I had a conversation recently with some like minded friends about how a man can remember a split second glance that he caught of a beautiful women, perhaps that he saw over 10 years ago, and never even spoke to. Many of these strong memories are catalogued in our brains. Why? Women don’t experience this, at least not to the same extent as their male counterparts. However, women maintain memories of more specific emotional connections. Whether that be the feelings of being sexually dominated, and her corresponding sexual submission, or a chance encounter and the strangely deep comfort connection she felt with the other person.

In today’s western society these emotional experiences are what can give the informed male the edge. Of course other parameters come into play when we talk about how women experience attraction, such as; physical beauty, security, social value, etc. But right now I am fascinated by this difference in how our brains process short interactions with someone and how we then feel more attracted to that person.

From reading books on evolutionary biology it is my opinion that there are specific mechanical reasons for this difference in male and female experience. Good books on this subject include, “The Selfish Gene,” and “The Red Queen.” Let us assume for a moment that the purpose of life is to survive. What needs to survive exactly? My offspring will not have my memories, my thoughts, they will not be me. Our genes survive. In the Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins discusses the concept that we are mere complex vessels evolved over time to allow our building blocks, our code, our real intelligence, our genes to survive. We are survival vessels.

In the Red Queen arguments are made as to why human beings have evolved to be a sexual species, rather than a species that replicates through an asexual process. Once again, this is optimum for our survival against the constant bombardment of ever evolving parasitic infection.

So why the difference between how men and women process experience into feelings of sexual desire? Why is it that women are most often the sexual choosers? The answer is rather simple. Women get pregnant, and as such they must carry the child with them for 9 months. During which time they are extremely vulnerable. Following the child’s birth the mother and child remain vulnerable for a considerable amount of time. Evolution has provided women with a different selection mechanism than men have, to counter this added vulnerability.

We have not yet evolved to accommodate for prophylactics, and sexual relationships that will not lead to child birth. Our body chemistry, and our attraction mechanisms act as if every interaction will lead to the woman being susceptible to this pending long period of vulnerability. Similarly, we have not evolved past our primitive tribal social environment, which also has implications on how men and women interact with each other in today’s environment.

Women need emotional connection; they need to feel that they have pair bonded with the man they are going to have a sexual relationship with. They are genetically hard-wired to select men whom they feel will stay around to protect them and their child. This is why when a woman thinks about the men that she has felt attraction to she will usually think in emotional terms. This is also, according to Mystery, why women experience last minute sexual resistance.

This same argument presents us with another phenomenon, that of the “gold digger”. It is my belief that all women are, to varying degrees, are attracted to social status. Men with social status, are more powerful, and are more likely to be capable of providing for them and their offspring. This isn’t necessarily a conscious decision process, and in fact can be very subtle. Developing the skills to be adept at conveying social value has been a proven tactic to influence sexual attraction, and is a large piece of Mystery’s indirect game theory.

Let us not exclude that we are talking in general terms here. There is a percentage of society, both men and women, who are more psychologically influenced in their sexual behavior. Whether, that be from childhood trauma, or simply their genetic makeup. In my experience with women it has always been due to their childhood environment.

Yes, it is also true that women, like men, are attracted to physical beauty, simply because this is a strong indicator of successful survival. Good genes in our mate will combine with our genes through sexual reproduction, and will provide a better chance of superior genetic survival abilities for our offspring, and therefore for our own genes.

Finally, back to the male half of this equation. No matter how successful, powerful, or attractive a man is, when he visually sees a beautiful woman he will always feel himself stop, and experience a need to align himself with her. The more physically beautiful, the stronger the feelings. Without the same personal survival needs of the female, the male’s sexual urges are far more dependent upon seeing physical beauty. We have just discussed how physical beauty is the best indicator of gene survivability. Therefore, when a man thinks about women he has found attractive he has a database of visual, and often momentary fragments frozen in time.

To conclude, women are hard-wired to evaluate potential mates based upon a complex set of intertwined attributes. Less than average looking men may have to work harder in certain situations, not all situations, but as you can see there are far stronger influences at play. So much so that good looking guys can often be left bewildered as to what they are doing wrong, and why they can’t seem to meet women.

In men, the prostate produces the watery component of semen. In women, Skene’s glands are also thought to produce a watery substance that may explain female “ejaculation”. The tissue surrounding these glands, which includes the part of the clitoris that reaches up inside the vagina, swells with blood during sexual arousal. And there’s some evidence that nerves in the area produce an orgasm different to one produced by clitoral stimulation.

Nevertheless, there is still debate about whether the G spot even exists. “Not everyone has accepted this yet,” says Beverly Whipple, a neurophysiologist who co-wrote a book about the G spot in the 1980s. So Emmanuele Jannini of the University of Aquila, Italy, and his team decided to look for biochemical markers of sexual function in the area where the G spot is meant to be. They picked PDE5, an enzyme that chews up the nitric oxide that triggers erections. Viagra works by blocking PDE5.

Researchers had seen evidence of nitric oxide activity in the clitoris before, but no one had actually looked for PDE5 enzymes or knew exactly where they might be. “It’s ridiculous but true that we’ve waited till now to really know the female anatomy,” says Jannini.

Anatomically Impossible

He found PDE5 in the vagina of five volunteers, he will report in Adult Urology. Dissections of 14 cadavers revealed that the enzymes were mostly clustered in the G spot. But in two of the subjects with much lower concentrations of PDE5, he couldn’t find any Skene’s glands at all. “For such women, having a vaginal orgasm is anatomically impossible,” he says.

Whipple and others suspect the glands may have been there but were too small to spot. Even so, the small size of the area should make a “G-spot orgasm” unlikely.

The findings suggest that Viagra and related drugs like tadalafil and vardenafil, set to hit the market in a few months, should have the greatest effect on women who have large Skene’s glands and heaps of PDE5. Trials of Viagra in women have so far had mixed results. Some researchers speculate that this is because the women tested had too broad a range of sexual problems, from not reaching orgasm to not wanting sex at all. Jannini’s work suggests that a woman’s anatomy might also make a difference.

Well Hidden

“Research in women using these drugs has been hampered by a lack of a framework demonstrating the biochemical processes governing the female sexual response,” says Helen O’Connell of the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia, who showed in 1998 that the clitoris is far bigger than anyone thought. “That understanding of the clitoral and vaginal structure and function is developing is great for women.”

So how do you tell if you’ve got a G spot? Sadly, because Skene’s glands are so well hidden by the surrounding tissue, no visual examination can reveal if a women has them or not. Only personal experience can do the trick.

But even for those with a small G spot or none at all, Viagra-type drugs might still have some effect, as PDE5 is found in the clitoris too. And other drugs that stimulate arousal via the brain could soon become available. But Jannini and Whipple both agree that the female orgasm is so complex that drugs alone won’t work for everyone.

Source: New Scientist
Author: Nicola Jones, 3/7/2002

advertisement
MEN, ask yourself if you would like to become an amazing lover? Realize! that women absolutely crave guys who get them off.. size never matters with DAVID SHADE’S advice on how to be a Masterful Lover. Take a look at this closely guarded SECRET >>> CLICK HERE … ssshh