Women are so gay
I have pondered before the not-so-straight sexuality of heterosexual women. A recent study covered in the Times provides further evidence that unlike men, women are not at all straightforward in their sexual responses.
Specifically, this study found that when shown photos of naked people, heterosexual women's biological sexual response was stronger in response to the image of the female. Photos of naked men were about as exciting as a landscape photo.
There are numerous conclusions to draw from this data--perhaps women are "naturally" bisexual; maybe men's bodies are not the site of sexual attraction for women; perhaps the constant objectification of women has caused straight women to sexualize each other's bodies. I really don't know what to make of it. At the very least, it 's nice to know that women's sexuality is broad enough to appreciate non-hetero images
Other theories?
i don't have the inclination to sign up with nyt to read the article, but i am curious about how they measure 'biological sexual response' and also whether that translates into actual sexual arousal.
that said, i'm inclined to think that it has a lot to do with what is considered 'sexy' by societal standards. and also what is considered safe. it's weird to me, for instance, that so many self-identified straight women do not like fellatio, and think that penises are icky. seriously, i think this is really weird. but that is because my own experience as a straight woman is that penises are pretty freaking awesome.
it seems like women are seen as aphrodisiacs in our culture. the green m and m, for instance, which is the one purported to be arousing, is presented as a female character in their advertising, the only female m and m character. it's not as straight forward as pavlovian response, but as a culture, we spend almost no time gazing at male bodies, and i think this must have an affect on women, just as the media's focus on the male gaze (that is to say it is from a straight male perspective most of the time) conditions women to see other women (and sometimes themselves) as characters in some man's story, or they end up identifying more with male characters because it is too painful/pointless to identify with the female characters in media.
Posted by: al oof | June 13, 2008 at 02:40 AM
They apparently used bloodflow to the genital region as the measure of sexual arousal. Makes enough sense, no?
I agree with you that it is really strange how many women are "grossed out" by penises. I think it's some mixture of safety (maybe not wanting to appear slutty and/or fear of inviting unwanted sexual advances), lack of desensitization, and the Paglian argument that male sexuality is just so damn powerful that maybe some women can't help but shrink in the face of it.
Women are absolutely viewed as aphrodisiacs in our culture. How cool is it, then, to *be* a woman? I wish more women understood the incredible fun which can be had in playing/messing with this role.
Posted by: Rebecca R | June 18, 2008 at 02:59 PM