[lbo-talk] Re: Is Sex Fun for Girls? --> Sociobiology, Sex, and History

ravi ravi at platosbeard.org
Tue Jan 23 10:28:04 PST 2007


Responses to Andie, Nicholas Ruiz III:

At around 22/1/07 11:20 pm, Nicholas Ruiz III wrote:
>
> [top-posting left as is]
>
> Interesting...care to proffer up one of these evolutionary 'stories'?
> Let's
> not carelessly make the mistake of equating theories of deity with
> evolutionary facts. Evolution occurs. Deity is somewhat a different
> object, no?
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> On Behalf Of Doug Henwood
>
> But sometimes stuff just happens. A lot of "evolutionary"
> explanations try to find a justification for everything, rather like
> intelligent design.
>

I think Doug is equating [extreme] functionalism/adaptationism with deity (in that there is a need to believe in a single cause/story), not evolution facts. There are lots of such evolutionary stories; perhaps: for example, the idea that [human] rape is an evolutionary adaptation. (caution: I am not commenting on what I think of such a theory).

At around 23/1/07 10:29 am, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
> As for my speculation, it was a further thought I had
> to balance against the idea that the location of the
> clitoris is a design defect if a main function of the
> capacity for sexual pleasure is to encourage
> copulation.
>

Reductionists will probably respond that the location of the clitoris is inconsequential and the capacity for sexual pleasure in women is a leftover of the shared developmental history of the sexes. Actually scratch that... thus argues Gould in "Male Nipples and Female Ripples" or Elisabeth Lloyd w.r.t female orgasms, though interestingly she considers the clitoris an evolutionary adaptation. There are theories that do support the idea that a female orgasm (and one can extend these to the position of the clitoris) is an adaptation exactly the way you describe. Here is John Alcock, talking about Gould on female orgasms:

=== begin quote ======================== His argument goes as follows. First, embryonic females have one kind of hormone-tissue interaction that produces the clitoris, the structure necessary for orgasm in adult females, whereas the same cells in males undergo another kind of hormone-tissue interaction that produces the penis. The penis and male sexual orgasm are of obvious adaptive utility to males; the clitoris and female sexual orgasm are merely side effects of the developmental systems that provide males with these adaptive attributes. According to Gould, one no more need explain female orgasm in adaptive terms than one need inquire into the adaptive value of male nipples, which arise because of their utility to females, not males. The proximate (developmental) explanation for female orgasm is all we need. To this end, he writes, "If anything, such developmental explanations are more expansive and operational than the necessarily fruitless and untestable selectionist speculations that continue to permeate our literature." === end quote ==========================

And Lloyd on the female orgasm:

=== begin quote ======================== The female orgasm, she argues in the book, "The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution," has no evolutionary function at all.

Rather, Dr. Lloyd says the most convincing theory is one put forward in 1979 by Dr. Donald Symons, an anthropologist.

That theory holds that female orgasms are simply artifacts - a byproduct of the parallel development of male and female embryos in the first eight or nine weeks of life.

[...]

The female orgasm, she said, "is for fun." === end quote ========================

I can understand the argument in favour of female orgasm as adaptation though I may not agree with it. The female orgasm (in theories offered by others, not Alcock) causes expansion and suction in the uterus leading to higher retention of sperm and therefore greater reproductory chances. Alcock's (and Andie's) arguments are more elaborate, suggesting that the orgasm (in Alcock's case) and the position of the clitoris (in Andie's case) are used as an evaluation device by women as to the quality of the male. Andie's argument is further complicated since in Alcock's case (as argued in the alternate uterus expansion theory) the orgasm provides a reproductory advantage. In Andie's case, once the male is in, he is in, so the fitness/adaptation story has to be a pretty complex one. The developmental story offers a simpler alternative (and IMHO would be the bookie's choice, not the idea about doggie style).

Hrdy too has an explanation of the female orgasm (as a means of avoiding infanticide by males: mate with all to make them believe they are the father, but use the orgasm, which enhances chances of reproduction, as a filter, or alternately the clitoris is a means to make the female copulate with multiple males, since it's stimulation is pleasurable, thus decreasing the chance of any of them killing her baby).


> ... but suggestion of an adaptive
> mechanism is explanatory progress, as long as one
> doesn't insist that all traits are adaptive. Some -
> cystic fibrosis, MS, CFS, sickle cell, Epstein Barr --
> are not.

Why would you say that? From what I understand, sickle cell exists because it gave resistance to malaria (a huge killer in Africa and parts of Asia), and hence is highly prevalent as a trait in those of African origin (as in recent African origin).

--ravi



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list