SHEsaysWITHaSMILE.blogspot.com

THOUGHTS ON SEX for (me!) sandra, tvgp

i have them.

and so i watched with interest when charlie rose interviewed a couple scientitific researchers on the topic

the upshot was pathetic i thought. went something like this:

they start with the question of what men/women desire; what turns them on sexually?

and they take a group of heterosexual males, and have them watch a variety of movies w/sexual content -two men together, two women together, a man and a woman.. animals mating..
you get the picture.

and based on bio-feedback they conclude that heterosexual males are mostly.. almost exclusively.. turned on by watching women. and this is what men say.. and it matches with the bio-feedback reports

but when it came to heterosexual women, there was a discrepancy between what they said, and what the bio-feedback reported. so that, while they said they were turned on by male/female couples only, what the bio-feedback mechanisms reported was that...

-and this is my favorite part-

" women are turned on by everything!" (i'm exaggerating to make their point).

now..

exactly because the barrier to entry in the blogosphere has been lowered so dramatically

even ~ i ~ can share my thoughts, ideas, opinions, observations and arguments on this topic.

first thought.. how silly. like.. human beings were mating, masturbating, having desires and enjoying sex long before the invention of film or tv

to use sexually stimulating movies as a research method will show only what desires/stimulation can be MANIPULATED/TRIGGERED (and i imagine this changes with culture, age, ..long list here).

there is a big difference in my mind between natural/organic and manipulated/triggered. we can use hunger/appetite as an example

human beings were eating food long before we became bombarded with food commercials, advertisements, a fast food restaurant on every corner and 24 hour food shows

so to sit people in front of commercials or movies about food will ONLY show what visual triggers manipulate/trigger specific reactions -which may or may not- be related to the viewing person's natural/organic appetite

it would be more interesting to see -in the absense of any/all- visual triggers. -what then, happens in terms of true appetite for which foods..

but laughing here, because.. may turn out with similar results.. heterosexual men want only women and women want everything

but getting back to point:

because i've done my own scientific research on my own sexual appetite and desires and have discovered the following.

i like it.

but more importantly, what i've found, is that my sexual appetite; my becoming sexually aroused is not tied to watching sexually stimulating visual triggers at all. i'm not really one for movies which provoke in that manner

i like a plot

but rather, and most definitely, and without a doubt: my sexual arousal seems at least 90% related to my hormone and menstrual cycle. -with the same accuracy i could predict my periods (prior to peri-menopause), i can predict my sexual desire

very, very, and highly cyclical.

this is not to say that if you hooked me up to bio-feedback machines that i would not be turned on -physically- by what i see

in the same way, that if you hook me up to bio-feedack machines and have me watch a cooking show, it will no doubt demonstrate that my appetite has been manipulated/triggered

or if you hook me up and have me watch people sleeping, it will demonstrate that suddenly i feel tired

or if you hook me up to bio feedback machines and have me watch people fighting, it might show that i've become upset

or if you hook me up to biofeedback machines and have me watch mother's caring for their newborns, i'll probably demonstrate high levels of love reaction..

THE ONLY THING WE LEARN THIS WAY, is the same thing we already know

the same thing that has created the bombardment of ADVERTISEMENTS shoved in our faces everyday

we can be manipulated through visual triggers. some work better than others. different visual stimulation works differently on different people, with common denominators here and there

he's manipulated by the carl's jr burger. she's manipulated by the chocolate cake. the vegetarian is manipulated by the giant pasta salad

"surprise!"

in my own scientific research.. i've found that during a certain time of the month, robin williams could stand naked before me and i'd just want a hug

but during another time of the month, i'm willing to drive ten-thousand miles just to lick his ankle

it is very predictable.

i treat my sexual appetite much like all the others:

when i am tired, i sleep.
when i am hungry, i eat.
when i have energy, i create.
when i'm horny, i self-cultivate. (little euphamism from christiane northrup).

and these all seem like natural/organic appetites. and i honor them all to the degree i can within the greater demands/responsibilities/restrictions of real life

mothering
working
living in the day to day world.. following write time & place manners to what degree i can

i don't eat, for example, even if i have an appetite, when i'm cashering.. i wait until my break.
i don't cultivate, when i'm eating.. etc.

so: there you have it. sandra kay's scientific research on sex:

hypothesis: women's sexual arousal is directly tied to their hormone/menstrual cycle; with predictable peaks and valleys
experiment: honor (within social constraints) any/all sexual appetites by self-cultivating (if you're single like me) or w/significant other (if you have one)
and write down day/time. also write down day/time of monthy period. do this for several months in a row.. or years. -really, this should be a life-time experiment i'm thinking..
observe: any patterns
conclude: sandra kay is write again!

posted by SHE @ 5:29 AM