Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022 Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022 OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published.
Contact OrangeEnt for info: maildrop62 at proton dot me
While the subjects watched on a computer screen, Chivers... measured their arousal in two ways, objectively and subjectively... The genitals of the volunteers were connected to plethysmographs [also known as "bonermeters" -- ace]...
The men, on average, responded genitally in what Chivers terms “category specific” ways. Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women....
All was different with the women. No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, they showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men. They responded objectively much more to the exercising woman than to the strolling man, and their blood flow rose quickly... as they watched the apes. And with the women, especially the straight women, mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad weren’t in much accord. During shots of lesbian coupling, heterosexual women reported less excitement than their vaginas indicated; watching gay men, they reported a great deal less; and viewing heterosexual intercourse, they reported much more. Among the lesbian volunteers, the two readings converged when women appeared on the screen. But when the films featured only men, the lesbians reported less engagement than the plethysmograph recorded. Whether straight or gay, the women claimed almost no arousal whatsoever while staring at the bonobos.
Monkeys? You sick twists are getting off on monkeys?
I guess we know which gender came up with "hot monkey sex."
Based on Chivers' research, the following is the most sexually arousing video for women ever produced. It's got it all.
Oh, and this is the best song to make love to:
New strategy to get your wife to screw you: "The Mighty Joe Hung."
Thanks to EdC.
But Seriously... ThomasD suggests what occurred to me almost immediately, that this is not really "sexual arousal" per se as we think of it, but merely a completely automatic, inborn reaction to the thought of sex -- even undesired sex -- so as to prepare women for it, should they actually have sex.
In other words, this might be as non-indicative of actual sexual arousal as morning wood. No one ever studies morning boners and concludes "Sleep makes men horny." It's just something your joint does while you're asleep, like Norton AntiVirus performing background monitoring.
I read four of the seven (seven!) pages of this article, and this notion wasn't mentioned at all. I think because it's non-sexy, and kinda just demolishes all provocative, exciting conclusions this research suggests (but doesn't prove).
Porn for Women! Here's some bonobos having hot monkey sex.
Content Warning. Because I guess I see what might be doing the trick in women's minds: The monkeys look an awful like humans when they hump, in terms of motions and postures.