tazzygirl
Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SocratesNot
quote:
Since you make the claim again.... could you pony up a decent research study from the past five years that contains these stats?
quote:
Sex Drive: How Do Men and Women Compare? Experts say men score higher in libido, while women's sex drive is more "fluid."
I will copy just the main points:
1. Men think more about sex.2. Men seek sex more avidly.3. Women's sexual inclinations are more complicated than men's.4. Women's sex drives are more influenced by social and cultural factors.5. Women take a less direct route to sexual satisfaction.6. Women experience orgasms differently than men.7. Women's libidos seem to be less amenable to drugs.for the rest see:
http://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare
"Sexual desire in women is extremely sensitive to environment and context," says Edward O. Laumann, PhD, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago and lead author of a major survey of sexual practices, The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States.
From the webmd source.
Published 1994.
This survey of sexual practices in the United States has been combed by the media for items of interest to the public: monogamous sex is much more widespread in this country than has been thought; infidelity is less frequent than presumed; vaginal intercourse is the defining experience of heterosexual behavior; watching one's partner undress is stimulating to many people; married couples have more sex than single people (unmarried, cohabiting couples have the most sex of all); the majority of couples experience sex twice a week to several times a month; 2.8% of men identify themselves as homosexual and 1.4% of women do so, but a higher percentage of people consider a same-gender experience to have some appeal; 75% of men always experience orgasm compared with 28.6% of women, but more nearly equal numbers of men and women declare themselves satisfied with their sexual experiences.
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/summary/273/8/675
that is just an exerpt i found on Jama.
The title of this essay takes liberties with the title of a book published in 1994. Sex in America, subtitled A Definitive Survey, is one of a pair of books, the other of which is entitled The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States.1 The two books are the outcomes of a set of surveys conducted over a seven-month period in 1992 by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC), an organization devoted to quantitative social science research. Taken together, the two books purport to tell "a true story about sex, based on scientifically accurate survey data" that was collected by 220 professional interviewers (S, p. 1).
The liberty I have taken with the title of Sex in America is to superimpose the international sign of prohibition over the operative noun sex. By this graphical alteration I do not mean to suggest that the thesis of these books is that there is no sex in America, much less that there should be no sex in America. On the contrary, the authors state their conclusions clearly in both books: Americans are having lots of sex, but what their survey "definitively" shows is that the sex Americans are having is with "people who are remarkably like ourselves--in age, race or ethnicity, and education" (S, p. 44).2 The reason for this, the authors assert, is that what most of us imagine to be our most intimate behavior, driven by our most private fantasies, is actually determined by social factors that are just as regular, and therefore just as measurable, as are rates of birth, death, and suicide. Once we have "the facts about Americans' sexual practices" (S, p. 1), the authors claim, we can see that sex is just another social phenomenon that conforms to the same kind of laws that make social scientific research possible in the first place.
The sex that the authors of this study found in America, then, is curiously both what political and religious conservatives always thought sex should be and not at all what they feared it had become. That is, according to this survey, American sex is heterosexual, potentially reproductive intercourse with people who are like ourselves (in every sense except gender), and it is not transgressive or dangerous in any way. This explains why the authors of Sex in America state that their findings are "counterrevolutionary" (S, p. 25). It also explains my graphical alteration to the title of the more popular book: I wanted to represent sex both ways, as simply what conservatives think it "should" be and as an admonitory reminder of that other, prohibited incarnation that it seemed to have, but has not really, become.3 Of course, depicting sex as always already under erasure fails to explain why the authors of Sex in America represent their study as a necessary exercise in cultural therapy, much less why the U.S. government first wanted to sponsor and then decided to defund a survey about sex. If there was no sexual revolution, then how can this survey be "counterrevolutionary"? And in what sense have Americans been injured such that these writers can now offer a cure? If there was no sexual revolution, then why did the federal government initially consider a sex survey worthy of federal support? And if sex momentarily seemed like a matter of national concern, then why did the government subsequently decide not to fund a survey about sex?
http://www.uchicago.edu/research/jnl-crit-inq/issues/v24/v24n2.poovey.html
A government paid, then defunded, survery... hmmm.
Now, take into consideration that these questions asked for the survey were asked of women who were born in the 40's and 50's and that most didnt peak sexually until the 80's and were still dealing with their driving hormones on the 90's while in the back of their minds have the stereotypical notion that women did not enjoy sex.
So, yes, your source while it may be factual for some medical advice, not to be overshadowed by a Physician, is circumspect for having this as their primary source for their evidence about libido in regards to the sexes.
_____________________________
Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.
|
RE: No Male dominatrices? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread