Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discover)   What can 2,914 female Australian twins teach us about orgasms? Besides that subby should learn to get his pants off faster, that is   (blogs.discovermagazine.com) divider line 61
    More: Interesting, ncbi rofl, extroversions, educational attainment, Human sexual behavior, sexual fantasy, Australians  
•       •       •

10376 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 Jul 2011 at 4:26 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



61 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-07-04 02:01:22 AM  
tl;dr

/wall of txt
 
2011-07-04 04:34:02 AM  

ThatGuyGreg: tl;dr

/wall of txt


Nah, yo. Easy:

1) Frequency of orgasm is genetic.

2) But it don't mean shiat else.
 
2011-07-04 04:36:22 AM  

ThatGuyGreg: tl;dr

/wall of txt


maybe pix would help?t0.gstatic.com
/drtfa
 
2011-07-04 04:37:23 AM  
As someone with a huge collection of Abby Winters DVDs, I'm getting a real kick out of this story.
 
2011-07-04 04:43:57 AM  
I did not see the twin orgasm rates for threesomes including the two twins. This study is incomplete.
 
2011-07-04 04:52:27 AM  

pup.socket: I did not see the twin orgasm rates for threesomes including the two twins. This study is incomplete.


You are correct sir, I think I'm brave enough for this study
 
2011-07-04 05:00:25 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: pup.socket: I did not see the twin orgasm rates for threesomes including the two twins. This study is incomplete.

You are correct sir, I think I'm brave enough for this study


I'd also like to sign up. It's for science after all. 2913 spots remaining.
 
2011-07-04 05:01:01 AM  

Baryogenesis: tinfoil-hat maggie: pup.socket: I did not see the twin orgasm rates for threesomes including the two twins. This study is incomplete.

You are correct sir, I think I'm brave enough for this study

I'd also like to sign up. It's for science after all. 2913 spots remaining.


Oops, 2912 spots left.
 
2011-07-04 05:10:42 AM  
t3.gstatic.com
Well just because, night all I've got to crash big day tomorrow and all
 
2011-07-04 05:12:21 AM  
Would the subjects of this study be deemed piss-friendly?
 
2011-07-04 05:15:40 AM  
I'd go down under on the first one, and put it in the second one's outback.
 
2011-07-04 05:15:50 AM  
There is a good chance my girlfriend was part of this study.

Today we were out spending the $200 worth of gift cards she's been getting for doing twins studies (at least that's where she says she's getting them)
 
2011-07-04 05:50:20 AM  
"Aim. To test hypothesized evolutionary functions of the female orgasm. Methods."

Is that what you were aiming for?
 
2011-07-04 06:34:57 AM  
I've never done Aussie twins. Not identical anyway.
/oi
 
2011-07-04 07:00:19 AM  
If this doesn't get the male of the species to take up science nothing will.
 
2011-07-04 07:17:46 AM  
Basically, the study found that they have no idea what causes differences in female orgasm rates. By itself useless, until someone does another study to find the actual cause.
 
2011-07-04 07:36:07 AM  
Until humans are genetically engineered to breed girls over boys at a 2:1 ratio, threesomes will never be common.

Therefore, we should be focusing our twin studies on how to ensure female births are always also identical twin births.
 
2011-07-04 07:40:23 AM  

Unsung_Hero: Until humans are genetically engineered to breed girls over boys at a 2:1 ratio, threesomes will never be common.

Therefore, we should be focusing our twin studies on how to ensure female births are always also identical twin births.


Alternative: kill half the males. Same results.
 
2011-07-04 07:44:31 AM  

2chris2: Basically, the study found that they have no idea what causes differences in female orgasm rates. By itself useless, until someone does another study to find the actual cause.


Far from useless. They demonstrated that a lot of candidate explanations definitely don't cause the differences. In particular, they disproved the working hypothesis that difficulty achieving orgasm has a psychiatric basis ("FOD"), thereby saving a lot of women from (a) feeling guilty/at fault and (b) pointless therapy.

They also threw cold water on the theory that orgasm serves an evolutionary purpose, adding one more log to the bonfire of evolutionary psychology's Just So stories.

But you completely missed the real point of this research: The underlying assumption has been that low rates of orgasm are dysfunctional and that there is an "actual cause" to be found. Increasingly, it looks like that's not the case, and that rates of orgasm are no more functional than, say, having straight or curly hair.

/Always fascinated by male mythologizing about female sexuality
 
2011-07-04 07:51:41 AM  

Silais: Unsung_Hero: Until humans are genetically engineered to breed girls over boys at a 2:1 ratio, threesomes will never be common.

Therefore, we should be focusing our twin studies on how to ensure female births are always also identical twin births.

Alternative: kill half the males. Same results.


Well, yes, more or less... but slightly more cruel, and with less sexy identical twins.
 
2011-07-04 08:29:25 AM  
So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?
 
2011-07-04 08:49:39 AM  

PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?


i568.photobucket.com
 
2011-07-04 09:01:19 AM  

czetie: 2chris2: Basically, the study found that they have no idea what causes differences in female orgasm rates. By itself useless, until someone does another study to find the actual cause.

Far from useless. They demonstrated that a lot of candidate explanations definitely don't cause the differences. In particular, they disproved the working hypothesis that difficulty achieving orgasm has a psychiatric basis ("FOD"), thereby saving a lot of women from (a) feeling guilty/at fault and (b) pointless therapy.

They also threw cold water on the theory that orgasm serves an evolutionary purpose, adding one more log to the bonfire of evolutionary psychology's Just So stories.

But you completely missed the real point of this research: The underlying assumption has been that low rates of orgasm are dysfunctional and that there is an "actual cause" to be found. Increasingly, it looks like that's not the case, and that rates of orgasm are no more functional than, say, having straight or curly hair.

/Always fascinated by male mythologizing about female sexuality


Sounds like a get out of jail free card for failing in bed. "Honey, you're just genetically predisposed to have few orgasms."
 
2011-07-04 09:07:43 AM  

Silais: Unsung_Hero: Until humans are genetically engineered to breed girls over boys at a 2:1 ratio, threesomes will never be common.

Therefore, we should be focusing our twin studies on how to ensure female births are always also identical twin births.

Alternative: kill half the males. Same results.


Why do you think war is so popular?
 
2011-07-04 09:08:19 AM  

95BV5: As someone with a huge collection of Abby Winters DVDs, I'm getting a real kick out of this story.



bookmark
 
2011-07-04 09:13:54 AM  

tomWright: Why do you think war is so popular?


I want your stuff, and you look funny?
 
2011-07-04 09:14:18 AM  

95BV5: As someone with a huge collection of Abby Winters DVDs, I'm getting a real kick out of this story.


DVD's? HAHAHA! You pay for porn? hahaha
 
2011-07-04 09:17:28 AM  

MisterLoki: PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?


(conjoined twins.jpg)

Oh no you di'n't.
 
2011-07-04 09:32:10 AM  
 
2011-07-04 09:48:35 AM  

Unsung_Hero: You won't be sorry for clicking here. (new window)


Am I wrong, or did it look like they'd practiced? By the way, that's just something I noticed, not a complaint. :-)
 
2011-07-04 09:55:56 AM  

PizzaJedi81: Unsung_Hero: You won't be sorry for clicking here. (new window)

Am I wrong, or did it look like they'd practiced? By the way, that's just something I noticed, not a complaint. :-)


Also, the one on the left was really into it, while the one on the right was just going along with her twin.

Good looking twins who will play a bit with each other for fun? I'd ruin a relationship with either of them by continually pestering them for a fully interactive threeway.
 
2011-07-04 09:56:35 AM  

MisterLoki: PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?

[i568.photobucket.com image 400x354]


So this chicks has two heads, brains and personality's but they have only 1 set of sex organs. Since their minds are independent what if only one was horny and wanted to masturbate, how would that work? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
2011-07-04 09:58:55 AM  

dennysgod: MisterLoki: PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?

[i568.photobucket.com image 400x354]

So this chicks has two heads, brains and personality's but they have only 1 set of sex organs. Since their minds are independent what if only one was horny and wanted to masturbate, how would that work? Inquiring minds want to know.


That's actually an interesting question. It would be fascinating to wait until they're horny, then put headphones on them, attempting to turn one on and turn the other off and see what happens.

How much is chemicals in the blood, how much is mental?
 
2011-07-04 10:11:30 AM  

dennysgod: So this chicks has two heads, brains and personality's but they have only 1 set of sex organs. Since their minds are independent what if only one was horny and wanted to masturbate, how would that work?


Sex is driven by hormones. Hormones are shuttled through the body by the bloodstream. They share a common blood supply.

They can have distinct personalities, but their moods (including arousal) are going to coincide more often than not.
 
2011-07-04 10:12:14 AM  
Evolutionary psychology being proven wrong?! Say it ain't so!
 
2011-07-04 10:18:32 AM  

MisterLoki: PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?


Think that they share a vagoo? Get stereo screams.
 
2011-07-04 10:20:51 AM  

Deagan Herumor: Think that they share a vagoo? Get stereo screams.


Now imagine them going down on you.
 
2011-07-04 10:22:57 AM  

PizzaJedi81: Deagan Herumor: Think that they share a vagoo? Get stereo screams.

Now imagine them going down on you.


The angles are severely limited due to their conjoined nature. Two girls already makes it awkward enough for positioning without adding that.
 
2011-07-04 10:24:03 AM  
cmon, make with the hot twin pics.

here, I'll start:

www.dailyhaha.com

/what?
 
2011-07-04 10:26:09 AM  

Unsung_Hero: The angles are severely limited due to their conjoined nature. Two girls already makes it awkward enough for positioning without adding that.


Maybe so...but in my head, it's freakin' AWESOME!
 
2011-07-04 10:34:14 AM  

Baryogenesis: Sounds like a get out of jail free card for failing in bed. "Honey, you're just genetically predisposed to have few orgasms."


That's what I was thinking. "Well of course you didn't cum, honey, your genetics won't allow it."
 
2011-07-04 10:34:18 AM  
 
2011-07-04 10:35:23 AM  

Dr.Gonzo7719: Baryogenesis: Sounds like a get out of jail free card for failing in bed. "Honey, you're just genetically predisposed to have few orgasms."

That's what I was thinking. "Well of course you didn't cum, honey, your genetics won't allow it."


Or basically, what you said. I need farking coffee.
 
2011-07-04 10:44:26 AM  

dennysgod: MisterLoki: PizzaJedi81: So...is this gonna be a twin thread, or are y'all gonna just be yapping over the results?

[i568.photobucket.com image 400x354]

So this chicks has two heads, brains and personality's but they have only 1 set of sex organs. Since their minds are independent what if only one was horny and wanted to masturbate, how would that work? Inquiring minds want to know.


They're wired to the same sensory systems I assume, I would assume they both feel the majority of sensations all over the body.

Theaetetus: Evolutionary psychology being proven wrong?! Say it ain't so!


You do realize the brain evolved with everything else, right? This is more of a societal attitude extrapolated to a hypothesis than the whole of evolutionary psychology being incorrect. I'm always amazed at people that seem to think the brain is just a magic box and none of your genes or environmental could possibly effect anything in it.
 
2011-07-04 10:46:12 AM  
They used libido as a measure, but that's self reported. I wonder if they could have used physiological measures to see if those correlated with orgasm rates.
 
2011-07-04 10:46:52 AM  

tomWright: cmon, make with the hot twin pics.

here, I'll start:

[www.dailyhaha.com image 420x340]

/what?


That disturbs me an incredible amount. Ew.
 
2011-07-04 10:53:11 AM  

Barakku: Theaetetus: Evolutionary psychology being proven wrong?! Say it ain't so!

You do realize the brain evolved with everything else, right?


Yes. You do realize that science is more than "people are this way because I say so, and it makes sense because of [digs through pile of buzzwords] evolution!" right?

This is more of a societal attitude extrapolated to a hypothesis than the whole of evolutionary psychology being incorrect. I'm always amazed at people that seem to think the brain is just a magic box and none of your genes or environmental could possibly effect anything in it.

This is more of a strawman than your argument being correct. I'm always amazed at people that see a criticism of the science (or lack thereof) in evolutionary psychology, and immediately interpret it as endorsing a nonsensical contrary position.

/"but, but, but, the brain evolved! Therefore evolutionary psychology is totes a real science, even though it can't actually predict anything and it moves goalposts to avoid being falsifiable!"
 
2011-07-04 11:05:38 AM  
This thread has failed

img819.imageshack.us


media1.break.com


4.bp.blogspot.com


www.topforwardedemails.com


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2011-07-04 11:09:23 AM  

DSF6969: This thread has failed

[img819.imageshack.us image 300x400]


[media1.break.com image 610x700]


[4.bp.blogspot.com image 424x390]


[www.topforwardedemails.com image 500x374]


[4.bp.blogspot.com image 328x400]


I'll take sets 2, 4 and...damn, you could bounce quarters off of both in set 5!
 
2011-07-04 11:21:11 AM  
During the testing did the second twin seem to take a little longer?
 
Displayed 50 of 61 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report