CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:30
Arguments:12
Total Votes:34
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (12)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(40163) pic



Is there an evolutionary benefit for women to be multi-orgasmic?

multi-orgasmic women and sleepy men

Is there an evolutionary benefit for men to fall asleep shortly after sex?

Does a man (rolling off his mate and reaching for one last cigarette before) falling fast asleep while his mate's sexual appetite hasn't even reached its peak, give the woman a chance to mate again with someone else (in the tribe, thus mixing up the gene pool)?

Add New Argument

Obviously, for reproductive purposes, sex hzs to be pleasurable. The question is therefore, why is the multi-orgasm so hard to achieve. Well, that may not have been an issue before circumsicion (full fore-skin helps a women hence "ribbed" condoms). Also, sex was probably a source of entertainment. With no TV to distract you, it's possible sexual partners did it a lot for a prolonged period of time. About it being "multi": why not? Singular makes less sense if its meant to produce pleasure, and its only singular in man because once it happens reproduction can begin (hence further orgasms are redundant for just one ejaculation).

Just because you can't do it Joe, doesn't mean no on can.

Side: Joe just can't please a woman
altarion(1955) Disputed
3 points

Wasn't there, for a long time, scientific belief that the circumcision lead to a healthier sexual life for men? Because the forskin caught dirt and bacteria and what-not that was hard to remove (kinda like your wisdom teeth skin flaps) but was later disproved? And as for less pleasureable after being circumcised, WHAT? That doesn't make any sense to me. Foreskin or no foreskin it is still stretched out once a guy gets an erection, so how could it be that having a foreskin on the male is more pleasureable for the female?

Side: Joe just can't please a woman
3 points

what the fuck is Joe tryna get at with this debate ? jeebs. lol.

Side: Joe just can't please a woman

One up vote for you. I bow to your ability to shoot more than once but I just need one shot to get a bulls eye ;)

Side: just another stupid debate by JC
3 points

I am pretty sure the conclusion was that it allows the semen to be pulled in farther therefore increasing chance of pregnancy.

Side: Pull in deeper
2 points

No, I'm pretty sure I can deliver my pay load right to the target's front door. Kinda like UPS ;)

Side: just another stupid debate by JC
3 points

According to Sperm Wars by Robin Baker, female orgasms are used to either help or hurt the passage of sperm up the cervix. If the woman orgasms 1-2 minutes before the man does, all of the mucus in her cervix will have been expelled, making it easier for the sperm to swim up said cervix. Any longer, and the cervix will be swamped with new mucus, making it harder for sperm to go up.

To summarize: it allows women's bodies to decide whether or not to become pregnant.

Side: Defense against Sperm Warfare

OK, I've two kids, so does that mean "mission acomplished?"

I mean, if the cervix is swamped with new mucus and the woman gets pregnant, then that means that the sperm that gets to the egg is more than likely a boy sperm becuase boy sperm are stronger and are able to swim upstream.

On the other hand, girl sperm have a better chance to make it to the egg if the mucus in the cervix has already been expelled due to a "premature" orgam (1-2 minutes before the man).

Now, not only do I have 2 kids, but they're both girls; which proves my statement earlier, "I just need one shot to hit the bulls eye!" :)

Side: just another stupid debate by JC
1 point

From a genetic point of view, yes.

As for the sperm comment, how does the premature orgasm help girl sperm? Are there more of them?

Lol at the last line. :P

Side: just another stupid debate by JC

I don't know but I'm a light sleeper so it doesn't affect me ;)

Side: just another stupid debate by JC
0 points

I HAVE NO CLUE BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS GUY LIKES TO GET QUEEFED ON

Side: just another stupid debate by JC