Desired By Women

---

There is a conspiracy theory at the heart of this book. But "What Do Women Want?: Adventures in the Science of Female Desire" by journalist Daniel Bergner uses groundbreaking sex research to show the ways in which our supposedly enlightened society still has female sexuality backward -- completely, utterly, profoundly.

In accessible and entertaining prose, "What Do Women Want? The book, which grew from a much-discussed New York Times Magazine cover story in , reveals how gender stereotypes have shaped scientific research and blinded researchers to evidence of female lust and sexual initiation throughout the animal kingdom, including among humans. Bergner, and the leading sex researchers he interviews, argue that women's sexuality is not the rational, civilized and balancing force it's so often made out to be -- that it is base, animalistic and ravenous, everything we've told ourselves about male sexuality.

As one researcher tells Bergner of all the restrictions put on female sexuality: Because the drive must be so strong to override all of that. The implications are huge.

As Bergner puts it: This book -- how do I put this without sounding hyperbolic? This book should be read by e very woman on earth.

THIS IS SOME TITLE

It is a must-read for any person with even a remote erotic interest in the female gender. It deserves to be listed on bridal registries -- gay and straight. It could single-spine-edly replace at least a quarter of the sexual self-help section and the world would be better for it. It is a revelation, a story of redemption.

The truth about female desire: It's base, animalistic and ravenous

I laughed, I almost cried -- with joy. I was turned on, even. You want a female Viagra?

This book is as close as we have to it. What are the main bits of wisdom about female sexuality that you took away from writing this book?

Study: Women find men who are desired by other women to be more desirable

The science behind that is flimsy, circular. And the science, when you look at it clearly, that stands in opposition to that is actually fairly strong -- still emergent, but fairly strong. And so, that was the first thing that was so striking to me. You point out some remarkable ways that scientists have ignored evidence suggesting that women -- and female animals -- are far from passive when it comes to sex and are in fact often initiators. Do you have a favorite example of this? Christian Standard Bible He will not show regard for the gods of his fathers, the god desired by women, or for any other god, because he will magnify himself above all.

Contemporary English Version This king will reject the gods his ancestors worshiped and the god preferred by women.

In fact, he will put himself above all gods Good News Translation The king will ignore the god his ancestors served, and also the god that women love. In fact, he will ignore every god, because he will think he is greater than any of them. Holman Christian Standard Bible He will not show regard for the gods of his fathers, the god longed for by women, or for any other god, because he will magnify himself above all. International Standard Version He'll recognize neither the gods of his ancestors nor those desired by women—he won't recognize any god, because he'll exalt himself above everything.

NET Bible He will not respect the gods of his fathers--not even the god loved by women. He will not respect any god; he will elevate himself above them all. New Heart English Bible Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the one desired by women, nor show regard to any other god, because he shall magnify himself above all.

He will have no interest in any god, because he will make himself greater than anyone else. JPS Tanakh Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers; and neither the desire of women, nor any god, shall he regard; for he shall magnify himself above all. You point out some remarkable ways that scientists have ignored evidence suggesting that women -- and female animals -- are far from passive when it comes to sex and are in fact often initiators.

Do you have a favorite example of this? Deidrah, a rhesus monkey, a member of the species that we sent into space in the '60s as our doubles, to see how well we would survive, is one of my favorite characters in the book. I went down and spent a while at a primatology center with a scientist who was trying to take the blinders off the way we see the sexuality of our closest ancestors. And what I learned was that for decades, despite evidence to the contrary, scientists had painted primate sex as male dominated.

Males are the initiators; females the sort of almost indifferent receivers.

“The desire of women” or “The one desired by women” in Daniel ? - King James Version Today

But standing next to this scientist Kim Wallen, it was clear that that was not at all true -- almost comically so. We spent a day following Deidrah, a relatively tranquil, low-key female monkey, who was nevertheless relentlessly stalking -- sexually stalking -- her object of desire. So that was one example of our blindness to female sexuality and, ultimately I think, our fear of it. One of the scientists, who was really influential in calling attention to the size, put it this way: That is, women are all about reproduction and men are all about sex.

Again, a complete distortion.

A new book on women's sexuality turns everything we think we know on its head

At one point in the book, researcher Marta Meana shows you a pair of joke control panels -- one with an on-off switch, the other with tons of knobs. These were meant to represent male and female desire.

Is female sexuality really that much more complicated that male sexuality? Of course it does for all of us, men and women. But I do wonder whether that metaphor has much more to do with the force of culture and if, fundamentally, female desire might be quite straightforward. Some of the evidence suggesting that female sexuality is stronger than is typically suggested is based on plethysmograph a tool used to measure vaginal blood-flow and lubrication studies showing that women become physically aroused to a much wider array of visual stimuli than men even as they subjectively report a much smaller range of arousal.

But what of the hypothesis presented by researcher Meredith Chivers, that vaginal lubrication might not be a reliable measure of female desire, that it is a separate system, an evolutionary adaptation, meant to protect females from sexual violence and bodily harm? If this proved to be true, what would it mean for all these plethysmograph studies?

So, let me pause and try to be coherent. But, I think that both Meredith and I have started to wrestle with a simpler interpretation: On the subject of rape and sexual assault, and the fact that, also in the lab, women are responding generally to scenarios of sexual assault. Number two is, there are different levels of desire and of fantasy, and you know, fantasy and sexual assault in one form or another are pretty common, but does that mean that any of us want to go out and be sexually assaulted?

The realm of arousal and the realm of fantasy can tell us something about ourselves psychologically without indicating that we really want to experience that thing, far from it. Since we're on the topic of rape fantasies, can we talk about why they are so common among women?

• Golden Retrievers Are the Best! (The Best Dogs Ever)
• Cellular Aspects of Wood Formation: 20 (Plant Cell Monographs)
• Le phénomène (Blanche) (French Edition)
• A Righteous Man Christian Based Inspiration
• The Three Birds
• Hurrah For The Blackshirts!: Fascists and Fascism in Britain Between the Wars
• Blood Sex (The Blood Life Series)