Jump to content

See evolution from sex positions


clumsygirl
 Share

Recommended Posts

As human, the main reason we study on the human sex positions is only for baby conception. Today, I want to stand in the prospective of evolution to have a look at the animals' sex positions. First, we have to know how many sex positions animals have on the earth. One is rear entry (doggie style), the other is face to face.

 

1, Rear entry In this position, male have the penetration into vagina behind the female. It is also called doggie style, because animals mostly have sex in this position as same as dog. Of course rear entry has lots of variation, such as the standing canine, spooning, the cuissade, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetration from the back of female. According to the people who hold the theory of penis envy, this position is good for stroking female G-spot, because penetration is quite deep in this position. I really have to admit that this position indeed offers a deep penetration during sex, but unfortunately the G-spot never exist. With the skin gone, what can the hair adhere to?

 

2, Face to face In this position, male penetrates female face to face. If you have ever seen other animals mating, you know that face to face position is pretty much unique to humans, so far we only find two animals who do the sex face to face: Bonobo and Chimpanzee, undoubtedly they are the closest relatives to humans we have found. Missionary position is the most popular in human, and it offers the deepest penetration thereby allowing semen to easily enter the cervix. Of course missionary position also has lots of variation, such as the lap dancing, the female superior position, the scissors position, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetrating female face to face.

 

Do you ever think why almost animals, except human, only have the rear entry sex position? Why face to face position only happens during human, bonobo and chimpanzee? What is the difference between the two positions in evolution? What makes face to face happened on human, but not on other animals? Is face to face sex position the result of human evolution?

 

Here I try to explain these questions step by step. First, if earth's entire history was just 24 hours long,

Life on Earth (app. 3.8 Ga) 4:10 AM

Metazoans (1.2 Ga?) 17:44 PM

Chordates (565 Ma) 21:03 PM

Land dwelling plants (475 Ma) 21:31 PM

Land dwelling animals 21:46 PM

Reptiles (340 Ma) 22:13 PM

Dinosaurs (235 Ma) 22:46 PM

Mammals (225 Ma) 22:49 PM

Common ape-human ancestor (7 Ma) 23:57 PM

Homo sapiens (165.000) 23:59:56,9 PM

Oldest civilizations (3.500) 23:59:59,9 PM

Industrial revolution (250) 23:59:59,999 ?

 

post-46871-0-07547100-1342250971_thumb.gif

 

From the history of evolution, undoubtedly the face to face sex position occurs far behind rear entry sex position, because sex reproduction occurs in 18:08 PM, but human occurs in 11:58:43 PM. So we can claim that rear entry really has a long history than face to face, and it also means face to face is really the result of evolution.

 

Second, I think one of the reasons why face to face happens on human is that people want to see and communicate with each other during sex process, at least one side wants. It illustrates that other animals don't have the desire to see the partner during the sex. Why? Sex also ends as male ejaculation, what makes the difference between human and animals? I think the only reason is that the purposes they have sex is different. The purpose animals have sex is just for reproduction, so male only have sex with female during the estrus, maybe once a year or twice a year. In general, they mates only during female estrus. Look back to our human. Man nearly want to have sex with a woman all the time, whatever she is in estrus or not, whatever she is in fertility age or menopause age. Apparently, we can claim that human have sex not only for the reproduction, but also for some other purpose, maybe for pleasure or self sex desire. In modern time, I think reproduction is only a by-product for a man to have sex.

 

Third, what makes human have the other purpose to have a sex rather than reproduction different from other animals? I think the answer is evolution, not only physical evolution, but also psychology evolution. In physical evolution, human is the only animals who always walk upright, and scientists think the first mammal that walked upright was the ape-like australopithecines - believed by scientists to be an ancestor of early humans – which lived about five million years ago in Africa. Walking upright significantly frees up the hands to carry objects, also creates the physical conditions for face-to-face mating. But only physical evolution is not enough in short history of human. In psychology evolution, self-awareness shows up. Frankly speaking, I am not an idealist, but I really agree with some points of Descartes. Human need more than basic physical needs which only in the first floor during Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Undoubtedly, the self-awareness of human is the strongest among all animals, then human are going to pursue the other four needs, like safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, self-actualization. Do you notice that: the higher up in the model of Maslow, the more words "Self" he used, such as self-esteem in forth floor, self-actualization top floor, and of course, self-awareness makes humans so significant difference from others. I don't mean that self-awareness can exist without brain, but the form of its existing is really different from substance, for example, if people got drunk, they were unconscious, but the brain still there. Self-awareness is going to start make human to have a clear perception of internal and external things, including personality, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, and emotions, so human began to a real evolution in comparison with other animals. As human grow in self-awareness, we will understand who we are and what we want and why we want it. So men found that they were more willing to enjoy the special pleasure during sex, not only for the original purpose: reproduction, as a species. I can claim that the phenomenon of human having sex all the time is the product of development of human self-awareness, precisely to say, just man self-awareness.

 

Finally, sex positions evolved. Because chimpanzee females are highly promiscuous, some scientists thought chimpanzee females are more likely to achieve orgasm by mating sequentially with multiple males. This is big mistake. The main reason I think chimpanzee females can't achieve orgasm is just because they mate with multiple males sequentially. If they really have an orgasm, they must have the refractory period right after orgasm, and can't get into another mating. As a woman, I have to admit that the evolutions of man and woman are not synchronous, apparently, the evolution of female, in many areas, lagged behind male. As men, they have already walked out the trap of reproduction, but women are still trapped in the cave. Evolution is always moving forward. Human and our closest relatives are already evolved far forward than other animals, and the most significant sign is the appearance of face to face sex position, because only in this position, female have a chance to stimulate the clitoris shaft by accident, and then women's self-consciousness can be awakened. Women will know that sooner or later the true meaning of sex is "genital rubbing", the problem is that male genital is penis, but female genital is clitoris shaft, not vagina.

 

Many times history is unfair, especially in the reproduction of species. Even we can say that the reproduction is so selfish and cruel, not only can it sacrifice the interests of other species, and also even can sacrifice some group of their own species. Fortunately, evolution is still moving forward, we are only on the middle way of long evolutionary history. Human have lots of things waiting to be changed, human females have more. It is really time for women to get out the trap of reproduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm, humans mate face to face? Humans mate many ways and all of them can and do result in orgasm for both partners, genital stimulation via means other than intercourse is not uncommon among animals other than humans and some in species of bats fellatio is necessary for intercourse to happen. Doggy style is not the oldest copulation position, reptiles usually mate side to side as do some internally fertilized fishes and lets not forget dolphins...

 

Your premise would seem to be based on quite few assumptions that are simply not true...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a suggestion that men find breasts interesting because they resemble buttocks.

I'm a "breast man" myself but often stroke my wife's buttocks when we give each other a hug!

 

"Sexologist Alfred Kind suggested that the buttocks is the primary sexual presentation site in primates. Some anthropologists and sociobiologists believe that breast fetishism derives from the breasts' similarity to buttocks, but instead provide sexual attraction from the front of the body.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_history_of_the_buttocks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a suggestion that men find breasts interesting because they resemble buttocks.

I'm a "breast man" myself but often stroke my wife's buttocks when we give each other a hug!

 

"Sexologist Alfred Kind suggested that the buttocks is the primary sexual presentation site in primates. Some anthropologists and sociobiologists believe that breast fetishism derives from the breasts' similarity to buttocks, but instead provide sexual attraction from the front of the body.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_history_of_the_buttocks

 

 

I tend to agree ( i misread your post, sorry) with that, most of the women I've "known" seem to prefer doggy style for simple raw orgasm, face to face more for intimacy...

 

The OP seems to be making some rather unusual assumptions, human sexuality is quite varied and much of our sexuality is orientated around sexual acts that do not result in procreation, cunnilingus and fellatio are too big examples. you cannot simplify human sexuality to simply intercourse, our mating practices are simply more complex than that and foreplay is often as much fun orgasm wise as actual intercourse.

 

Then of course you have the range of actual sexual orientation from totally heterosexual to totally homosexual and everything in between, bonobos have been used as an example of a complex sexual/social system but I think human sexuality is if anything more complex but more subtle...

Edited by Moontanman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree ( i misread your post, sorry) with that, most of the women I've "known" seem to prefer doggy style for simple raw orgasm, face to face more for intimacy...

 

The OP seems to be making some rather unusual assumptions, human sexuality is quite varied and much of our sexuality is orientated around sexual acts that do not result in procreation, cunnilingus and fellatio are too big examples. you cannot simplify human sexuality to simply intercourse, our mating practices are simply more complex than that and foreplay is often as much fun orgasm wise as actual intercourse.

 

Then of course you have the range of actual sexual orientation from totally heterosexual to totally homosexual and everything in between, bonobos have been used as an example of a complex sexual/social system but I think human sexuality is if anything more complex but more subtle...

 

I don't know whether to feel jealous or not lol. I see I'm almost a generation older than you and doubtless wasn't as attractive to the opposite sex anyway. Perhaps times and expectations were different. I was certainly not irresistible! I actually married the first, and only, girl that I have had full intercourse with! But I soon made up for lost time with her willing assistance. biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know whether to feel jealous or not lol. I see I'm almost a generation older than you and doubtless wasn't as attractive to the opposite sex anyway. Perhaps times and expectations were different. I was certainly not irresistible! I actually married the first, and only, girl that I have had full intercourse with! But I soon made up for lost time with her willing assistance. biggrin.gif

 

 

The love of a good woman is far more precious than experience with many woman, i applaud you joatman...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at the OPs posts throughout the site. All saying painfully inaccurate things, all talking about sex, and ranting about evolutionary psych. They also never return for discussion and never address the counters made of their points. It's like a special kind of spam, but more ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at the OPs posts throughout the site. All saying painfully inaccurate things, all talking about sex, and ranting about evolutionary psych. They also never return for discussion and never address the counters made of their points. It's like a special kind of spam, but more ignorant.

 

 

I am beginning to think it's someone too young or inexperienced or both to ask the right questions much less debate them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP's question, although surrounded by factual difficulties, is based on a legitimate observation regarding face-to-face versus doggie style, to which, I believe, science provides a valid reason.

 

I see the differences in sexual positions as a result of changes in physical construction brought on by evolution.

 

If you look at the construction of four-legged animals, you'll notice that their torsos are generally deeper than they are wide and that their limbs are primarily directed toward the ventral (ie, belly), with their range of motion very limited. If you notice animals that get onto their backs, they are generally not stable (or comfortable) in that position, and they cannot easily get their limbs "underneath themselves" to right themselves, leaving them very vulnerable.

 

As primates evolved bipedal locomotion, their torsos became flatter front-to-back, with their torsos being wider than they are deep, most pronounced in humans, and among humans, most pronounced in Asians who tend to have (for example) much flatter pelvises than other human "races". The limbs are primarily directed toward the posterior and have a much greater range of motion. This allows either gender to lie down comfortably (or stand up or sit down), and thus, to facilitate face-to-face sex much more easily.

 

Not only do humans rest (and even sleep) comfortably on their backs, but their limbs can also rotate toward the dorsal direction, the arms propping up their end of the torso on elbows, and the legs propping up their end of the torso on feet. Long ago, westerners encountered native people (I'm not sure where), who typically engaged in sex in a modified "missionary" position, where the females completely levitated their torsos, allowing them much greater abilities to thrust their pelvises, and the males must have been on "hands and knees" or some similar position.

 

Another evolutionary modification apparently caused by bipedal locomotion/stance is that the penis, whose direction seems limited in most animals toward the anterior (thus limiting allowable sex positions, such as doggie style), can hang down (toward the posterior), which prevents males from urinating up themselves and allows the urethra to drain completely while standing and, as a collateral effect, probably allows comfortable sex in more positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm, humans mate face to face? Humans mate many ways and all of them can and do result in orgasm for both partners, genital stimulation via means other than intercourse is not uncommon among animals other than humans and some in species of bats fellatio is necessary for intercourse to happen. Doggy style is not the oldest copulation position, reptiles usually mate side to side as do some internally fertilized fishes and lets not forget dolphins...

 

Your premise would seem to be based on quite few assumptions that are simply not true...

 

 

i think we can argue something here? Can you tell me what assumptions i mentioned in this paper are wrong. i will response for that.

 

Thank you!

 

There is a suggestion that men find breasts interesting because they resemble buttocks.

I'm a "breast man" myself but often stroke my wife's buttocks when we give each other a hug!

 

"Sexologist Alfred Kind suggested that the buttocks is the primary sexual presentation site in primates. Some anthropologists and sociobiologists believe that breast fetishism derives from the breasts' similarity to buttocks, but instead provide sexual attraction from the front of the body.[2]"

http://en.wikipedia....of_the_buttocks

 

 

thank you for your suggestion, frankly speaking, i don't agree with lots of things Alfred Kinsey said.

 

Thank you again.

 

I tend to agree ( i misread your post, sorry) with that, most of the women I've "known" seem to prefer doggy style for simple raw orgasm, face to face more for intimacy...

 

The OP seems to be making some rather unusual assumptions, human sexuality is quite varied and much of our sexuality is orientated around sexual acts that do not result in procreation, cunnilingus and fellatio are too big examples. you cannot simplify human sexuality to simply intercourse, our mating practices are simply more complex than that and foreplay is often as much fun orgasm wise as actual intercourse.

 

Then of course you have the range of actual sexual orientation from totally heterosexual to totally homosexual and everything in between, bonobos have been used as an example of a complex sexual/social system but I think human sexuality is if anything more complex but more subtle...

 

Moontanman, I hope you were right, unfortunatley, you are not.

 

The love of a good woman is far more precious than experience with many woman, i applaud you joatman...

 

Unfortunately, the love of a good woman can get herself an real orgasm.

 

Take a look at the OPs posts throughout the site. All saying painfully inaccurate things, all talking about sex, and ranting about evolutionary psych. They also never return for discussion and never address the counters made of their points. It's like a special kind of spam, but more ignorant.

 

You can understand it ,maybe because you are too ignorant.

 

I am beginning to think it's someone too young or inexperienced or both to ask the right questions much less debate them...

 

The fact is the child of time, you will see it sooner or later.

 

I hope you can hold your opinion at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As human, the main reason we study on the human sex positions is only for baby conception. Today, I want to stand in the prospective of evolution to have a look at the animals' sex positions. First, we have to know how many sex positions animals have on the earth. One is rear entry (doggie style), the other is face to face.

 

1, Rear entry In this position, male have the penetration into vagina behind the female. It is also called doggie style, because animals mostly have sex in this position as same as dog. Of course rear entry has lots of variation, such as the standing canine, spooning, the cuissade, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetration from the back of female. According to the people who hold the theory of penis envy, this position is good for stroking female G-spot, because penetration is quite deep in this position. I really have to admit that this position indeed offers a deep penetration during sex, but unfortunately the G-spot never exist. With the skin gone, what can the hair adhere to?

 

2, Face to face In this position, male penetrates female face to face. If you have ever seen other animals mating, you know that face to face position is pretty much unique to humans, so far we only find two animals who do the sex face to face: Bonobo and Chimpanzee, undoubtedly they are the closest relatives to humans we have found. Missionary position is the most popular in human, and it offers the deepest penetration thereby allowing semen to easily enter the cervix. Of course missionary position also has lots of variation, such as the lap dancing, the female superior position, the scissors position, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetrating female face to face.

 

I'd like to see some support for this assumption.

 

Do you ever think why almost animals, except human, only have the rear entry sex position? Why face to face position only happens during human, bonobo and chimpanzee? What is the difference between the two positions in evolution? What makes face to face happened on human, but not on other animals? Is face to face sex position the result of human evolution?

 

Can I ask for clarification here? Are we talking about just primates? Just mammals? Or all living creatures? I am not claer how this applies to anything but mammals.

 

[/size][/font] From the history of evolution, undoubtedly the face to face sex position occurs far behind rear entry sex position, because sex reproduction occurs in 18:08 PM, but human occurs in 11:58:43 PM. So we can claim that rear entry really has a long history than face to face, and it also means face to face is really the result of evolution.

 

Your conclusion is possibly correct but the way you go about asserting is disturbing. It's not true that doggy style is more common in anything but mammals, and it is mostly due to the body plan of mammals and the reduced tail compared to reptiles and dinosaurs. I think face to face sex is the result of evolutionary pressures, the result of humans being so sexually active. I think it's called sexual selection.

 

Second, I think one of the reasons why face to face happens on human is that people want to see and communicate with each other during sex process, at least one side wants. It illustrates that other animals don't have the desire to see the partner during the sex. Why? Sex also ends as male ejaculation, what makes the difference between human and animals? I think the only reason is that the purposes they have sex is different. The purpose animals have sex is just for reproduction, so male only have sex with female during the estrus, maybe once a year or twice a year. In general, they mates only during female estrus. Look back to our human. Man nearly want to have sex with a woman all the time, whatever she is in estrus or not, whatever she is in fertility age or menopause age. Apparently, we can claim that human have sex not only for the reproduction, but also for some other purpose, maybe for pleasure or self sex desire. In modern time, I think reproduction is only a by-product for a man to have sex.

 

I would like to point out that humans seem to use sex as a pair bonding ritual and not just for reproduction, we have almost all our sex for fun and to show our partner how much we love them.

 

Third, what makes human have the other purpose to have a sex rather than reproduction different from other animals? I think the answer is evolution, not only physical evolution, but also psychology evolution. In physical evolution, human is the only animals who always walk upright, and scientists think the first mammal that walked upright was the ape-like australopithecines - believed by scientists to be an ancestor of early humans – which lived about five million years ago in Africa. Walking upright significantly frees up the hands to carry objects, also creates the physical conditions for face-to-face mating. But only physical evolution is not enough in short history of human. In psychology evolution, self-awareness shows up. Frankly speaking, I am not an idealist, but I really agree with some points of Descartes. Human need more than basic physical needs which only in the first floor during Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Undoubtedly, the self-awareness of human is the strongest among all animals, then human are going to pursue the other four needs, like safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, self-actualization. Do you notice that: the higher up in the model of Maslow, the more words "Self" he used, such as self-esteem in forth floor, self-actualization top floor, and of course, self-awareness makes humans so significant difference from others. I don't mean that self-awareness can exist without brain, but the form of its existing is really different from substance, for example, if people got drunk, they were unconscious, but the brain still there. Self-awareness is going to start make human to have a clear perception of internal and external things, including personality, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, and emotions, so human began to a real evolution in comparison with other animals. As human grow in self-awareness, we will understand who we are and what we want and why we want it. So men found that they were more willing to enjoy the special pleasure during sex, not only for the original purpose: reproduction, as a species. I can claim that the phenomenon of human having sex all the time is the product of development of human self-awareness, precisely to say, just man self-awareness.

 

Finally, sex positions evolved. Because chimpanzee females are highly promiscuous, some scientists thought chimpanzee females are more likely to achieve orgasm by mating sequentially with multiple males. This is big mistake. The main reason I think chimpanzee females can't achieve orgasm is just because they mate with multiple males sequentially. If they really have an orgasm, they must have the refractory period right after orgasm, and can't get into another mating. As a woman, I have to admit that the evolutions of man and woman are not synchronous, apparently, the evolution of female, in many areas, lagged behind male. As men, they have already walked out the trap of reproduction, but women are still trapped in the cave. Evolution is always moving forward. Human and our closest relatives are already evolved far forward than other animals, and the most significant sign is the appearance of face to face sex position, because only in this position, female have a chance to stimulate the clitoris shaft by accident, and then women's self-consciousness can be awakened. Women will know that sooner or later the true meaning of sex is "genital rubbing", the problem is that male genital is penis, but female genital is clitoris shaft, not vagina.

 

Many times history is unfair, especially in the reproduction of species. Even we can say that the reproduction is so selfish and cruel, not only can it sacrifice the interests of other species, and also even can sacrifice some group of their own species. Fortunately, evolution is still moving forward, we are only on the middle way of long evolutionary history. Human have lots of things waiting to be changed, human females have more. It is really time for women to get out the trap of reproduction.

 

 

i think we can argue something here? Can you tell me what assumptions i mentioned in this paper are wrong. i will response for that.

 

Thank you!

 

 

 

 

thank you for your suggestion, frankly speaking, i don't agree with lots of things Alfred Kinsey said.

 

Thank you again.

 

 

 

Moontanman, I hope you were right, unfortunatley, you are not.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, the love of a good woman can get herself an real orgasm.

 

 

 

You can understand it ,maybe because you are too ignorant.

 

 

 

The fact is the child of time, you will see it sooner or later.

 

I hope you can hold your opinion at that time.

 

 

Clumsygirl, we are talking something here that is very subjective, ask 1000 people sexual questions and you are likely to get 1000 different answers. I'm not sure you can nail down any aspect of human sexuality and apply it across the board to everyone.

 

One thing is for sure i don't see how you can connect humans making love face to face with anything other than our desire for intimacy. We certainly can and do have rewarding sexual experiences in other ways and saying that somehow face to face is uniquely human or an evolutionary significant move is not supported by your assumptions.

 

Clumsygirl, it is quite possible we are simply not communicating, i get the impression that English is not your original language, possibly some of the problems are centered around that possibility or they could be cultural. I have found that the attitudes of some cultures about sex and what is or is not true is quite dependent of that particular culture. I am going to bold a couple places in this post that confuse me and possibly we can get past this impass and have a more meaningful conversation.

 

I bolded some of the stuff that needs to be discussed, I'll be back later...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.