The Mystery of the Female Orgasm Essay Example

al. (2012) argue against the byproduct hypothesis, claiming a lack of empirical support.

They cite Gould and Lewontln's (1979) Influential antl-adaptatlonlst female orgasm is a spandrel that arose as an indirect product of selection operating on another aspect of the phenotype; strong selection for a trait in one sex (the male orgasm) can maintain a vestigial form in the opposite sex. Gould himself was a supporter of the byproduct hypothesis, as he believed that the clitoris (the origin of female orgasm) is simply an underdeveloped penis resulting from an undifferentiated organ during embryonic development (Gould, 1992).

Puts et al. on the other hand, assume an adaptationist stance to explain the female orgasm as a rait that has been shaped by natural selection for a particular function: increased fitness due to the female orgasm selecting for mates with good genes. Ron Amundson, in his review of Elisabeth Lloyd's book, The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution (2005), states "In the face of many failures of adaptationist theories, several reviewers find it irresistible to offer new explanations of their own" (Amundson, 2008).

Gould and Lewontin recognize this as a common style of argument followed by the adaptationist program: "we do wonder, though, Nhether the failure of one adaptive explanation should always simply inspire a earch for another... rather than a consideration of alternatives to the proposition that each part is for some specific purpose" (Gould and Lewontin, 1979). Although Puts et al.

illustrate captivating hypotheses for the female orgasm as an adaptation, they admit that "additional research is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn" (Puts et al. 012). Furthermore, the evidence

they submit for the mate-choice hypothesis is neither parsimonious nor convincing enough to support the theory that female orgasm is an adaptation. When explaining a trait in terms of on adaptation, one must assume the most arsimonious explanation, that is, the explanation with the fewest assumptions. As George C.

Williams explains, "parsimony demands that we recognize adaptation at the level necessitated by the facts and no higher" (Williams, 1996). Puts et al. 's sire choice hypothesis requires many assumptions.

First, they assume that sex (therefore orgasm) is linked to reproduction exclusively. They fail to recognize other explanations for sexual behavior (pleasure, power, and love, to name a few). Secondly, they assume that orgasm is unanimous among females: "Given that 90-95% of Nestern women report having experienced orgasm, and some of the remainder are ikely capable of doing so under more favorable circumstances.

.. data do not refute the possibility that orgasm is a species wide capacity in normal women" (Puts et al. , 2012).

If female orgasm was indeed shaped by natural selection, there should be 'ariability within the experience of the trait, and not unanimous, as the authors suggest. Third, in order for female orgasm to support the sire choice hypothesis, seven criteria must be met, including but not limited to: 1) orgasm promotes conception, 2) orgasm depends on male genetic quality of the mate, and 3) orgasm is more frequent near ovulation. Puts et al. emand too many assumptions of the female orgasm for the sire choice hypothesis to be parsimonious. Thus, the most parsimonious explanation for the female orgasm remains the byproduct hypothesis.

Conclusion human phenomenon? Why is it so difficult for scientists

to accept the orgasm as a nonfunctional developmental byproduct? Scientists have been proposing explanations for the female orgasm for decades, yet there has been no concrete evidence supporting any of the adaptationist stories. In order to assume that female orgasm is an adaptation shaped by natural selection, there must be data to support a orrelation between the quantity and/or quality of offspring and whether or not the female experiences orgasm during intercourse.