This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← The Million Dollar Sex Challenge

sprite's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by sprite

I think the problem is that women are seen as having to be either one or the other - either as promiscuous as men are/would like to be, or not really interested in sex.

Biology has been a problem here too with Bateman's experiments and the general view that females 'should' not need to mate much and indeed should try to avoid the costs.

Then we get human females liberating themselves from the falsehood of 'good women not being much interested in sex' along with evidence from nature that females do, indeed, often mate far more promiscuously that they 'should'. And this is for all kinds of reasons such as allowing sperm competition/ cryptic female choice/avoiding injury from males/avoiding infanticicde by males...

My conclusion is that female sexual behaviour across many species is largely situation dependant. Male sexual behaviour is far more uniform and opportunistic and happy to be casual. Females have to have more variable and discriminatory strategies.

So females will be mad for sex, not interested in sex, exchanging sex for something else - protection or money, coerced into sex, responding to the sexual behaviours of other females they are in competition with......

The idea that contraception will make females into males is very unlikely - unless say testosterone or other hormones are added to give females that constant hormonal arousal that men get from being permanently fertile. If I remember rightly when the pill was first introduced it worked particuarly well because women lost interest in sex due to the homones in them removing that ovulatory, mid-cycle time when females are fertile and can conceive - and seek sex and lots of it.

And why it has been decided that male-type sexuality for all is what we should be aiming for, well, I'm not sure I would automatically go along with that. What's wrong with female-type sexuality???

Feminists don't want women to be seen as only good if they are not much interested in sex. Culturally the control of female sexuality by men is a very bad thing for women. But plenty of feminists also see the sexual exploitation of women that comes from no longer being able to say no to sex.

It would be most honest, I think, to see that men and women are different. Men, on average, are glad to get whatever sex they can. Males are the ones who are potentially more likely to get left out of reproduction so they tend to be more desperate.

Women are a mixture and a forever changing mixture of sexualities depending on their circumstances and hormone levels. They are also going to find it hard not to be judged on their sexual behaviour by a man who is intending to share parenting with them.

The evolutionary biology very strongly suggests to me that sexual conflict is something that will always be there though the way it plays out will be forever changing. The evolved reproductive facts of the two sexes means men and women will always be different and always be at odds - at least apart from those spells where there is something mutual going on or when the understanding of our differences helps each to compromise and make it work. Perhaps that's love.

Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:34:15 UTC | #589326