Like everyone is a latent cannibal when found in a single-food-source environment.
Hmm, the one I saw found that men who identified as bisexual were mostly aroused by pictures of men, but women of every stated orientation were mostly aroused by images of people doing sexy things. That is, women were more aroused by the narrative implied by the image than by the body type.
If that’s true, that women are less oriented towards body type, it makes it easier for women to be bi.
Of course, I know several women who are very strongly attracted to a fairly specific body type. One told me, “if you lined up every guy I’ve dated, they all look pretty much the same.”
i’ve heard those arguments before, but one thing remains elusive. Two women are much more likely to hug each other than two men, as a sign of casual support. To me, there is a close link between sexual attraction and desire to touch.
In which cultures?
Yeah, that varies a lot by culture.
You don’t watch a lot of sports do you?
I’ve heard the same. As a society, we’re taught to sexualize women regardless of whether you’re a man or a woman. Granted, this doesn’t answer if this developmentally leads to women being sexually attracted to women or if it simply allows women more freedom to express sexual attraction to other women with men thinking it’s “hot” or otherwise encouraging it.
Here’s an article about the study I was referring to.
Now, however, new evidence has emerged to suggest that “category specificity,” as Bailey calls it–the tendency for gay men to become aroused only to same-sex images and heterosexual men to become aroused only to opposite-sex images–is not true of women. If so, it means there are fundamental sex differences in the relationship between arousal and orientation.
In their study, Chivers and Bailey showed erotic films to heterosexual, bisexual and lesbian women while measuring their genital and subjective arousal. They found that women, unlike men, showed the same genital responses to different kinds of erotic stimuli regardless of their sexual orientation, says Bailey. Whether the films depicted two males, two females, or a male and a female engaging in sexual activity, the different groups of women in the study responded similarly.
Did this study account for men watching way more porn than women?
What do you mean?
A. Why would it matter? B. How would you control for that?
If you’re going to measure arousal in men and women by showing them porn then you should consider that men look at a lot more porn than women and that exposure to sexual imagery can change reactions to it over time. I don’t doubt in the modern world of internet porn that this difference between men and women is not what it once was, but I’m sure it’s still there. There are a ton of additional questions about how they measured genital responses in men and women when they have different kinds of genitals. Just exactly how do you quantify and compare men’s and women’s genital responses to erotic stimuli?
A. Because B.
B. You can’t.
Well maybe you can. Sex researchers may go through a period of desensitization to porn by exposure to lots of it of all varieties so that they can be more objective in their research. I don’t know how well that works, some people apparently never get bored with porn. But could attempt to evaluate the measured reactions in regard to past experiences.
So you’re basically saying this is impossible to research?
No. I’m questioning how well this was done and whether it’s conclusions were valid. I don’t have enough info to make a determination but I think the potential problems are obvious.
Obvious enough that the researchers might have thought of them? Lol.
Can you point out in that article anything indicating they did? Did you read the article? I doubt it is reporting accurately anything about this study. I didn’t even get into the obviously questionable concept of comparing results of a study of men from the 1960s to a study of women conducted today. But like most science articles I assume their is a lot of misinterpretation by it’s author. I just raised the question about that one aspect, there are so many more.
This is interesting to me.
I remember also reading a study where women were found to be most aroused by hard pornography (vs soft porn & cable tv sex) despite many claiming the contrary. It was also discovered that both men and women were more aroused by viewing women enjoying sex vs viewing men enjoying sex.
I wonder whether some men may be thinking more of the activities they’d be doing in the situation, and some women may be thinking more of the stimulation they’d be receiving.
For example: maybe some man who are aroused by touching, or imagining touching, female breasts and genitalia but not the male versions may look at a porn image involving only men and no women, see nothing that they’d be aroused by touching, and not be aroused; while maybe some woman who aren’t aroused by touching or imagining touching female breasts and genitalia may look at a porn image involving only women and no men, see nothing that they’d be aroused by touching, but imagine having their own breasts and genitalia be touched and therefore be aroused.
I don’t know whether any researchers have looked at it from that direction.
In “traditional” masculine society, particularly in the last couple of centuries and especially as influenced by Abrahamic religions, any tendency for a man to express any sexual attraction for another man has been harshly punished in mainstream society. So, it makes sense to me on a societal level that men are pressured to choose either heterosexuality or homosexuality exclusively.
I don’t think the same dynamic applies so harshly to women.