.
But in the end who cares. Most amazing feeling in the world, so lets not ruin it with wondering why it is ;P
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: minuetcat
2006-04-15 05:17 pm (UTC)
Exactly! They should learn a lesson from that.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: ex_la_foret689
2006-04-14 09:35 pm (UTC)
In conclusion:
clearly there need to be more female scientists

and

(male) scientists clearly never have sex.

This entry amused me.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: minuetcat
2006-04-15 05:17 pm (UTC)
lmao. I'm glad!!
Either that, or they get off from making prime specimens out of the cause of female pleasure.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)