Why Women Have Sex

musicmonky

we are all monkeys... i knew that
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/sep/28/sex-women-relationships-tanya-gold/print


not looking good for Women... and some say Men are B******
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17619-its-true-all-the-taken-men-are-best.html

Half the participants were told their ideal mate was single, and the other half that he or she was already in a romantic relationship.

The most striking result was in the responses of single women. Offered a single man, 59 per cent were interested in pursuing a relationship. But when he was attached, 90 per cent said they were up for the chase.

Nevyn

Lies, damn lies and statics.
Sample group of how many...

have interviewed 1,006 women

pfff
Women have sex cos they want to usually cos they are horny.
I know I have never chased after someone who was in a realtionship.

Novella

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055696455

Ta-da! It's actually pretty interesting.

johnathan woss

Thaedydal wrote: »

Lies, damn lies and statics.
Sample group of how many... pfff

1006 is a HUGE sample.

That study just confirms what all men know, whether you want to admit it to yourself or not.

Earthhorse

The first article isn't that interesting. Basically, people have sex for a wide range of reasons. Hardly revelatory.

The second is at least putting some confirmation on what some people have observed as being true.

Wibbs

Women don't have to, nor should admit a goddamn thing. Surveys? Surveys need to tell us why women have sex? Eh they like it. Only boys may think differently. They may start out with society's constrictions, but when they get beyond that? They enjoy it, they want to enjoy it and they want to keep enjoying it. Seems a silly question to me. I reckon that while many men think about sex, many women feel that need, with the right guy and (oh noes) with the "wrong" guy too. Actually I would say the the wrong guy has the slight edge. And for different reasons than a lot of guys may think.

As for the original topic, morals aside I would say its pretty understandable. Given a choice between a guy with no experience or wit or practice in the reality of relationships, the guy already attached and who seems to have that knowledge seems like a better bet.

Latchy

As Wibbs said above , once you get past society's constrictions and work it out for yourself ,then it's a simple route and choice to make .Women want sex as when it suits them , anytime and also when you least expect it .

itsallaboutheL

Thaedydal wrote: »

I know I have never chased after someone who was in a realtionship.

Sorry a little OT but i had a conversation recently with a ladyfriend and a guyfriend of mine.

Basically they both were adament that they would never go near some who was in a relationship, that it was strictly off limits. \it seems to be the prevelant stance taken on this subject..

But i think it's crazy, what if the person of your dreams is out there, someone you just fit perfectly with, but they're in a relationship, are you going not going to take the chance??

Because i sure as hell am.

Dudess

Granted, if you find yourself being drawn only to people who are in a relationship, well maybe that's symptomatic of something deeper - i.e. the fact they're in that committed relationship being an actual decider of their attractiveness (this can be the case for some people who aren't confident enough to believe themselves as worth anything more than a bit on the side, or those who simply get an illicit thrill out of the idea).

But if you find someone attractive for a variety of reasons and they're not single, well that's hardly unusual - or confined moreso to women than men. It's just a case of fancying someone.

johnathan woss

Wibbs wrote: »

Women don't have to, nor should admit a goddamn thing. Surveys? Surveys need to tell us why women have sex? Eh they like it. Only boys may think differently. They may start out with society's constrictions, but when they get beyond that? They enjoy it, they want to enjoy it and they want to keep enjoying it. Seems a silly question to me. I reckon that while many men think about sex, many women feel that need, with the right guy and (oh noes) with the "wrong" guy too. Actually I would say the the wrong guy has the slight edge. And for different reasons than a lot of guys may think.

As for the original topic, morals aside I would say its pretty understandable. Given a choice between a guy with no experience or wit or practice in the reality of relationships, the guy already attached and who seems to have that knowledge seems like a better bet.

Wibbs you've made essentially the same post on boards.ie about this and similar topics about 1000 times; so we all know your view, believe me.

Latchy

johnathan woss wrote: »

Wibbs you've made essentially the same post on boards.ie about this and similar topics about 1000 times; so we all know your view, believe me.

True but Wibbs is the Boards Guru on all things sexual

( sure he wont mind me saying that )

pikachucheeks

itsallaboutheL wrote: »

But i think it's crazy, what if the person of your dreams is out there, someone you just fit perfectly with, but they're in a relationship, are you going not going to take the chance??

Because i sure as hell am.

If the said "person of your dreams" thinks as highly of you as you do of them, they'll honour their feelings by ending their other relationship to be with you - and only you.

If you accept being someone's bit-on-the-side, you're reducing yourself to a level much lower than your real worth.

Everyone deserves to be with someone who truly loves and appreciates them.

As for why women have sex, I'd consider it to be for the same reason men have sex ;

It's enjoyable.
It's pleasurable.
It brings you physically and emotionally closer to a person / people.
It's an expression of your feelings for someone.
It's fun.
It's exercise :P

Latchy

It's Royding

johnathan woss

Latchy wrote: »

True but Wibbs is the Boards Guru on all things sexual

( sure he wont mind me saying that )

The first time I read it I thought it was a very good post but I honestly feel like I've now read the same post from him ONE THOUSAND TIMES

itsallaboutheL

pikachucheeks wrote: »

If the said "person of your dreams" thinks as highly of you as you do of them, they'll honour their feelings by ending their other relationship to be with you - and only you.

If you accept being someone's bit-on-the-side, you're reducing yourself to a level much lower than your real worth.

Everyone deserves to be with someone who truly loves and appreciates them.

I probably worded that poorly because i was trying to not look like a prick,

But even putting aside knowing the person and thinking there could really be something there, i still would hesitate (well i would but not often) to put my cards on the table with a random girl that i got on well with regardless of her relationship status. I just don't see why you wouldn't tbh. Now obviously i would much perfer if they were single but often times they are not.

Latchy

johnathan woss wrote: »

The first time I read it I thought it was a very good post but I honestly feel like I've now read the same post from him ONE THOUSAND TIMES

Sure but if there was no Wibbs we would have to invent him eh ?






Sure he keeps the ' up to date ' Kama Sutra handy to

pikachucheeks

johnathan woss wrote: »

The first time I read it I thought it was a very good post but I honestly feel like I've now read the same post from him ONE THOUSAND TIMES

It is a very good post - as are all Wibbs' posts. He's an intelligent man (woman, to some confused posters!) with a lot of great insight. tLL wouldn't be the same without him, probably the reason why he's so well respected and a moderator in here.

I think a lot of us have learned a lot from him. Kudos, Wibbs!

Novella

johnathan woss wrote: »

Wibbs you've made essentially the same post on boards.ie about this and similar topics about 1000 times; so we all know your view, believe me.

What is he supposed to do, change his view-point? I know I've found myself voicing my opinion on the same subject in different threads on here. I'm hardly gonna post something I don't think is true because I've already said it before.

Wibbs is a really intelligent poster (man!). I've learned SO much from reading his posts alone and find him to be very inspirational. As you can probably tell from the people jumping to his defence, myself included, he is very well respected and "knowing his view" is not something to be balked at.

Go Wibbs!!

minidazzler

Novella wrote: »

What is he supposed to do, change his view-point? I know I've found myself voicing my opinion on the same subject in different threads on here. I'm hardly gonna post something I don't think is true because I've already said it before.

Wibbs is a really intelligent poster (man!). I've learned SO much from reading his posts alone and find him to be very inspirational. As you can probably tell from the people jumping to his defence, myself included, he is very well respected and "knowing his view" is not something to be balked at.

Go Wibbs!!

And people don't forget, Wibbs does have the experience of the ages. (I hate making him sound old), but chances are he has been there done that, bought the T-shirt and spilled beer on it on a night out:D

He is one of the posters for whom even if there is an extremely long post of his that is similar to what he's posted before I will read it, because I would bet my life's worth, (€2.90 last I checked), that it is good advice.

musicmonky

thread has been hi jacked

BlueButterBean

why you say?..because men want it!

2 stroke

Why women have sex?
My belief is that women have stronger sex drives than men, something that they are cultured to hide in our society.

Nevyn

Latchy wrote: »

True but Wibbs is the Boards Guru on all things sexual

( sure he wont mind me saying that )

Muahahahahaha *cough*hahahahha
Just the type of laugh I needed on a Saturday morning
I have to admit I was pleased when he agreed to be come a Sex and Sexuality mod.

2 stroke wrote: »

Why women have sex?
My belief is that women have stronger sex drives than men, something that they are cultured to hide in our society.

That is interesting but it's more complex then just that it is a case of societal repression. We still have that, where a woman's sexuality it to be feared or "controlled" be it via the oral contraceptive pill or by making the focus of it how to please their man.

I have never see an article in a woman's mag about 10 tips to get your self off, or 10 top tips for your pleasure.

The pill makes a woman's body think she is pregnant chemically and can for a lot women decrease their libido dramatically and does it with out the randiness women who are actually preggo experience.

Women's sex drives when they are not on horrormoanal contraception has a
natural ebb and flow with the peak being in and around ovulation and when that is not happening sure is noticeable.

I don't think sweeping generalisations about sex drives can be made.
I think they have been which has been detrimental to people thinking that there is something wrong with them, men thinking I don't want to shag 3 times a day there is something wrong with me and women think I want to shag 3 times a day there is something wrong with me.

It doesn't help that the definition of sexual nymphomania is a woman who has the same sexual urges as a man, eh which man and what does it make me if I have a higher sex drive then most men I have encountered?

Yes we are breaking away from the Victorian models of morality which kept people repressed and controlled and we are later in doing so in this country due to the repression of the catholic church and we still have far to go as we don't have proper health and fact based sex and sexuality education in our schools.

Which means we are bombarded by media which is far to sexed up and saying we should be having sex, everyone is having sex but sex is about getting the guy off and what he wants but we don't have the basics covered
and a lot women don't won their own sexuality, and haven't' explore what gets them off and then can't communicate that to their partners and wonder why they aren't being sexually fulfilled.

johnathan woss

Thaedydal wrote: »

Muahahahahaha *cough*hahahahha
Just the type of laugh I needed on a Saturday morning
I have to admit I was pleased when he agreed to be come a Sex and Sexuality mod.




That is interesting but it's more complex then just that it is a case of societal repression. We still have that, where a woman's sexuality it to be feared or "controlled" be it via the oral contraceptive pill or by making the focus of it how to please their man.

I have never see an article in a woman's mag about 10 tips to get your self off, or 10 top tips for your pleasure.

The pill makes a woman's body think she is pregnant chemically and can for a lot women decrease their libido dramatically and does it with out the randiness women who are actually preggo experience.

Women's sex drives when they are not on horrormoanal contraception has a
natural ebb and flow with the peak being in and around ovulation and when that is not happening sure is noticeable.

I don't think sweeping generalisations about sex drives can be made.
I think they have been which has been detrimental to people thinking that there is something wrong with them, men thinking I don't want to shag 3 times a day there is something wrong with me and women think I want to shag 3 times a day there is something wrong with me.

It doesn't help that the definition of sexual nymphomania is a woman who has the same sexual urges as a man, eh which man and what does it make me if I have a higher sex drive then most men I have encountered?

Yes we are breaking away from the Victorian models of morality which kept people repressed and controlled and we are later in doing so in this country due to the repression of the catholic church and we still have far to go as we don't have proper health and fact based sex and sexuality education in our schools.

Which means we are bombarded by media which is far to sexed up and saying we should be having sex, everyone is having sex but sex is about getting the guy off and what he wants but we don't have the basics covered
and a lot women don't won their own sexuality, and haven't' explore what gets them off and then can't communicate that to their partners and wonder why they aren't being sexually fulfilled.

Female (and male!) sex drives are moderated by society for good reasons.
Sure the Catholic church went too far in Ireland there's no denying that.

Nevyn

johnathan woss wrote: »

Female (and male!) sex drives are moderated by society for good reasons.

Such as?

johnathan woss wrote: »

Sure the Catholic church went too far in Ireland there's no denying that.

And we are still dealing with that from the aftermath of the Laundries, people who's sexuality is screwed up due to sexual abuse and lack of proper sex education in the majority of our schools which are patronage d by the church still.

Earthhorse

Wibbs wrote: »

As for the original topic, morals aside I would say its pretty understandable. Given a choice between a guy with no experience or wit or practice in the reality of relationships, the guy already attached and who seems to have that knowledge seems like a better bet.

I think we all get that, but then why the gap between women and men? I know you'll probably say it's to do with social status or social approval being more important to women but still. Of course, there were only 186 participants in the study which makes it difficult to draw any real conclusion from but I'd be interested in seeing the results of a much bigger sample size on the same subject.

Wibbs

It defo needs a wider study. The sample was way too small.

I think the biggest diff between men and women is paternity. Or was before paternity tests(and reliable contraception) came out.

If a guy goes for a woman who is attached, if she gets pregnant, he can't know if the child is his and the oul monkey brain doesn't like expending resources on any offspring that isn't his.

Our nearest relatives, chimps and gorillas etc will actually kill offspring they suspect isn't theirs. You usually see it when a new male deposes the old male and takes over the group. Now we are different to the great apes in many many ways, not the least of which is our intelligence. Plus we have different pair bonding things going on, but paternity is still an issue for men more than women and became moreso after we left the tribal model and settled and inheritance and bloodlines started to matter. Look at all the historical and cultural importance put on virginity and "chasteness" in women. Now there are cultures where a woman with kids already is valued as she shows that she's fertile, but they're rarer.

Whereas a woman who goes for an attached man and gets pregnant may be concerned that he won't support her(a biggy, damn near life threatening in the past), she can always be sure the child is hers. A maternity test makes no real sense(unless there's a mixup in the hospital etc).

I reckon that's where a helluva lot of the sexual double standard applied to men and women comes from, exaggerated by culture of course.

Thaedydal wrote:

The pill makes a woman's body think she is pregnant chemically and can for a lot women decrease their libido dramatically and does it with out the randiness women who are actually preggo experience.

Women's sex drives when they are not on horrormoanal contraception has a
natural ebb and flow with the peak being in and around ovulation and when that is not happening sure is noticeable.

+1 That's a biggy I reckon. There have been some interesting articles/studies I've read that found that women look for or are attracted to diff kinds of men during their fertility cycle. AFAIR it was more testosterone males at ovulation and less test males at other times and especially in pregnancy. There was even one other study that seemed to show that when women met a guy when already on the pill, but came off hormonal contraception in the relationship they were more likely to split with the guy, compared to those not on the pill or who continued to take it. Which kinda plugs into the previous study. He was attractive to her "pregnant" mind, but not so much to her fertile. I'd put more faith in stuff like that if there were more large scale studies though as there are sooooo many variables.


Apologies to all if a repeat post. Novel posting will return soon :D

johnathan woss

If we are talking evolutionary psychology don't forget that a man was putting more at risk by sleeping with another man's partner (i.e. possible death).

Dudess

musicmonky wrote: »

thread has been hi jacked

Disappointed you didn't start a men versus women sh1t-storm eh...?

musicmonky wrote: »

not looking good for Women... and some say Men are B******

Wibbs

johnathan woss wrote: »

If we are talking evolutionary psychology don't forget that a man was putting more at risk by sleeping with another man's partner (i.e. possible death).

Yep but they did it, just like the male apes. The drive to spread the genes and get the best genes was stronger than the risk attached for both genders.

iguana

itsallaboutheL wrote: »

But i think it's crazy, what if the person of your dreams is out there, someone you just fit perfectly with, but they're in a relationship, are you going not going to take the chance??

There are close to 7 billion people on the planet, 7,000,000,000 people. You will fit perfectly well with thousands upon thousands of them. If you meet someone you fit perfectly well with but he is in a relationship, just move on and meet the next guy you fit with. Simples.

musicmonky

Dudess wrote: »

Disappointed you didn't start a men versus women sh1t-storm eh...?

NO. just like the thread to stay on topic....

iguana

johnathan woss wrote: »

If we are talking evolutionary psychology don't forget that a man was putting more at risk by sleeping with another man's partner (i.e. possible death).

Because women never fight over a man.:rolleyes:

minidazzler

iguana wrote: »

There are close to 7 billion people on the planet, 7,000,000,000 people. You will fit perfectly well with thousands upon thousands of them. If you meet someone you fit perfectly well with but he is in a relationship, just move on and meet the next guy you fit with. Simples.

It really depends.

The Question shouldn't be if they are in a Relationship, it should be are they HAPPY in that relationship.

I will break up an unhappy relationship with no remorse. Never had the chance and hope I never break up a happy one.

iguana

minidazzler wrote: »

I will break up an unhappy relationship with no remorse. Never had the chance and hope I never break up a happy one.

Even the best of relationships hit bad patches, so what can look like a bad relationship at times can actually just be a normal one at a bad point. You can't know, so it's best to stay right away from it. If it's bad it will end by itself so wait until the person is free. Or just move on.

Herbal Deity

Thaedydal wrote: »

Lies, damn lies and statics.
Sample group of how many... pfff

Wibbs wrote: »

It defo needs a wider study. The sample was way too small.

Have either of you ever studied probability or statistics?

The reality of sample sizes needed to reflect accurate data tends to go against conventional thought patterns.

Check out this calculator: http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

Select 95% confidence, a confidence interval of 3.1, a generous estimate of 5000000 for the population of Ireland, and click calculate. The result is 999. This means that to be between 91.9% and 98.1% confident of the result, you need a random sample of 999 people. Obviously, this is improved slightly with 1006 people.

If you want a bit of a headfúck, consider that we don't need to consider men in this, so given an assumed 50:50 male:female split, enter 2500000 instead. What happens? It stays at 999. The relationship between population size and sample size needed is not linear. Once you hit an upper bound, increasing population size has little or no effect on the sample size needed for an accurate result.

Sorry if this is wildly off topic.

musicmonky

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Have either of you ever studied probability or statistics?

The reality of sample sizes needed to reflect accurate data tends to go against conventional thought patterns.

Check out this calculator: http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

..

Sorry if this is wildly off topic.

TV view figures are arrived. By a sample size. Not as big as you may think
http://john.beynon.org.uk/2009/01/20/how-are-tv-viewing-statistics-obtained/

"It turns out that in the UK BARB (Broadcasters audience research board) are behind these figures. Out of the 25+ millions homes here in the UK, 5100 homes make up the reporting panel – a mere 0.02% of UK homes!!!!"

The old singles chart in the UK was the same. Only a sample of the record stores where part of the chart not all stores.

I agree . 1000 isn't massive survey but it gives you an idea. I think I would like to see the same survey in Europe , especailly Uk/Ireland. To to see any culture differences. Which I think there would be, as divorce is nearly trivial in America.

I was at a wedding of a guy in his mid forties and everyone ask him what number this was. NO ONE in Ireland would even think of asking that question.
It was number 3.... lol.

It is sometimes hard to discuss things on boards when statistics and generalisations are not taken seriously. Scientists use the word "tend" to imply that this is what usually happens. Thats all.

Ok back to the gender beating.....:eek:

Snowie

pikachucheeks wrote: »

If the said "person of your dreams" thinks as highly of you as you do of them, they'll honour their feelings by ending their other relationship to be with you - and only you.

If you accept being someone's bit-on-the-side, you're reducing yourself to a level much lower than your real worth.

Everyone deserves to be with someone who truly loves and appreciates them.

As for why women have sex, I'd consider it to be for the same reason men have sex ;

It's enjoyable.
It's pleasurable.
It brings you physically and emotionally closer to a person / people.
It's an expression of your feelings for someone.
It's fun.
It's exercise :P

so in a nut shell you had your fun and thats all that matters

Silverfish

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

so in a nut shell you had your fun and thats all that matters

Should women not find sex fun?

Snowie

Silverfish wrote: »

Should women not find sex fun?

you said sex....


*Sniggers*
:pac:

wheres the fun if only one persons enjoying it :cool:.......

johnathan woss

iguana wrote: »

Because women never fight over a man.:rolleyes:

Do you want to argue that
1) women got into as many physical fights over partners as men did in humanity's past
2) women have the same ability to seriously hurt or kill each other in a fight as men

???

If not then I don't see the point to your post or the :rolleyes:

Silverfish

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

you said sex....


*Sniggers*
:pac:

wheres the fun if only one persons enjoying it :cool:.......

Well, the OP was asking why women specifically have sex, so she was just replying from the point of view of a woman on why women have sex.

That's a lot of smileys for one post.

( I said sex twice! :eek:)

Snowie

Silverfish wrote: »

Well, the OP was asking why women specifically have sex, so she was just replying from the point of view of a woman on why women have sex.

I Know , i was saying she could just say she has her fun and thats all that matters it was a joke...

Silverfish wrote: »

That's a lot of smileys for one post.

It is? Il take your, constructive critisim and send it to the processing unit, then wel take the commet kick it around a little till it's a shadow of it once was and get back to you with an answer

Silverfish wrote: »

( I said sex twice! :eek:)

I know your going to hell for that one....

personally i think women and men booth have sex for the same reason.


They want to, why qurestion it...

why can't they question something like why does snowmonkey go after the wrong women and not take whast handed to him on a siliver platter
er

minidazzler

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

I know your going to hell for that one....

personally i think women and men booth have sex for the same reason.


They want to, why qurestion it...

True, But the Question they are asking is WHY do Women want to.

metrovelvet

Because it is fun.

musicmonky

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

personally i think women and men booth have sex for the same reason.

I think its deeper than that. Women seem to have sex for many more reasons/motives than men. I think men are more simplistic. Men want to have sex, no agendas. But sometimes women politicise sex.

If a man had sex with a woman and found out that he was being used in someway, he would be annoyed but don't think he would make a big issue out of it. Hes just glad to have sex cause thats what he wanted.

minidazzler

musicmonky wrote: »

I think its deeper than that. Women seem to have sex for many more reasons/motives than men. I think men are more simplistic. Men want to have sex, no agendas. But sometimes women politicise sex.

If a man had sex with a woman and found out that he was being used in someway, he would be annoyed but don't think he would make a big issue out of it. Hes just glad to have sex cause thats what he wanted.

I'd be well upset about it.

If I want an orgasm I have Mrs. Palmer and her five lovely daughters. When I have sex it's because I want intimacy(usually, sometimes I just want to $£"%).

But then again, i am quite picky about who I actually have intercourse with.

iguana

johnathan woss wrote: »

Do you want to argue that
1) women got into as many physical fights over partners as men did in humanity's past
2) women have the same ability to seriously hurt or kill each other in a fight as men

???

If not then I don't see the point to your post or the :rolleyes:

1) Yes of course they do.
2) Of course they do. Two women fighting each other have the same power to hurt each other as two men fighting each other. Women are weaker when they fight, but they are also weaker when attacked.

Nevyn

I would say there is a huge difference between the reasons a woman will have sex and what reasons she will use to justify it to herself and others.

Snowie

musicmonky wrote: »

I think its deeper than that. Women seem to have sex for many more reasons/motives than men. I think men are more simplistic. Men want to have sex, no agendas. But sometimes women politicise sex.

If a man had sex with a woman and found out that he was being used in someway, he would be annoyed but don't think he would make a big issue out of it. Hes just glad to have sex cause thats what he wanted.

but sure then you could ask the same thing about men... But to be honest i think trying to put labels on boxs to why some one want s to copulate.

I mean come on now is it really all that Important... ?

minidazzler wrote: »

True, But the Question they are asking is WHY do Women want to.

im sorry if i was a woman id want sex a lot.

dearg lady

Thaedydal wrote: »

I would say there is a huge difference between the reasons a woman will have sex and what reasons she will use to justify it to herself and others.

agree 100%. There's still that notion hanging around that women have sex only to please men and have little interest themselves. It seems to confuse the issue. As a single woman I'm sometimes made to feel slutty for wanting sex, and won't always tell people if I do.
I just think our perceptions about men and womens attitudes to sex are so ingrained in us that it's taking us as a society a long time to change our views.