-
Posted
Monday, January 26, 2009 10:41 AM
| By
Nina Shen Rastogi
Interestingly, though, the women recorded their sexual response differently than did the machines that measured it: they said they had been more turned on by the images of heterosexual sex—and less turned on by the images of bonobo sex—than they actually had been. Hmm. As I understand it, this discrepancy either means that women's minds and bodies are subconsciously at war, or that the women were conscious of their less "normative" desire but felt ashamed of it. In either case, it bears thinking about.
I agree that the split between bodily reactions and psychological reactions Chivers found was fascinating. (Though I wonder how cleanly those divisions can actually be made.) But the way you describe that discrepancy makes it inherently a problem—either our minds and bodies are "at war" or we're "ashamed" of getting turned on by horny bonobos. Is it possible that the women simply had complicated reactions that, in the immediate testing situation, they weren't fully prepared to untangle or report accurately? Not that I like perpetuating the idea that women are this deep, dark forest of mystic mysteries, while men, in turn, are straightforward and easy to comprehend. (Ann, I'm a fan of your Freudian reading of the article.) But I'm not sure Chivers' data necessarily paints a picture of a womanly torment.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?