Comments on: British twins in emotional sex shocker

By: travesti

travesti — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:29:18 +0000

thnk you for sharing travesti

By: Jennifer R. Ewing

Jennifer R. Ewing — Thu, 14 May 2009 15:36:02 +0000

One more point. Correlational studies aren’t of much value because you can never completely account for every single variable. Correlational studies can always be skewed to try to show the result the experimenter hoped for, as opposed to a result that actually has merit or statistical significance.

By: Jennifer R. Ewing

Jennifer R. Ewing — Thu, 14 May 2009 15:29:27 +0000

“To ask for what you want,you first have to know what you want”?! The author of this post seems to suggest that women are incapable of adequately expressing their needs, wants and desires to their partner. Not only is that a sexist viewpoint, but it conveniently absolves the woman’s partner from any responsibility. If the partner isn’t interested in the other’s experience, but only in their own gratification, the woman could draw detailed illustrations, present a slideshow, and do lots of “show and tell” and all that effort would still come to naught. Sexual pleasure is best when it’s mutual. If your partner isn’t interested in what you want, it doesn’t matter how “emotionally intelligent” you are, because (duh) you’ll always be better off masturbating. I tell my husband to do A, so he does B, then tells me with some surprise he thought I’d like B better. That’s not a lack of “emotional intelligence” on my part. That’s my husband’s willful disregard of what I enjoy.

By: Christie

Christie — Wed, 13 May 2009 17:07:05 +0000

Not only are the correlations low, but they don’t even mention that there’s no causation in their methods: in short, EQ could be raised by frequent orgasms. I talked about that side of it in my post about it.

By: Tom Michael

Tom Michael — Wed, 13 May 2009 15:24:48 +0000

Thats a great Headline man. I was like; Mmmmmmm… Identical Twins…

By: Lilian Nattel

Lilian Nattel — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:57:00 +0000

It makes good press. It’s an attention grabber. And it links female orgasm with emotion(al intelligence). So in that way it appeals to social views of women by linking sex and emotion. Whether it is good science is another question. Thanks for explaining the stats.

By: Tom Rees

Tom Rees — Wed, 13 May 2009 10:53:49 +0000

Could’ve been communal masturbation…

By: Sulfura

Sulfura — Wed, 13 May 2009 09:36:20 +0000

Its not that I am sticking up for this study but…
“It’s also worth noting that the relationship is stronger for masturbation than orgasm during intercourse, which kinda pours cold water on the ‘asking for what you want in bed’ angle.”
To ask for what you want, you first have to know what you want.
Its not like people are born already knowing all their buttons. Some self experimentation is necessary. Women who have success at self experimentation can surely carry this skill on to shared experimentation. A high EQ is good for both these things.