Interesting BBC article on female sexual response...

[ordinaryman]

Interesting BBC article on female sexual response...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38170324

What is it specifically you find interesting?
The science?
The fact that there is so much more to learn?

I found many elements of it interesting, especially the fact that it took this poor woman 20 doctors to get to somebody who understood and could remedy her problem.

Also the assertion that so little is known about female sexual response relative that that of men..

And also that particularly women's physiology differs so widely that a lot of advice given-out in magazines, etc. is likely to be useless to 50% of it's audience.

But above all, I thought others on here might find it an interesting read (?)

That's very interesting.
A lot more work does need to be done, but it does explain why women are so vastly different if the number and location of their nerve endings varies so much.
There is definitely a different attitude towards male vs female sex drive and dysfunction.
And the advice about getting into an active state is interesting too.

Thanks op. That was an interesting read.

I've been trying to figure out what bothers me about the ?tone ?content of this article.
It's not that the science is not fascinating and interesting and very much deserving of more investigation etc etc, but it is the implication that female sexual dysfunction can or should be fixed or at least be fixable.
When IMO what goes on between the ears is far more important than what goes on between the legs.

The example of the young woman who suffered with a very rare condition is of course upsetting/painful/frustrating for her, so research into how to recognise/diagnose/treat this is welcome, but maybe there should be more emphasis on how women may be treated better, feel valued, feel wanted and therefore enjoy better sexual lives.

Human sexuality is such a difficult to pin down thing that more research is welcomed, but I wonder whether it is misplaced by just focusing on the genitals.

It's going to make a huge difference if a physical reason for the lack of enjoyment of sex can be identified.

Lots of research is needed, this is just one area that is being explored because there is such a mismatch between the understanding of male and female genitals. There's also a huge difference between how male and female dysfunction issues are treated. Men's erectile dysfunction is treated far more seriously than women's comparable problems. There's an underlying expectation that women can just do it anyway, their pleasure is unimportant. More research and understanding should help to address this.

I do agree that the brain plays a vital part of sexual function, but the genitals are also vital.

I was quite shocked that such attitudes still exist. That lots of research goes into erectile disfunction (as a man's well being, satisfaction is important plus the whole making babies bit) but for women, it doesn't seem to matter. I thought we had moved beyond that attitude.

Pacific I agree what goes on between the ears is important. I do find it interesting that physiology is also important.

OH MY GOODNESS! When seeing BBC I though of something else regardless, it is interesting.

Thanks OP; a very interesting piece and just illustrates how female pleasure is under researched compared to the male equivalent.