Use of the Bogus Pipeline Increases Sexual Concordance in Women But Not Men

Sex Differences in Sexual Motivation in Humans and Other Mammals: The Role of Conscious and Unconscious Processes

In self-report questionnaires, men report higher scores than women on variables such as desire for sex, frequency of sexual thoughts, number of sex partners, etc. Based on this, men are considered to have a higher level of sexual motivation than women. However, retrospective self-reports may be unsuitable for estimations of the inherent level of sexual motivation. We review data on automatic (unconsciously controlled) responses and measures of implicit motivation during exposure to sexual stimuli. These responses and measures are inaccessible to willful manipulations and make it possible to determine whether the sex difference in answers to questionnaires is replicated when volitional response manipulations are unlikely. We complement the human data with observations from some rodent and non-human primate species. The attentional resources allotted to stimuli with sexual relevance as well as genital responses to such stimuli are similar in men and women. Measures of implicit motivation also fail to detect any sex difference. Finally, the frequency of masturbation is superior in female infants before the age at which social expectations begin to determine behavior. Neither in rodents nor in non-human primates is there any clear-cut evidence for sex differences in motivation. It seems that males and females are similar with regard to the intensity of sexual motivation. The responses to questionnaires may be affected by social learning of sexual scripts and/or the inferior quality of sexual experiences in women, among other things.

The elusive concept of sexual motivation: can it be anchored in the nervous system?

Sexual motivation is an abstract concept referring to the mechanisms determining the responsivity to sexually relevant stimuli. This responsivity determines the likelihood of producing a sexual response and the intensity of that response. Both responsivity to stimuli and the likelihood of making a response as well as the intensity of response are characteristics of an individual. Therefore, we need to assume that the concept of sexual motivation materializes in physiological mechanisms within the individual. The aim of the present communication is to analyze the requisites for the endeavor to materialize sexual motivation. The first requisite is to provide an operational definition, making the concept quantifiable. We show that parameters of copulatory behavior are inappropriate. We argue that the intensity of sexual approach behaviors provides the best estimate of sexual motivation in non-human animals, whereas the magnitude of genital responses is an exquisite indicator of human sexual motivation. Having assured how to quantify sexual motivation, we can then proceed to the search for physiological or neurobiological underpinnings. In fact, sexual motivation only manifests itself in animals exposed to appropriate amounts of gonadal hormones. In female rats, the estrogen receptor α in the ventrolateral part of the ventromedial nucleus of the hypothalamus is necessary for the expression of sexual approach behaviors. In male rats, androgen receptors within the medial preoptic area are crucial. Thus, in rats sexual motivation can be localized to specific brain structures, and even to specific cells within these structures. In humans, it is not even known if sexual motivation is materialized in the brain or in peripheral structures. Substantial efforts have been made to determine the relationship between the activity of neurotransmitters and the intensity of sexual motivation, particularly in rodents. The results of this effort have been meager. Likewise, efforts of finding drugs to stimulate sexual motivation, particularly in women complaining of low sexual desire, have produced dismal results. In sum, it appears that the abstract concept of sexual motivation can be reliably quantified, and the neurobiological bases can be described in non-human animals. In humans, objective quantification is feasible, but the neurobiological substrate remains enigmatic.

Use of sexual stimuli in research and clinical settings: expert opinion and recommendations

Background

Sexual stimuli, such as sexual videos, images, and narratives describing sexual interactions, are one of many tools used by clinicians and researchers to elicit or augment sexual response. Given the wide variability within sexual stimuli and their effects on sexual response, we provide guidance on when and how to use sexual stimuli, selecting sexual stimuli, and standardizing the use and reporting of sexual stimuli in research and clinical practice.

Aim

This expert opinion review article discusses standard operating procedures when using sexual stimuli in clinical and research applications, addressing 3 broad areas: settings in which sexual stimuli are used, characteristics and contexts of the stimuli, and practical and ethical considerations when using the stimuli.

Methods

This article is based on an expert opinion review of the sexual psychophysiology literature.

Results

First, we discuss the settings in which sexual stimuli are typically used and evaluate the ecological validity of each setting. Second, we review the types of sexual stimuli used in sexual response research, including physical characteristics, depicted sexual activity, and context, and the impacts of these characteristics on sexual response. Last, we discuss the practical and ethical considerations that come with the choice and use of sexual stimuli in clinical and research settings. We address potential limitations of certain sexual stimuli, including practical and ethical considerations such as participant vs experimenter choice, diversity and representation, and proper sourcing of sexual stimuli for use in clinical and research applications. Discussions on the future applications of sexual stimuli, such as the use of virtual reality, and ethical considerations in terms of user-generated Internet sexual stimuli are also explored.

Conclusion

We provide an expert opinion review of the literature regarding use of sexual stimuli for clinical and research applications and offer best use practices and recommendations.

Study of Sexual Concordance in Men and Women with Different Typologies of Adherence to the Sexual Double Standard

Background/Objective

Sexual concordance (i.e., relationship between genital response and subjective sexual arousal) is higher in men than in women. Among the factors that could explain this difference would be the sexual double standard (SDS). Sexual concordance is examined by SDS typologies of adherence (egalitarian, man-favorable, and woman-favorable).

Method

During exposure to a film with sexual content, genital response (penile circumference/vaginal pulse amplitude) and self-reported sexual arousal were recorded in 104 young adults (42 men and 62 women), distributed into SDS typologies of adherence on the basis of their scores on the Sexual Double Standard Scale.

Results

Sexual concordance was obtained in men and women with egalitarian and man-favorable typology. Subjective sexual arousal explained a significant percentage of the variance in genital response in the egalitarian typology (men: R² = .32, p < .01; women: R² = .19, p < .05) and man-favorable typology (men: R² = .21, p < .05; women: R² = .23, p < .05).

Conclusions

Agreement between genital responsiveness and subjective sexual arousal depends on DES adherence typology.

Women Get Worse Sex: A Confound in the Explanation of Gender Differences in Sexuality

Gender differences in sexuality have gained considerable attention both within and outside of the scientific community. We argue that one of the main unacknowledged reasons for these differences is simply that women experience substantially worse sex than men do. Thus, in examinations of the etiology of gender differences in sexuality, a confound has largely been unacknowledged: Women and men are treated to different experiences of what is called "sexuality" and "having sex." We discuss four arenas in which women's experience of sexuality may often be worse than men's: (a) anatomical differences, (b) sexual violence, (c) stigma, and (d) masculine cultures of sexuality. Then we consider how each disparity might explain well-known gender differences in sexuality.