What do you think?
Rate this book
A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World's Largest Experiment Reveals about Human Desire
Two maverick neuroscientists use the world's largest psychology experiment-the Internet-to study the private activities of millions of men and women around the world, unveiling a revolutionary and shocking new vision of human desire that overturns conventional thinking.
For his groundbreaking sexual research, Alfred Kinsey and his team interviewed 18,000 people, relying on them to honestly report their most intimate experiences. Using the Internet, the neuroscientists Ogas and Gaddam quietly observed the raw sexual behaviors of half a billion people. By combining their observations with neuroscience and animal research, these two young neuroscientists finally answer the long-disputed question: what do people really like? Ogas and Gaddam's findings are transforming the way scientists and therapists think about sexual desire.
In their startling book, Ogas and Gaddam analyze a "billion wicked thoughts" on the Internet: a billion Web searches, a million individual search histories, a million erotic stories, a half-million erotic videos, a million Web sites, millions of online personal ads, and many other enormous sources of sexual data in order to understand the true differences between male and female desires, including:
?Men and women have hardwired sexual cues analogous to our hardwired tastes-there are sexual versions of sweet, sour, salty, savory, and bitter. But men and women are wired with different sets of cues.
?The male sexual brain resembles a reckless hunter, while the female sexual brain resembles a cautious detective agency.
?Men form their sexual interests during adolescence and rarely change. Women's sexual interests are plastic and change frequently.
?The male sexual brain is an "or gate": A single stimulus can arouse it. The female sexual brain is an "and gate": It requires many simultaneous stimuli to arouse it.
?When it comes to sexual arousal, men prefer overweight women to underweight women, and a significant number of men seek out erotic images of women in their 40s, 50s, and 60s.
?Women enjoy writing and sharing erotic stories with other women. The fastest growing genre of erotic stories for women are stories about two heterosexual men having sex.
?Though the male sexual brain is much more different from the female sexual brain than is commonly believed, the sexual brain of gay men is virtually identical to that of straight men.
Featuring cutting-edge, jaw-dropping science, this wildly entertaining and controversial book helps readers understand their partner's sexual desires with a depth of knowledge unavailable from any other source. Its fascinating and occasionally disturbing findings will rock our modern understanding of sexuality, just as Kinsey's reports did sixty years ago.
For his groundbreaking sexual research, Alfred Kinsey and his team interviewed 18,000 people, relying on them to honestly report their most intimate experiences. Using the Internet, the neuroscientists Ogas and Gaddam quietly observed the raw sexual behaviors of half a billion people. By combining their observations with neuroscience and animal research, these two young neuroscientists finally answer the long-disputed question: what do people really like? Ogas and Gaddam's findings are transforming the way scientists and therapists think about sexual desire.
In their startling book, Ogas and Gaddam analyze a "billion wicked thoughts" on the Internet: a billion Web searches, a million individual search histories, a million erotic stories, a half-million erotic videos, a million Web sites, millions of online personal ads, and many other enormous sources of sexual data in order to understand the true differences between male and female desires, including:
?Men and women have hardwired sexual cues analogous to our hardwired tastes-there are sexual versions of sweet, sour, salty, savory, and bitter. But men and women are wired with different sets of cues.
?The male sexual brain resembles a reckless hunter, while the female sexual brain resembles a cautious detective agency.
?Men form their sexual interests during adolescence and rarely change. Women's sexual interests are plastic and change frequently.
?The male sexual brain is an "or gate": A single stimulus can arouse it. The female sexual brain is an "and gate": It requires many simultaneous stimuli to arouse it.
?When it comes to sexual arousal, men prefer overweight women to underweight women, and a significant number of men seek out erotic images of women in their 40s, 50s, and 60s.
?Women enjoy writing and sharing erotic stories with other women. The fastest growing genre of erotic stories for women are stories about two heterosexual men having sex.
?Though the male sexual brain is much more different from the female sexual brain than is commonly believed, the sexual brain of gay men is virtually identical to that of straight men.
Featuring cutting-edge, jaw-dropping science, this wildly entertaining and controversial book helps readers understand their partner's sexual desires with a depth of knowledge unavailable from any other source. Its fascinating and occasionally disturbing findings will rock our modern understanding of sexuality, just as Kinsey's reports did sixty years ago.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published May 5, 2011
About the author
Sai Gaddam
3 books17 followersSai Gaddam PhD, was a postdoctoral fellow in the Center for Adaptive System at Boston University. He coauthored Journey of the Mind and A Billion Wicked Thoughts. He lives in Mumbai.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 391 reviews
June 27, 2011
"The world's largest experiment," as anyone who's encountered this book's hype machine knows well, is neither an experiment nor the world's largest anything. It is two neuroscientists trying to quantify and analyze online porn, and this breezy non-scientific book seems to have been written before they found out anything neurological. You can summarize their conclusions as follows:
(A) Men will shoot and fire at anything that gets them off, like Elmer Fudd, and women will analyze relationship potential and the future prospects of a mate, like Miss Marple. (Warning: this all-too-Manichean Fudd/Marple dichotomy is used constantly through the book, to wearying effect.)
(B) Gay and straight men have analogous porn tastes (youth, BBW/Bear, breasts/chests, asses, etc.)
(C) Straight men like penises to appear in their porn to an unusual extent, including the fact that tranny/ladyboy porn is mostly consumed by straight men.
(D) Women prefer it when men become romantic and loving, even if sex is involved. They also eagerly consume gay porn that focuses on romance (e.g. Brokeback Mountain, written by a woman).
(E) BDSM seems to be a mostly upper-class phenomenon, at least when it comes to paying for porn. Possibly related to powerful people wanting to be bottoms (or, on occasion, tops).
(F) Straight and gay men really love seeing black males show up in their porn.
(G) Gay dudes love -- maybe even prefer -- hot straight men.
That's just a basic selection of their awesome findings -- this "experiment" (??) seems to reveal very little about neurology. Though they do have some fascinating digression about experiments past. My favorite is Elaine Hatfield's random sexual offers experiment, which showed that zero women would ever take a random man home for sexx, but a statistically significant number of men would take a random woman home for such a purpose. This of course is one of those wonky social psychology experiments that has nothing to do with neurology, but it's entertaining to read nonetheless, especially in that it seems to confirm Stephen Fry's contention that women don't really enjoy sex except as "payment" for a relationship, LOLOLOL.
Anyway, there are many things obviously missing from this "experiment". For example, they frequently cite "youth" and "teen" as by far the most common porn search characteristics, and they yammer a bit about evolution and fertility and whatnot, but they leave that borderline-illegal porn realm outside of their inquiries. Even though it might be the most obvious thing they need to investigate. Other ultra-squicky porn realms like bestiality are also absent from their discussion or theorizing, so, er, yeah... not a very comprehensive "experiment".
Some methodological errors crop up here and there too -- the biggest is their assumption that all searches by the same AOL user came from the same physical human. And don't get me started about their hypothesis that people frequently search for "vintage" porn because of some attachment to their first youthful sex/porn experiences, when in fact it may often be that vintage porn actors/models weren't augmented and depilated as they often are today.
I'm still giving it an extra star, despite its brevity and flaws, because this misanthrope kinda digs reading about everyone's porn search activity.
(A) Men will shoot and fire at anything that gets them off, like Elmer Fudd, and women will analyze relationship potential and the future prospects of a mate, like Miss Marple. (Warning: this all-too-Manichean Fudd/Marple dichotomy is used constantly through the book, to wearying effect.)
(B) Gay and straight men have analogous porn tastes (youth, BBW/Bear, breasts/chests, asses, etc.)
(C) Straight men like penises to appear in their porn to an unusual extent, including the fact that tranny/ladyboy porn is mostly consumed by straight men.
(D) Women prefer it when men become romantic and loving, even if sex is involved. They also eagerly consume gay porn that focuses on romance (e.g. Brokeback Mountain, written by a woman).
(E) BDSM seems to be a mostly upper-class phenomenon, at least when it comes to paying for porn. Possibly related to powerful people wanting to be bottoms (or, on occasion, tops).
(F) Straight and gay men really love seeing black males show up in their porn.
(G) Gay dudes love -- maybe even prefer -- hot straight men.
That's just a basic selection of their awesome findings -- this "experiment" (??) seems to reveal very little about neurology. Though they do have some fascinating digression about experiments past. My favorite is Elaine Hatfield's random sexual offers experiment, which showed that zero women would ever take a random man home for sexx, but a statistically significant number of men would take a random woman home for such a purpose. This of course is one of those wonky social psychology experiments that has nothing to do with neurology, but it's entertaining to read nonetheless, especially in that it seems to confirm Stephen Fry's contention that women don't really enjoy sex except as "payment" for a relationship, LOLOLOL.
Anyway, there are many things obviously missing from this "experiment". For example, they frequently cite "youth" and "teen" as by far the most common porn search characteristics, and they yammer a bit about evolution and fertility and whatnot, but they leave that borderline-illegal porn realm outside of their inquiries. Even though it might be the most obvious thing they need to investigate. Other ultra-squicky porn realms like bestiality are also absent from their discussion or theorizing, so, er, yeah... not a very comprehensive "experiment".
Some methodological errors crop up here and there too -- the biggest is their assumption that all searches by the same AOL user came from the same physical human. And don't get me started about their hypothesis that people frequently search for "vintage" porn because of some attachment to their first youthful sex/porn experiences, when in fact it may often be that vintage porn actors/models weren't augmented and depilated as they often are today.
I'm still giving it an extra star, despite its brevity and flaws, because this misanthrope kinda digs reading about everyone's porn search activity.
June 7, 2011
I made it roughly a quarter of the way through before I called it a day. A pathetic and nauseating piece of so-called research. The data is shoddy, the conclusions are incredibly spurious and wildly over generalized and besides that...the writing is irritating as hell. Men are "proven" to be lusty buffoons and insatiable porn hounds, while women are portrayed as perpetually swooning twits who can't get enough of romance novels and Alpha Males (including murderers). They draw these "facts" from such dubious sources as - fan fiction message boards, livejournal comments, OK Cupid user polls, romance novel forums, and lesbian porn sites. The fact that the majority of their info comes from AOL and Dogpile searches in 2006 should tell you all you need to know.
As if their specious assumptions of causality were not ridiculous enough...the authors compare male sexual "software" (groan) to Elmer Fudd and women's sexual agency/selection to The Miss Marple Detective Agency - an analogy they run with chapter after chapter. This book is just atrocius, steer clear.
As if their specious assumptions of causality were not ridiculous enough...the authors compare male sexual "software" (groan) to Elmer Fudd and women's sexual agency/selection to The Miss Marple Detective Agency - an analogy they run with chapter after chapter. This book is just atrocius, steer clear.
Shelved as 'hell-no'
January 19, 2015ugh. Do you love the nice binary pink and blue opposition on the cover? /s
The reasons I will not be reading this book are here.
The reasons I will not be reading this book are here.
December 21, 2022
I was really excited when I heard the premise of this book, and to hear all the buzz about it. The idea of using internet search data to get uncensored information about human sexual proclivities is intriguing, as is the fact that there is so much of that data available (largest-scale study since Kinsey, as the authors point out).
But I'm dissatisfied. The authors spend a tremendous amount of time explaining already-familiar theories of human sexuality that are so widely discussed and thoroughly worked over in college and even high school classes that they really do not require the long, tedious exposition given here. On the other hand, I might have liked to have learned more about the history of these theories themselves. They are apparently accepted very widely in the field, but I wonder how they were developed, what experimental data form their foundation, and whether there are any issues that remain controversial. The authors never really discuss their choice of fundamental assumptions, even though they subsequently fit all their data to them.
I am also irritated by the treatment of women's sexuality. The authors' analysis starts with well-worn stereotypes (not necessarily acknowledged as such), and one wonders whether some of the stereotypical female tastes and behaviors that they treat as universal and intrinsic might not have socioeconomic, rather than biological, origins. The foundation of the authors' exploration of gender is the assumption that romance novels and fan fiction have the same universal appeal to women that porn has to men, and on the basis of this assumption, they seek in romance novels and fan fiction the features toward which women are universally inclined in men. However, they fail to consider the possibility that romance novels and fan fiction might be read by only a subset of women, probably a subset defined by a particular socioeconomic situation, and that romance novel and fan fiction fantasies might therefore reflect tastes created by socioeconomic factors. Indeed, since reading "A Billion Wicked Thoughts" I have inquired of all the women I work with, and have found no one among my peers who makes a habit—or, at least, admits to making a habit—of reading either romance novels or fan fiction. The authors' findings about gender dovetail nicely with their overarching theory of human sexuality; however, this might be because of unexamined socioeconomic underpinnings that support both analyses.
In the last chapter there's a long discussion of the role of illusion in sexuality; however, the authors never define "illusion." Using the standard meaning of the term--i.e., "perception of something objectively existing in such a way as to cause misinterpretation of its actual nature," (Merriam-Webster)--none of the phenomena they discuss actually contain any significant element of illusion.
Finally, there are a lot of topics upon which the authors touch briefly and which cry out for more discussion, but which are not explored. For example, the internet search data shows a large number of internet searches for pornographic images of middle-aged and older women, and I would have liked to have learned who is executing these searches--young people, or people who are themselves middle-aged or older? The authors assume it's younger men with an interest in "MILFs" or "GILFs," but I'm not sure why they do not mention that it could just as well be older men. Another topic touched briefly upon is obscure kinks, but the book is pretty exclusive in its treatment of the statistically most common predilections. The fact that rare kinks are neglected is a pity since (as the authors themselves observe) the internet is a gold mine of such things.
Overall, "A Billion Wicked Thoughts" had a lot of interesting tidbits, but did not realize the potential of its topic.
But I'm dissatisfied. The authors spend a tremendous amount of time explaining already-familiar theories of human sexuality that are so widely discussed and thoroughly worked over in college and even high school classes that they really do not require the long, tedious exposition given here. On the other hand, I might have liked to have learned more about the history of these theories themselves. They are apparently accepted very widely in the field, but I wonder how they were developed, what experimental data form their foundation, and whether there are any issues that remain controversial. The authors never really discuss their choice of fundamental assumptions, even though they subsequently fit all their data to them.
I am also irritated by the treatment of women's sexuality. The authors' analysis starts with well-worn stereotypes (not necessarily acknowledged as such), and one wonders whether some of the stereotypical female tastes and behaviors that they treat as universal and intrinsic might not have socioeconomic, rather than biological, origins. The foundation of the authors' exploration of gender is the assumption that romance novels and fan fiction have the same universal appeal to women that porn has to men, and on the basis of this assumption, they seek in romance novels and fan fiction the features toward which women are universally inclined in men. However, they fail to consider the possibility that romance novels and fan fiction might be read by only a subset of women, probably a subset defined by a particular socioeconomic situation, and that romance novel and fan fiction fantasies might therefore reflect tastes created by socioeconomic factors. Indeed, since reading "A Billion Wicked Thoughts" I have inquired of all the women I work with, and have found no one among my peers who makes a habit—or, at least, admits to making a habit—of reading either romance novels or fan fiction. The authors' findings about gender dovetail nicely with their overarching theory of human sexuality; however, this might be because of unexamined socioeconomic underpinnings that support both analyses.
In the last chapter there's a long discussion of the role of illusion in sexuality; however, the authors never define "illusion." Using the standard meaning of the term--i.e., "perception of something objectively existing in such a way as to cause misinterpretation of its actual nature," (Merriam-Webster)--none of the phenomena they discuss actually contain any significant element of illusion.
Finally, there are a lot of topics upon which the authors touch briefly and which cry out for more discussion, but which are not explored. For example, the internet search data shows a large number of internet searches for pornographic images of middle-aged and older women, and I would have liked to have learned who is executing these searches--young people, or people who are themselves middle-aged or older? The authors assume it's younger men with an interest in "MILFs" or "GILFs," but I'm not sure why they do not mention that it could just as well be older men. Another topic touched briefly upon is obscure kinks, but the book is pretty exclusive in its treatment of the statistically most common predilections. The fact that rare kinks are neglected is a pity since (as the authors themselves observe) the internet is a gold mine of such things.
Overall, "A Billion Wicked Thoughts" had a lot of interesting tidbits, but did not realize the potential of its topic.
January 2, 2018
Една от най-важните книги на десетилетието. Според мен.
За човешката сексуалност е писано много и ще се пише още повече. Еволюционно програмирани сме да я смятаме за най-важното нещо на света, все пак. Всякакви научни дисциплини се опитват да я описват и обясняват, с по-голяма или по-малък успех. Това, което им липсва (освен факта, че психологията, социолог��ята и антропологията не са науки, а дисциплини) е кредабилност на данните.
Сериозно, това е най-големият проблем в изследването на човешката сексуалност - просто няма достатъчно достоверни данни за нея. Поради спецификата на темата, повечето данни са от т.н. self-reporting тип - т.е. питаш хората по въпроса за тяхното сексуално поведение и те ти отговарят, а не ги наблюдаваш пряко. Което, очевидно, води до огромна пропаст между това, което хората правят наистина и това което казват, ако някой ги попита. Този проблем е значителен за всички видове self-reporting данни, но специално за сексуалното поведение, където влиянието на срама, обществените норми, догми и т.н. е много, много голяма, той прави данните много трудно използваеми. Основната борба на изследователите на сексуалността е да се преборят с този проблем - да видят какво правят НАИСТИНА хората, а не какво казват, че правят.
И ето, че екип от трима учени е намерил начин да се сдобие с огромен масив от сурова информация относно сексуалните предпочитания на изключително широк спектър от хора от всякаква нация, пол, сексуалност, етнос, култура и т.н. - нещо почти митично, мечтан и невъзможен идеал във всяка научна дисциплина.
Те просто събират и обработват анонимните трафични данни на голям набор порнографски и еротични сайтове, насочени към мъже и жени, да ни представят темите на повече от 1 млрд потребителски търсения търсения в тях (от там и заглавието) и да направят анализ на търсенията сравнени с типовете потребители. Защото каквото и да се самозалъгваме, каквото и да залъгваме някой анкетьор който ни пита за секса ни, гледаме това порно, което ни харесва, а не това, което ни се иска другите да си мислят, че ни харесва.
Изводите от гигантското изследване са невероятно интересни и заслужават прочитане - дават реален поглед върху сексуалните предпочитания на мъже и жени и ги анализират от еволюционна и културна гледна точка. Освен това някои факти са изключително любопитни и забавни (като например че в Япония на фестивалите на ЛГБТ киното ходят не гей-активисти, а 99% тийнейджърки, за да гледат мъжки гей-романси, което там е много популярно - любителите на аниме знаят че основните потребители на яои и шоунен-аи са момичета дори у нас). Намерете и четете.
За човешката сексуалност е писано много и ще се пише още повече. Еволюционно програмирани сме да я смятаме за най-важното нещо на света, все пак. Всякакви научни дисциплини се опитват да я описват и обясняват, с по-голяма или по-малък успех. Това, което им липсва (освен факта, че психологията, социолог��ята и антропологията не са науки, а дисциплини) е кредабилност на данните.
Сериозно, това е най-големият проблем в изследването на човешката сексуалност - просто няма достатъчно достоверни данни за нея. Поради спецификата на темата, повечето данни са от т.н. self-reporting тип - т.е. питаш хората по въпроса за тяхното сексуално поведение и те ти отговарят, а не ги наблюдаваш пряко. Което, очевидно, води до огромна пропаст между това, което хората правят наистина и това което казват, ако някой ги попита. Този проблем е значителен за всички видове self-reporting данни, но специално за сексуалното поведение, където влиянието на срама, обществените норми, догми и т.н. е много, много голяма, той прави данните много трудно използваеми. Основната борба на изследователите на сексуалността е да се преборят с този проблем - да видят какво правят НАИСТИНА хората, а не какво казват, че правят.
И ето, че екип от трима учени е намерил начин да се сдобие с огромен масив от сурова информация относно сексуалните предпочитания на изключително широк спектър от хора от всякаква нация, пол, сексуалност, етнос, култура и т.н. - нещо почти митично, мечтан и невъзможен идеал във всяка научна дисциплина.
Те просто събират и обработват анонимните трафични данни на голям набор порнографски и еротични сайтове, насочени към мъже и жени, да ни представят темите на повече от 1 млрд потребителски търсения търсения в тях (от там и заглавието) и да направят анализ на търсенията сравнени с типовете потребители. Защото каквото и да се самозалъгваме, каквото и да залъгваме някой анкетьор който ни пита за секса ни, гледаме това порно, което ни харесва, а не това, което ни се иска другите да си мислят, че ни харесва.
Изводите от гигантското изследване са невероятно интересни и заслужават прочитане - дават реален поглед върху сексуалните предпочитания на мъже и жени и ги анализират от еволюционна и културна гледна точка. Освен това някои факти са изключително любопитни и забавни (като например че в Япония на фестивалите на ЛГБТ киното ходят не гей-активисти, а 99% тийнейджърки, за да гледат мъжки гей-романси, което там е много популярно - любителите на аниме знаят че основните потребители на яои и шоунен-аи са момичета дори у нас). Намерете и четете.
Shelved as '1-tbr-owned-but-not-yet-read'
December 15, 2022I have more than a million, I'd like to know more ;-)
March 7, 2013
If you read mainstream news stories about sexual behavior research, most of the 'revelations' in the book will seem pretty familiar, even warmed-over. To wit: men's physical and emotional arousal systems are closely aligned, and triggered by visual and other sensory input. Women's physical and emotional arousal systems are not so closely aligned, because evolutionary pressures have pushed them (over generations) to develop a finely-tuned set of cues to tell whether a potential lover will be good material to help raise the offspring. Gay men are surprisingly like straight men, only more so.
All that's fine, but ignores much more interesting questions. What's the distribution of the bell curve for arousal triggers or behaviors? Do the curves for men and women overlap, and by how much? Are the curves lumpy, with people clustering around certain combinations of cues, and if so, do those clusters account for (sub-)cultural variations? The authors freely deploy natural and sexual selection to explain any and all surveyed behaviors. That might be right, but it feels more like a 'just so' story. And, what's with the total absence of lesbians? - from the attention they receive, you'd think they don't have sexual lives.
One final note, not itself a criticism but leading to one: the authors treat pornography and romance fiction as symmetrical - the first embodies arousal triggers for men; the second, for women. I can imagine some readers taking offense at this, thinking that the authors are asserting a moral equivalence. They're not; they don't discuss what their conclusions imply within any moral or philosophical framework. And while I wouldn't care about an implied moral equivalence, the book's failure to grapple with the non-biological part of the self is a shame. Our evolutionary heritage is only half of what makes us human; neglecting its interaction with the other half - how we consciously choose to shape our behaviors - makes the book feel a bit shallow.
All that's fine, but ignores much more interesting questions. What's the distribution of the bell curve for arousal triggers or behaviors? Do the curves for men and women overlap, and by how much? Are the curves lumpy, with people clustering around certain combinations of cues, and if so, do those clusters account for (sub-)cultural variations? The authors freely deploy natural and sexual selection to explain any and all surveyed behaviors. That might be right, but it feels more like a 'just so' story. And, what's with the total absence of lesbians? - from the attention they receive, you'd think they don't have sexual lives.
One final note, not itself a criticism but leading to one: the authors treat pornography and romance fiction as symmetrical - the first embodies arousal triggers for men; the second, for women. I can imagine some readers taking offense at this, thinking that the authors are asserting a moral equivalence. They're not; they don't discuss what their conclusions imply within any moral or philosophical framework. And while I wouldn't care about an implied moral equivalence, the book's failure to grapple with the non-biological part of the self is a shame. Our evolutionary heritage is only half of what makes us human; neglecting its interaction with the other half - how we consciously choose to shape our behaviors - makes the book feel a bit shallow.
November 10, 2011
At times fascinating at times infuriating always engaging. The book starts with an excellent premise, which is that the internet has opened up a world of data which can be mined by researchers, in this case neurologists, to examine heretofore unexplored aspects of the human psyche. I have not looked much into computational behavioral science but its seems like an area ripe for discovery. They utilize vast datasets, some from the AOL search data leak, to confirm and dispel theories on human sexuality. It doesn't pull punches either, discussing the acts and names of the most extreme porn sites and videos on the internet (however it did focus mostly on vanilla tastes, whether they be gay or straight vanilla, in past because it was short and poppy in part because the research is very small at this point).
When they were on point they had some fascinating things to discuss, but the book all to often fell into pop science generalization and science through reasoning as opposed to science through hypothesis testing. For a field with an entire universe of new data to examine, too often they made logical jumps and leaps based on self-confirming biases. Additionalyl they fell into evolutionary reasoning traps, using constructs of what the hunter gather world was like to construct neural pathways. Behavioral scientists since Freud in Totem and Taboo have made this mistake. It makes for a great story but it is bad science. Perhaps they did have studies to back them up, but being a pop science book, it was not footnoted or cited with any rigor.
Again though it did have some interesting studies, and despite my general distaste for evolutionary theorizing of human behavior, when faced with certain information it's hard to deny some trends. It is definitely a field worthy of more investigation. The similarities between male homosexual search habits and heterosexual habits was very well studied. Their switch from search habits to neurological studies to animal studies at points seemed far reaching, but did have a decent amount of support. One area they seemed to contradict themselves on was the target of homosexual porn. At one point, when discussing Playgirl, they said naked pictures of men were mostly consumed by men, even when targeted at women. Then in the last chapter they implied that many straight women watch gay porn. I can see the point they were trying to make but they seemed to not explain just who the major consumers were.
Also, they very briefly touched on race but never investigated it. The problem was they seemed to shy away from social or cultural explanations. So when they mentioned that black men are a major fetish amongst their homosexual searchers, and their cuckold searchers, they didn't investigate any racial meanings other than black = alpha male. It seemed worthy of more time and instead did black men just as much of a disservice as the porn industry which stereotypes them in the first place.
In the end though, it was very well worth the read. As a pop science book it was better than most, and the first of its kind relating to actual evidence based investigations into human sexuality.
However, this turned out to be the best book of poetry I've read in a while (and I do love poetry). Throughout the book are small lists of users search terms, taken from the accidental release of user data for 650,000 aol users. These terms comprise a mental history of what was on peoples minds, and give a great deal of insight into sexual tastes when searching for online pornography. However they are presented in lists, one search line after the next, and usually bookmarked with a non-sexual search. This gives them a strange haiku like structure, using found thoughts devoid of context, and speaks to the online habits and mental habits of individuals. That one can so easily see a list like the one below:
diaper dress up boys
whips and diapers
rape fantasy
school girls whip
best washing machine detergent
I would like a book made up entirely of these lists published as found poetry. I think it says something about the human psyche and its ability to compartmentalize in a way that data can never do. And in such a human way.
When they were on point they had some fascinating things to discuss, but the book all to often fell into pop science generalization and science through reasoning as opposed to science through hypothesis testing. For a field with an entire universe of new data to examine, too often they made logical jumps and leaps based on self-confirming biases. Additionalyl they fell into evolutionary reasoning traps, using constructs of what the hunter gather world was like to construct neural pathways. Behavioral scientists since Freud in Totem and Taboo have made this mistake. It makes for a great story but it is bad science. Perhaps they did have studies to back them up, but being a pop science book, it was not footnoted or cited with any rigor.
Again though it did have some interesting studies, and despite my general distaste for evolutionary theorizing of human behavior, when faced with certain information it's hard to deny some trends. It is definitely a field worthy of more investigation. The similarities between male homosexual search habits and heterosexual habits was very well studied. Their switch from search habits to neurological studies to animal studies at points seemed far reaching, but did have a decent amount of support. One area they seemed to contradict themselves on was the target of homosexual porn. At one point, when discussing Playgirl, they said naked pictures of men were mostly consumed by men, even when targeted at women. Then in the last chapter they implied that many straight women watch gay porn. I can see the point they were trying to make but they seemed to not explain just who the major consumers were.
Also, they very briefly touched on race but never investigated it. The problem was they seemed to shy away from social or cultural explanations. So when they mentioned that black men are a major fetish amongst their homosexual searchers, and their cuckold searchers, they didn't investigate any racial meanings other than black = alpha male. It seemed worthy of more time and instead did black men just as much of a disservice as the porn industry which stereotypes them in the first place.
In the end though, it was very well worth the read. As a pop science book it was better than most, and the first of its kind relating to actual evidence based investigations into human sexuality.
However, this turned out to be the best book of poetry I've read in a while (and I do love poetry). Throughout the book are small lists of users search terms, taken from the accidental release of user data for 650,000 aol users. These terms comprise a mental history of what was on peoples minds, and give a great deal of insight into sexual tastes when searching for online pornography. However they are presented in lists, one search line after the next, and usually bookmarked with a non-sexual search. This gives them a strange haiku like structure, using found thoughts devoid of context, and speaks to the online habits and mental habits of individuals. That one can so easily see a list like the one below:
diaper dress up boys
whips and diapers
rape fantasy
school girls whip
best washing machine detergent
I would like a book made up entirely of these lists published as found poetry. I think it says something about the human psyche and its ability to compartmentalize in a way that data can never do. And in such a human way.
May 28, 2011
when I picked this book up there weren't a lot of reviews, the negative ones seemed less about the book and more about sex negative american protestantism. While midlevel reviews took the opinion that the book was a good attempt but didn't contain enough or wasn't interesting enough.
When I opened this book on my nook I could tell it wouldn't be an interesting book, the font which has always been standardly sized was suddenly smaller on this book. I don't mean the preferences changed I mean set at large the font of this book looked like the font of the novels I'd read set at small, this is an indicator this book was never meant to be interesting. The thing is just because research is about sex doesn't mean the research will read like porn (a good book like that is The Other Hollywood: The Uncensored Oral History of the Porn Film Industry). This is interesting research the demographic is specific, I mean people who use dogpile and AOL, but I mean in 2006 that's not a bad demographic and they aren't making any pretenses about it.
The theories about the difference in what's important to men and women are interesting, but I think an important these get taken with a very specific grain of salt. we aren't actually talking about biological gender, we're talking about two ways of being that tend to correlate with biological gender. gender categories just make the conversation easier.
it's a worthwhile read if you like boring research.
When I opened this book on my nook I could tell it wouldn't be an interesting book, the font which has always been standardly sized was suddenly smaller on this book. I don't mean the preferences changed I mean set at large the font of this book looked like the font of the novels I'd read set at small, this is an indicator this book was never meant to be interesting. The thing is just because research is about sex doesn't mean the research will read like porn (a good book like that is The Other Hollywood: The Uncensored Oral History of the Porn Film Industry). This is interesting research the demographic is specific, I mean people who use dogpile and AOL, but I mean in 2006 that's not a bad demographic and they aren't making any pretenses about it.
The theories about the difference in what's important to men and women are interesting, but I think an important these get taken with a very specific grain of salt. we aren't actually talking about biological gender, we're talking about two ways of being that tend to correlate with biological gender. gender categories just make the conversation easier.
it's a worthwhile read if you like boring research.
January 6, 2024
30th book of 2016.
This book explores human sexuality by looking at large databases of both porn use (mostly by men - gay and straight) and romance writing (mostly by women for women).
The book does a good job of emphasizing how different the 'average' sexual responses for men and women are. I also found it fascinating how similar gay and straight porn is.
The book does a poorer job of exploring various non-standard (?) kinks. Weirdly there is no (or very little) discussion of lesbianism.
The authors, who are both neuroscientists, make some attempts at putting a neuroscientific spin on things, but they have (through no fault of their own) very little to work with.
This book explores human sexuality by looking at large databases of both porn use (mostly by men - gay and straight) and romance writing (mostly by women for women).
The book does a good job of emphasizing how different the 'average' sexual responses for men and women are. I also found it fascinating how similar gay and straight porn is.
The book does a poorer job of exploring various non-standard (?) kinks. Weirdly there is no (or very little) discussion of lesbianism.
The authors, who are both neuroscientists, make some attempts at putting a neuroscientific spin on things, but they have (through no fault of their own) very little to work with.
March 6, 2013
This book was certainly interesting, but there isn't sound evidence provided for any premise in the entire book; it's all speculation. The majority of 'evidence' that IS provided (and the basis for the title of this book) doesn't even really qualify as descriptive-- internet search histories aren't case studies. And scientific theories like the ones presented here need much more than case studies.
I would also like to note that I had issues with how the authors wrote about 'black' males and their 'masculinity,' which bordered on racist in presentation. But I think the way they wrote about it is really a larger reflection of the writing and the book as a whole-- too much speculation, shoddy evidence, no conflicting theories presented, not enough explanation...
I would advise anyone who picks up this book to already have a basic understanding of sociology, evolutionary theory, sexism, feminism, BDSM theory, and evolutionary psychology. I think otherwise he or she might be too inclined to misinterpret the musings provided in this book as facts.
All that said, this book did give me some interesting food for thought.
I would also like to note that I had issues with how the authors wrote about 'black' males and their 'masculinity,' which bordered on racist in presentation. But I think the way they wrote about it is really a larger reflection of the writing and the book as a whole-- too much speculation, shoddy evidence, no conflicting theories presented, not enough explanation...
I would advise anyone who picks up this book to already have a basic understanding of sociology, evolutionary theory, sexism, feminism, BDSM theory, and evolutionary psychology. I think otherwise he or she might be too inclined to misinterpret the musings provided in this book as facts.
All that said, this book did give me some interesting food for thought.
January 3, 2012
My Kindle highlights:
In 2006, AOL released a data set containing the search histories for 657,426 different people. Each search history contains all the searches made by a particular AOL user over three months, from March 1, 2006, to May 31, 2006. For example, here’s the abbreviated search history for “Mr. Bikinis,” our name for user #2027268: college cheerleaders cheerleaders in Hawaii pics of bikinis and girls the sin of masturbation pretty girls in bikinis girls suntanning in bikinis college cheerleader pics in bikinis noooooooo christian advice on lust
The first table shows the five most popular Web sites among men. The second table shows five Web sites popular among women, including the most popular fan fiction Web site, the most popular romance author Web site, the most popular romance novel Web site, and the most popular porn site for women.
Another challenge for cultural theories of the male sexual interest in feet: why feet and not hands? Hands are more visible in all cultures, and the general shape and detail of the hand is quite similar to the foot. Women’s hands are often decorated with bright, manicured fingernails, drawing attention to them. In online porn, women’s hands are frequently portrayed as actively participating in sexual acts: there are far more handjobs than footjobs. So hands are highly visible, attractively adorned, and presented as sexual instruments. Yet in the Dogpile data there were 93,885 sexual searches for feet and only 5,831 sexual searches for hands. There are 276 different foot sites in the Alexa Adult List, but we could only find one Web site that could be construed as hand-focused: Glove Mansion.
For men, the penis can never be too big, apparently. Just .2 percent of men wish they had a smaller penis, compared to 9 percent of women who wish they had smaller breasts.
On Fantasti.cc, 23 percent of the male users use an image of their penis as their avatar, while another 13 percent used a penis from a porn clip. In comparison, 5 percent of the female users use an image of a vagina. On reddit’s heterosexual Gone Wild forum, where users are free to post NC-17 pictures of themselves, 123 of the 345 self-posted male images (about 35 percent) consist of close-ups of penises.
All a hen needs to get a rooster crowing is a red comb. Head and body optional. When biologists tried to figure out which visual cues evoked sexual behavior in male fowl, they found that roosters would exhibit mating behaviors even when exposed to an artificial hen’s comb. About half of all roosters attempted copulation with an artificial chicken head mounted on a feather-covered board. Turkeys are even less discriminating: male gobblers will try to mate with a rubber ball, as long as it’s the size and height of a female head.
The phosphodiesterase inhibitor had no significant effect on unblocking the heart’s blood vessels. But the researchers did notice something quite interesting. Even though the male subjects’ angina did not improve, many of them asked for more of the test drug. When the researchers asked why, the men rather shyly explained it was helping their marriage. The researchers took a closer look at the drug’s effects. What they found would revolutionize male desire. The drug did facilitate blood flow after all—just not where they expected. They published their findings in an impotence research journal as “Sildenafil: An Orally Active Type 5 Cyclic GMP-Specific Phosphodiesterase Inhibitor for the Treatment of Penile Erectile Dysfunction.” Viagra was born. When Pfizer launched Viagra in 1998, its share price doubled within days.
In fact, the correlation between physical and psychological arousal in women was so low that it’s safe to say a woman’s vaginal lubrication is a poor predictor of what she is actually feeling. In fact, many women report lubrication and even orgasm during unwanted and coercive sex:
“Booty is so strong there are dudes willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of booty in another dimension,” observes comedian Joe Rogan.
On average, girls age twelve to seventeen send and receive eighty texts a day; boys send and receive thirty.
According to recent DNA analysis, through the history of the human race about 80 percent of the women reproduced. Only 40 percent of men reproduced. This means that plenty of men were able to have children with multiple women—but the majority of men never had any kids.
Most of the software of the Detective Agency software is located in the conscious parts of the brain, in the cortex. This is also the part of the brain that gets inhibited by alcohol and many recreational drugs.
The romance genre has the single largest share of the fiction market.
To the OkCupid survey question “Would you date someone who didn’t know how to drive a car?” most men answered yes. Most women answered no.
The popularity cue is prominent in romance novels,
Whereas the Magic Hoo Hoo is about a woman’s sexual desirability, Twu Wuv is about a woman’s specialness as a human being. The hero must demonstrate that his love is steady, irrational, and everlasting.
The average length of the gay penis is 6.32 inches. The average length of the straight penis is 5.99 inches.
Recently, some Web sites have adapted to the gay interest in straight porn by offering heterosexual content specifically tailored to gay cues.
Most gay men prefer to be bottoms.
One reason that tops are so valued in gay porn is because they are more straight-acting than bottoms, by virtue of the fact that they are playing the dominant role. In porn, tops are usually taller, more fit, and more dominant than bottoms.
Women with normal ovulatory cycles earned about $185 when they were menstruating, $260 when they were not menstruating nor ovulating, and $335 when they were ovulating. Perhaps the increase in tips was because the dancers unconsciously behaved differently.
Studies have shown that men are more protective and guard their mates more during ovulation. But women have evolved counter-countermeasures to combat men’s heightened surveillance. When ovulating, women more frequently resist men’s efforts to track their activities.
One particular group of women reported higher amounts of porn viewing, larger porn stashes, greater comfort with their partner watching porn, greater enjoyment of bondage, and more interest in using the Internet for porn. Who were these women? Self-identified bisexuals.
In addition, the responses of bisexual women were similar to heterosexual men on a variety of nonsexual topics, such as aggression, domination, and work habits.
Though bisexuality in women is poorly understood, one possibility advanced by scientists is that bisexual women have greater circulating levels of testosterone.
Most men, including gay men, are aroused by the idea of discovering their partner watching porn. It doesn’t appear to activate the male mate guarding software, since there’s no cue of physical cheating.
“I think every girlfriend I’ve had has turned to me after watching a romantic movie and asked ‘Why can’t you be more like him?’ ” laments one young man. “I’ve never put on a Jenna Jameson movie and asked ‘Why can’t you be more like her?’ ”
In an analysis of about twenty-four thousand children across nine mostly Anglo-Saxon countries, about 3 percent were found to have been fathered by a man other than the presumed father.
Cuckold porn is the second most popular heterosexual interest on English-language search engines. Only youth is more popular.
In Craigslist ads posted by couples seeking a man, nearly one-third specify they want a black guy.
In many species, the more dominant the potential rival, the stronger the sperm competition cue and the more intense the arousal,
The third most common type of comment is acknowledgment of the woman’s pleasure. For example, “She loves it!”, “Look at how excited she is,” “Would more cocks make her even happier?” (The most common type of comment is praise for a woman’s attractiveness. The second most common type of comment is variations of “What a delightful piece of anatomy.”)
After orgasming, why do men have such a difficult time getting aroused again by the same woman, but get erect so easily at the sight of a new woman? We think it’s to prevent a man from dislodging his own sperm—the same reason we believe men become flaccid after orgasming.
The more dominant a human male becomes, the more testosterone he produces, which in turn increases his sex drive. Men with high levels of testosterone lose their virginity earliest, have the most sexual partners, and convince women to have sex the fastest. Alpha males have the greatest sex drive of all.
Men are visual. They respond to a gender cue that is fundamental and fixed. They respond to visual cues that are flexible during adolescence, then very fixed. They respond to a cuckold cue from sperm competition, an authenticity cue, a novelty cue, and a partner pleasure cue. Transgression can intensify arousal.
Paranormals are the cream cheese sushi of the female sexual brain.
But the Internet is the real engine driving the surging popularity of gay romance, in the form of a subgenre of fan fiction known as slash. Slash takes its name not from any kind of violence, but rather from a punctuation mark. The content of slash stories is indicated by a particular pairing of two heterosexual men, such as Kirk/Spock, Harry Potter/Severus Snape, or Frodo/Legolas. Over the course of a slash story, the two “slashed” heroes will end up emotionally and sexually involved.
In 2006, AOL released a data set containing the search histories for 657,426 different people. Each search history contains all the searches made by a particular AOL user over three months, from March 1, 2006, to May 31, 2006. For example, here’s the abbreviated search history for “Mr. Bikinis,” our name for user #2027268: college cheerleaders cheerleaders in Hawaii pics of bikinis and girls the sin of masturbation pretty girls in bikinis girls suntanning in bikinis college cheerleader pics in bikinis noooooooo christian advice on lust
The first table shows the five most popular Web sites among men. The second table shows five Web sites popular among women, including the most popular fan fiction Web site, the most popular romance author Web site, the most popular romance novel Web site, and the most popular porn site for women.
Another challenge for cultural theories of the male sexual interest in feet: why feet and not hands? Hands are more visible in all cultures, and the general shape and detail of the hand is quite similar to the foot. Women’s hands are often decorated with bright, manicured fingernails, drawing attention to them. In online porn, women’s hands are frequently portrayed as actively participating in sexual acts: there are far more handjobs than footjobs. So hands are highly visible, attractively adorned, and presented as sexual instruments. Yet in the Dogpile data there were 93,885 sexual searches for feet and only 5,831 sexual searches for hands. There are 276 different foot sites in the Alexa Adult List, but we could only find one Web site that could be construed as hand-focused: Glove Mansion.
For men, the penis can never be too big, apparently. Just .2 percent of men wish they had a smaller penis, compared to 9 percent of women who wish they had smaller breasts.
On Fantasti.cc, 23 percent of the male users use an image of their penis as their avatar, while another 13 percent used a penis from a porn clip. In comparison, 5 percent of the female users use an image of a vagina. On reddit’s heterosexual Gone Wild forum, where users are free to post NC-17 pictures of themselves, 123 of the 345 self-posted male images (about 35 percent) consist of close-ups of penises.
All a hen needs to get a rooster crowing is a red comb. Head and body optional. When biologists tried to figure out which visual cues evoked sexual behavior in male fowl, they found that roosters would exhibit mating behaviors even when exposed to an artificial hen’s comb. About half of all roosters attempted copulation with an artificial chicken head mounted on a feather-covered board. Turkeys are even less discriminating: male gobblers will try to mate with a rubber ball, as long as it’s the size and height of a female head.
The phosphodiesterase inhibitor had no significant effect on unblocking the heart’s blood vessels. But the researchers did notice something quite interesting. Even though the male subjects’ angina did not improve, many of them asked for more of the test drug. When the researchers asked why, the men rather shyly explained it was helping their marriage. The researchers took a closer look at the drug’s effects. What they found would revolutionize male desire. The drug did facilitate blood flow after all—just not where they expected. They published their findings in an impotence research journal as “Sildenafil: An Orally Active Type 5 Cyclic GMP-Specific Phosphodiesterase Inhibitor for the Treatment of Penile Erectile Dysfunction.” Viagra was born. When Pfizer launched Viagra in 1998, its share price doubled within days.
In fact, the correlation between physical and psychological arousal in women was so low that it’s safe to say a woman’s vaginal lubrication is a poor predictor of what she is actually feeling. In fact, many women report lubrication and even orgasm during unwanted and coercive sex:
“Booty is so strong there are dudes willing to blow themselves up for the highly unlikely possibility of booty in another dimension,” observes comedian Joe Rogan.
On average, girls age twelve to seventeen send and receive eighty texts a day; boys send and receive thirty.
According to recent DNA analysis, through the history of the human race about 80 percent of the women reproduced. Only 40 percent of men reproduced. This means that plenty of men were able to have children with multiple women—but the majority of men never had any kids.
Most of the software of the Detective Agency software is located in the conscious parts of the brain, in the cortex. This is also the part of the brain that gets inhibited by alcohol and many recreational drugs.
The romance genre has the single largest share of the fiction market.
To the OkCupid survey question “Would you date someone who didn’t know how to drive a car?” most men answered yes. Most women answered no.
The popularity cue is prominent in romance novels,
Whereas the Magic Hoo Hoo is about a woman’s sexual desirability, Twu Wuv is about a woman’s specialness as a human being. The hero must demonstrate that his love is steady, irrational, and everlasting.
The average length of the gay penis is 6.32 inches. The average length of the straight penis is 5.99 inches.
Recently, some Web sites have adapted to the gay interest in straight porn by offering heterosexual content specifically tailored to gay cues.
Most gay men prefer to be bottoms.
One reason that tops are so valued in gay porn is because they are more straight-acting than bottoms, by virtue of the fact that they are playing the dominant role. In porn, tops are usually taller, more fit, and more dominant than bottoms.
Women with normal ovulatory cycles earned about $185 when they were menstruating, $260 when they were not menstruating nor ovulating, and $335 when they were ovulating. Perhaps the increase in tips was because the dancers unconsciously behaved differently.
Studies have shown that men are more protective and guard their mates more during ovulation. But women have evolved counter-countermeasures to combat men’s heightened surveillance. When ovulating, women more frequently resist men’s efforts to track their activities.
One particular group of women reported higher amounts of porn viewing, larger porn stashes, greater comfort with their partner watching porn, greater enjoyment of bondage, and more interest in using the Internet for porn. Who were these women? Self-identified bisexuals.
In addition, the responses of bisexual women were similar to heterosexual men on a variety of nonsexual topics, such as aggression, domination, and work habits.
Though bisexuality in women is poorly understood, one possibility advanced by scientists is that bisexual women have greater circulating levels of testosterone.
Most men, including gay men, are aroused by the idea of discovering their partner watching porn. It doesn’t appear to activate the male mate guarding software, since there’s no cue of physical cheating.
“I think every girlfriend I’ve had has turned to me after watching a romantic movie and asked ‘Why can’t you be more like him?’ ” laments one young man. “I’ve never put on a Jenna Jameson movie and asked ‘Why can’t you be more like her?’ ”
In an analysis of about twenty-four thousand children across nine mostly Anglo-Saxon countries, about 3 percent were found to have been fathered by a man other than the presumed father.
Cuckold porn is the second most popular heterosexual interest on English-language search engines. Only youth is more popular.
In Craigslist ads posted by couples seeking a man, nearly one-third specify they want a black guy.
In many species, the more dominant the potential rival, the stronger the sperm competition cue and the more intense the arousal,
The third most common type of comment is acknowledgment of the woman’s pleasure. For example, “She loves it!”, “Look at how excited she is,” “Would more cocks make her even happier?” (The most common type of comment is praise for a woman’s attractiveness. The second most common type of comment is variations of “What a delightful piece of anatomy.”)
After orgasming, why do men have such a difficult time getting aroused again by the same woman, but get erect so easily at the sight of a new woman? We think it’s to prevent a man from dislodging his own sperm—the same reason we believe men become flaccid after orgasming.
The more dominant a human male becomes, the more testosterone he produces, which in turn increases his sex drive. Men with high levels of testosterone lose their virginity earliest, have the most sexual partners, and convince women to have sex the fastest. Alpha males have the greatest sex drive of all.
Men are visual. They respond to a gender cue that is fundamental and fixed. They respond to visual cues that are flexible during adolescence, then very fixed. They respond to a cuckold cue from sperm competition, an authenticity cue, a novelty cue, and a partner pleasure cue. Transgression can intensify arousal.
Paranormals are the cream cheese sushi of the female sexual brain.
But the Internet is the real engine driving the surging popularity of gay romance, in the form of a subgenre of fan fiction known as slash. Slash takes its name not from any kind of violence, but rather from a punctuation mark. The content of slash stories is indicated by a particular pairing of two heterosexual men, such as Kirk/Spock, Harry Potter/Severus Snape, or Frodo/Legolas. Over the course of a slash story, the two “slashed” heroes will end up emotionally and sexually involved.
June 26, 2011
Those of you who are following along at home may recall our last selection on the "sex" theme--Bound and Gagged, Laura Kipnis' most excellent close reading of pornography. A Billion Wicked Thoughts approaches the question of desire from a totally different direction. Using their background in data mining and neuroscience, the authors look to hard (snicker) data from the Internet to figure out what it is that men (and women) really want. The data is both interesting and surprising, and the book is worth a read for that reason alone.
Gaddam and his co-author go on to use evolutionary biology to speculate on why people developed these different preferences. For me, this part of the book was a lot less compelling. That may be because I am generally skeptical towards evolutionary biology, or it may be because it's just a bunch of bullshit. Your call on that one.
Bound and Gagged and A Billion Wicked Thoughts invite the reader to look on with them, amazed, at the weird, wonderful, and incredibly diverse range of human sexuality. A Billion Wicked Thoughts goes on to explain how what may look strange at first is actually quite routine. Kipnis, in contrast, revels in the strangeness, interrogating it until it reveals some major disconnects in our culture's beliefs about class and gender.
I prefer Kipnis' approach, but both books are recommended.
Gaddam and his co-author go on to use evolutionary biology to speculate on why people developed these different preferences. For me, this part of the book was a lot less compelling. That may be because I am generally skeptical towards evolutionary biology, or it may be because it's just a bunch of bullshit. Your call on that one.
Bound and Gagged and A Billion Wicked Thoughts invite the reader to look on with them, amazed, at the weird, wonderful, and incredibly diverse range of human sexuality. A Billion Wicked Thoughts goes on to explain how what may look strange at first is actually quite routine. Kipnis, in contrast, revels in the strangeness, interrogating it until it reveals some major disconnects in our culture's beliefs about class and gender.
I prefer Kipnis' approach, but both books are recommended.
October 7, 2015
Absolutely fascinating! Lots of great data driven information and an engaging, easy-reading writing style. I learned some great cocktail party facts.
However, I felt the discussion of romance novels was overly simplistic and cherry picked to make their point. Also, most of the novels they cited were 20 or more years out of date.
Overall, a gasp-out-loud interesting review of make and female sexuality.
However, I felt the discussion of romance novels was overly simplistic and cherry picked to make their point. Also, most of the novels they cited were 20 or more years out of date.
Overall, a gasp-out-loud interesting review of make and female sexuality.
October 25, 2017
This is a very insightful book. It crushes my hope that I will ever fully understand my wife. At the same time it brings peace to me, because it is not that I'm not trying hard enough. The abyss between men and women is huge beyond imagination. A must read.
February 27, 2023
En general, creo que es un buen libro de divulgacion para entender mejor el comportamiento sexual del ser humano, y en ese punto este libro es muy util. Te enseña bastantes datos curiosos y casi siempre se basa en evidencia cientifica para respaldarlos.
Sin embargo, considero el libro algo especulativo en ciertas ideas y, a mi parecer, algo redundante. Creo que las ideas principales se podrian resumir en muchas menos paginas, lo que yo agradeceria.
Sin embargo, considero el libro algo especulativo en ciertas ideas y, a mi parecer, algo redundante. Creo que las ideas principales se podrian resumir en muchas menos paginas, lo que yo agradeceria.
January 3, 2013
I was extremely disappointed in this book. Looked forward to an interesting look at how internet searching could be used for behavior analysis in regards to sex. Not even close.
What this book is:
1. Description of what people are looking for in regards to sex.
2. Stories and anecdotes for those interested in Porn.
3. Lack of any scientific analysis. Lots of hypothesis, but no serious study to determine anything past observation.
In the end, if you are looking for a catalog of porn sites with anecdotes, then this book is for you. If you have any interest in real science or psychology, then avoid this book.
What this book is:
1. Description of what people are looking for in regards to sex.
2. Stories and anecdotes for those interested in Porn.
3. Lack of any scientific analysis. Lots of hypothesis, but no serious study to determine anything past observation.
In the end, if you are looking for a catalog of porn sites with anecdotes, then this book is for you. If you have any interest in real science or psychology, then avoid this book.
January 15, 2012
The most interesting part of the book was the premise - how little research is done on sex and sexuality based mostly on our puritanical society. The book has nearly 100 pages of notes, many of which I wanted to track down. The actual book has some interesting information - I enjoy seeing the ranking of things searched for online in terms of porn (granny might be higher than you think). But as the book wore on I felt there were some conclusions being drawn that were a bit too pat and not representative of the complicated nature of our sexuality. Still, interesting and thought provoking.
January 1, 2017
Сериозен разговор за секс у нас не се води. За него или се говори просташки, или неловко се мълчи като за нещо много лично и доста срамно. Отношението е като към нещо, за което няма какво толкова да се знае, защото природата си е свършила работата и е излишно да го проблематизираме. Липсва ми задълбочен разговор, надхвърлящ рамките на конкретните интимни преживявания на който и да било от нас. Въобще осъзнаване и признаване на секса като проблем, за който трябва да се учи и да се знае колкото е възможно повече, защото той се отразява по сложен начин върху всички останали сфери на живота ни.
В такъв интелектуален и ценностен климат книги като тази не предизвикват кой знае какъв интерес. И все пак за проявяващите любопитство към човешката сексуалност тази книга ще бъде интересна. В нея са представени резултатите от много интригуващо изследване на човешката сексуалност. Авторите му - учени, работещи в полето на невронауката - събират данни за активността на милиони потребители на уебсайтове с еротично и порнографско съдържание, обобщават ги, тълкуват ги и правят (на моменти свръхобобщени) изводи за фундаментални разлики между мъжката и женска сексуалност. Книгата е написана на достъпен език с много приятно за мен, ненатрапчиво чувство за хумор, което не разсейва, а разведрява.
Личните ми надежди да получа рационално обяснение на иначе неразбираеми от женската ми камбанария актове на мъжко сексуално поведение се оправдаха напълно. Много вълнуващо е да надникнеш в един пространствено толкова близък свят, в който се намираш в непрекъснато взаимодействие и който е неделима част от най-интимните ти преживявания, но който, заради липсата ти на мъжка чувствителност, Е и ще си остане само частично достъпен за теб.
По-голяма и не по-малко приятна изненада се оказаха изводите за женската сексуалност. Неща, които винаги съм усещала и преживявала, но разбирала много смътно, или такива, които съм мислела за дълбока, трудно доловима женска тайна се оказват съвсем прозрачни и лесно обясними. Тук особено ми допадна забавният начин, по който са описани. Контрастът между драматичността им, когато ги преживявам, и лекотата и комичността им, когато биват рационализирани и вербализирани, отнема от сериозността им и ги прави много по-поносими.
Накрая... много ми се иска повече хора да четат книги като тази. Да се опитват да разбират по-добре партньора/ката си, да се им се сърдят по-малко и да не настояват глуповато другият да започне да желае нещата, които са в противоречие с природата му. Мъжете никога няма да се на��итят на разнообразие от млади и красиви жени, защото не са програмирани за друго, а жените по една торба причини няма да започнем да се хвърляме в обятията на напълно непознати мъже независимо колко привлекателни са физически и колко недвусмислена е сексуалната ни реакция спрямо тях. Ако обаче познаваме по-добре паралелната реалност на другия, ще водим по-малко изтощителни битки с него, а от това вероятността да бъдем по-щастливи заедно чувствително се увеличава.
В такъв интелектуален и ценностен климат книги като тази не предизвикват кой знае какъв интерес. И все пак за проявяващите любопитство към човешката сексуалност тази книга ще бъде интересна. В нея са представени резултатите от много интригуващо изследване на човешката сексуалност. Авторите му - учени, работещи в полето на невронауката - събират данни за активността на милиони потребители на уебсайтове с еротично и порнографско съдържание, обобщават ги, тълкуват ги и правят (на моменти свръхобобщени) изводи за фундаментални разлики между мъжката и женска сексуалност. Книгата е написана на достъпен език с много приятно за мен, ненатрапчиво чувство за хумор, което не разсейва, а разведрява.
Личните ми надежди да получа рационално обяснение на иначе неразбираеми от женската ми камбанария актове на мъжко сексуално поведение се оправдаха напълно. Много вълнуващо е да надникнеш в един пространствено толкова близък свят, в който се намираш в непрекъснато взаимодействие и който е неделима част от най-интимните ти преживявания, но който, заради липсата ти на мъжка чувствителност, Е и ще си остане само частично достъпен за теб.
По-голяма и не по-малко приятна изненада се оказаха изводите за женската сексуалност. Неща, които винаги съм усещала и преживявала, но разбирала много смътно, или такива, които съм мислела за дълбока, трудно доловима женска тайна се оказват съвсем прозрачни и лесно обясними. Тук особено ми допадна забавният начин, по който са описани. Контрастът между драматичността им, когато ги преживявам, и лекотата и комичността им, когато биват рационализирани и вербализирани, отнема от сериозността им и ги прави много по-поносими.
Накрая... много ми се иска повече хора да четат книги като тази. Да се опитват да разбират по-добре партньора/ката си, да се им се сърдят по-малко и да не настояват глуповато другият да започне да желае нещата, които са в противоречие с природата му. Мъжете никога няма да се на��итят на разнообразие от млади и красиви жени, защото не са програмирани за друго, а жените по една торба причини няма да започнем да се хвърляме в обятията на напълно непознати мъже независимо колко привлекателни са физически и колко недвусмислена е сексуалната ни реакция спрямо тях. Ако обаче познаваме по-добре паралелната реалност на другия, ще водим по-малко изтощителни битки с него, а от това вероятността да бъдем по-щастливи заедно чувствително се увеличава.
June 22, 2011
Certainly this book of 416 fact filled pages isn't a "light" read, but more of an enlightning one. Never before has non-fiction literally grabbed hold of my mind and refused to leave it alone.
I guess you can compare reading a billion wicked thoughts to being present during the actual moment of a train wreck or better a tornado. Appearing seeminly out of nowhere, being swept away, taken on an amazing journey, safely deposited as a changed person and overwelmed with emotion from the things you've just learned. I think that about covers it.
Don't believe me? Well, I dare you to read this book and not have it effect you in some manner; weather physically, mentally or emotionally, it will get to you. My hope is that each person that picks up this amazing work gains a little truth, knowledge or maybe tolerance having read it.
What exactly is A Billion Wicked Thoughts? The world's largest experiment on human desire. Human desire you say? I can hear your "ga-faws" already.
Ever wonder what people are searching for on the internet? What the average housewife fantisizes about? What makes a woman so very different than a man in the sack? What I'm outlining is just the tip of the iceburg and a small portion of information that can be found within this ground breaking collection of human mysteries revealed. Yes, IT'S THAT GOOD.
Bravo to the authors, Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam, for taking up this quest for knowledge in a taboo subject among many. They undoubtably get down to business and crossed all barriers in order to bring us, the readers, such important research.
I had the pleasure of having Ogi Ogas on my Blog Talk radio show, Naughtilicious, just this past Sunday evening at 8PM PST. This weekly radio program feature a no hold bar format towards anything regarding sex, love & relationships.
Hosts are myself: Riverside blogger, columnist and book reviewer, Kelly Oakes, and Candi Fox: Radio personality, soon to be Sex therapist and practitioner of all things spiritual.
The post cast is available for listen or download. Caution, the show is explicit, 18 & over only.
Ogi was a splendid guest and had no reservstions in answering every question we threw his way. A Billion Wicked Thoughts is bound to be the book to read in 2011, and every year after until you get your copy.
I guess you can compare reading a billion wicked thoughts to being present during the actual moment of a train wreck or better a tornado. Appearing seeminly out of nowhere, being swept away, taken on an amazing journey, safely deposited as a changed person and overwelmed with emotion from the things you've just learned. I think that about covers it.
Don't believe me? Well, I dare you to read this book and not have it effect you in some manner; weather physically, mentally or emotionally, it will get to you. My hope is that each person that picks up this amazing work gains a little truth, knowledge or maybe tolerance having read it.
What exactly is A Billion Wicked Thoughts? The world's largest experiment on human desire. Human desire you say? I can hear your "ga-faws" already.
Ever wonder what people are searching for on the internet? What the average housewife fantisizes about? What makes a woman so very different than a man in the sack? What I'm outlining is just the tip of the iceburg and a small portion of information that can be found within this ground breaking collection of human mysteries revealed. Yes, IT'S THAT GOOD.
Bravo to the authors, Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam, for taking up this quest for knowledge in a taboo subject among many. They undoubtably get down to business and crossed all barriers in order to bring us, the readers, such important research.
I had the pleasure of having Ogi Ogas on my Blog Talk radio show, Naughtilicious, just this past Sunday evening at 8PM PST. This weekly radio program feature a no hold bar format towards anything regarding sex, love & relationships.
Hosts are myself: Riverside blogger, columnist and book reviewer, Kelly Oakes, and Candi Fox: Radio personality, soon to be Sex therapist and practitioner of all things spiritual.
The post cast is available for listen or download. Caution, the show is explicit, 18 & over only.
Ogi was a splendid guest and had no reservstions in answering every question we threw his way. A Billion Wicked Thoughts is bound to be the book to read in 2011, and every year after until you get your copy.
January 3, 2023
تجربة جيرجن (الغرفة المظلمة)
.
.
كانت الستينيات والسبعينيات من القرن الماضي ذروة تجارب علم النفس الاجتماعي الجريئة والمتهورة قليلاً ، والتي غالبًا ما تشبه حلقات برنامج Jackass على قناة MTV. قسّمت تجربة سجن ستانفورد عام 1971 الأشخاص إلى سجناء وحراس ، يعيشون في سجن مؤقت ، مما أدى إلى إساءات مهينة من قبل الحراس وأعمال شغب من قبل السجناء. تطلبت تجارب طاعة ستانلي ميلجرام في الستينيات من الأشخاص صدمة رجل ما بمستويات متزايدة من الكهرباء حتى بدا أن الرجل قد يموت. في عام 1973 ، أجرى عالم النفس (كينيث جيرجن) من كلية سوارثمور تجربة أخرى في علم النفس الاجتماعي من المحتمل أن تفشل في الحصول على موافقة مجالس الأخلاقيات اليوم. تساءل بحثه : "ماذا يفعل الناس في ظل ظروف تكون فيها هوياتهم مجهولة تماماً؟"
في تجربة جيرجن ، دخل خمسة شبان وخمس شابات غرفة صغيرة واحدة تلو الأخرى. لم يكونوا يعرفون بعضهم البعض قبل التجربة ، وتم عزلهم قبل دخولهم الغرفة. بمجرد دخولهم ، أصبحوا أحرارًا في فعل ما يحلو لهم. في نهاية التجربة ، غادر الأشخاص الغرفة واحدًا تلو الآخر. ولكن ما جعل هذه التجربة مثيرة للاهتمام للغاية كانت الغرفة نفسها. كانت شديدة الظلام.
لم يتمكن الأشخاص من رؤية بعضهم البعض ، ولم يعرفوا بعضهم البعض ، وكانوا يعلمون أنهم لن يعرفوا هويات بعضهم البعض بعد التجربة. بعبارة أخرى ، لقد اختبروا إخفاء الهوية بشكل كامل. إذن ماذا فعل هؤلاء الغرباء المجهولون؟
تحدثوا في البداية ، لكن سرعان ما توقف الحديث ، حيث بدأ اللمس. ما يقرب من 90 في المائة من المشاركين لامسوا شخصًا آخر عن قصد. عانق أكثر من نصف الأشخاص شخصًا ما. انتهى الأمر بثلث الأشخاص إلى التقبيل. قبّل أحد الشباب خمس فتيات مختلفات. يقول أحدهم : "بينما كنت جالسًا ، صعدت بيث وبدأنا نلعب وجهًا لوجه ، نتحسس أجسام بعضنا ، بدأنا في الرقبة نزولاً إلى الأسفل. قررنا أن نشارك الأمر مع الآخرين. لذلك انفصلنا وأخذت لوري مكانها ".
بسبب عدم الكشف عن هوياتهم ، عبر المشاركون بحرية عن رغباتهم. حتى أن أحد الرجال عرض على جيرجن أن يدفع له مقابل السماح له بالعودة إلى الغرفة. أفاد ما يقرب من 80 في المائة من الرجال والنساء عن شعورهم بالإثارة الجنسية بسبب تلك التجربة!!
.
Ogi Ogas
A Billion Wicked Thoughts
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
.
.
كانت الستينيات والسبعينيات من القرن الماضي ذروة تجارب علم النفس الاجتماعي الجريئة والمتهورة قليلاً ، والتي غالبًا ما تشبه حلقات برنامج Jackass على قناة MTV. قسّمت تجربة سجن ستانفورد عام 1971 الأشخاص إلى سجناء وحراس ، يعيشون في سجن مؤقت ، مما أدى إلى إساءات مهينة من قبل الحراس وأعمال شغب من قبل السجناء. تطلبت تجارب طاعة ستانلي ميلجرام في الستينيات من الأشخاص صدمة رجل ما بمستويات متزايدة من الكهرباء حتى بدا أن الرجل قد يموت. في عام 1973 ، أجرى عالم النفس (كينيث جيرجن) من كلية سوارثمور تجربة أخرى في علم النفس الاجتماعي من المحتمل أن تفشل في الحصول على موافقة مجالس الأخلاقيات اليوم. تساءل بحثه : "ماذا يفعل الناس في ظل ظروف تكون فيها هوياتهم مجهولة تماماً؟"
في تجربة جيرجن ، دخل خمسة شبان وخمس شابات غرفة صغيرة واحدة تلو الأخرى. لم يكونوا يعرفون بعضهم البعض قبل التجربة ، وتم عزلهم قبل دخولهم الغرفة. بمجرد دخولهم ، أصبحوا أحرارًا في فعل ما يحلو لهم. في نهاية التجربة ، غادر الأشخاص الغرفة واحدًا تلو الآخر. ولكن ما جعل هذه التجربة مثيرة للاهتمام للغاية كانت الغرفة نفسها. كانت شديدة الظلام.
لم يتمكن الأشخاص من رؤية بعضهم البعض ، ولم يعرفوا بعضهم البعض ، وكانوا يعلمون أنهم لن يعرفوا هويات بعضهم البعض بعد التجربة. بعبارة أخرى ، لقد اختبروا إخفاء الهوية بشكل كامل. إذن ماذا فعل هؤلاء الغرباء المجهولون؟
تحدثوا في البداية ، لكن سرعان ما توقف الحديث ، حيث بدأ اللمس. ما يقرب من 90 في المائة من المشاركين لامسوا شخصًا آخر عن قصد. عانق أكثر من نصف الأشخاص شخصًا ما. انتهى الأمر بثلث الأشخاص إلى التقبيل. قبّل أحد الشباب خمس فتيات مختلفات. يقول أحدهم : "بينما كنت جالسًا ، صعدت بيث وبدأنا نلعب وجهًا لوجه ، نتحسس أجسام بعضنا ، بدأنا في الرقبة نزولاً إلى الأسفل. قررنا أن نشارك الأمر مع الآخرين. لذلك انفصلنا وأخذت لوري مكانها ".
بسبب عدم الكشف عن هوياتهم ، عبر المشاركون بحرية عن رغباتهم. حتى أن أحد الرجال عرض على جيرجن أن يدفع له مقابل السماح له بالعودة إلى الغرفة. أفاد ما يقرب من 80 في المائة من الرجال والنساء عن شعورهم بالإثارة الجنسية بسبب تلك التجربة!!
.
Ogi Ogas
A Billion Wicked Thoughts
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
December 5, 2019
This book is a discussion about mostly hetero desire based on a statistical analysis of data collected on the internet. This book was published in 2011 so it is somewhat dated, no Fifty shades of Gray and Reddit.
Basically, men are Elmer Fudds, simple and myopically focused on shooting a wabbit, and women are Miss Marple detective agents sniffing out suitable suitors. Eh, if it sounds way over simplified, generalized, and sexist, that’s because it is. Basically evolutionary biology is sexist. Men like big boobs, small waists, big butts and small feet. Fuxk off!
I did not relate to 90% of the explanation about what women desire-I have less than zero interest in romance novels and fan fiction. I didn’t even know what fan fiction was before reading (okay listening to the audiobook) and I was laughing my ass off listening to the examples, Samwise Gangee and Frodo from LOTR getting on. Bahahahaha
Lastly, I think the assertion that women do not care all that much about penis size is total rubbish. Every female friend I know has talked about dicks. Size matters.
Other than the parts that made me want to gag and become completely asexual because men are gross, and women like fan fiction, I found this pretty fascinating.
Basically, men are Elmer Fudds, simple and myopically focused on shooting a wabbit, and women are Miss Marple detective agents sniffing out suitable suitors. Eh, if it sounds way over simplified, generalized, and sexist, that’s because it is. Basically evolutionary biology is sexist. Men like big boobs, small waists, big butts and small feet. Fuxk off!
I did not relate to 90% of the explanation about what women desire-I have less than zero interest in romance novels and fan fiction. I didn’t even know what fan fiction was before reading (okay listening to the audiobook) and I was laughing my ass off listening to the examples, Samwise Gangee and Frodo from LOTR getting on. Bahahahaha
Lastly, I think the assertion that women do not care all that much about penis size is total rubbish. Every female friend I know has talked about dicks. Size matters.
Other than the parts that made me want to gag and become completely asexual because men are gross, and women like fan fiction, I found this pretty fascinating.
January 8, 2013
What an amazing read. I know there aren't many who want to sit around reading about the science behind porn consumption, but for those of you that do, this is going to be the book for you. It has colored my opinions on quite a few behaviors and issues, as well as giving me a deeper insight into friends, family, and strangers.
The world needs more research into what makes us work, and that includes our most intimate moments alone, or the things we hide in the dark. It is a shame these things are so rarely investigated.
The world needs more research into what makes us work, and that includes our most intimate moments alone, or the things we hide in the dark. It is a shame these things are so rarely investigated.
September 30, 2022
A very well written and logically built book. It uses data science and neurology to get to know what people really find attractive. Those who say it is "generalizing": It is saying what the average male/female at it's core finds attractive. Primitively.
What is explained in the book about males is reflective in the porn industry (and what pornographical content is popular) and what is explained about females is also reflective about the best sellers in the romance category and how popular they are. It just is the brutal truth.
What is explained in the book about males is reflective in the porn industry (and what pornographical content is popular) and what is explained about females is also reflective about the best sellers in the romance category and how popular they are. It just is the brutal truth.
May 15, 2011
Authors use data mining on a large scale to try to better understand human sexual behavior. Despite vast amounts of data at their disposal, there's not much new here. One chapter reads like a recap of a recent book on romance novels. And there's the ethical considerations of using data derived from Internet searches without user consent. Authors claim it was all anonymous but one wonders.
September 30, 2015
One of the best non-fiction books I've read in a long time. Extremely well-researched and well-written.
April 27, 2022
Such an interesting collection of data! Recommend for anyone with a background in sociology or just a mind intrigued by why humans behave the way they do.
December 1, 2019
(The English review is placed beneath Russian one)
В целом, книга неплохая и чем-то напоминает книгу «Эволюция желания», а в чем-то - глянцевый журнал. И возможно из-за этого читать было довольно легко. Тем не менее, у книги есть несколько проблем. Но прежде чем к ним перейти стоит сказать, что книга очень хорошо подойдёт к вышеназванной книге «Эволюция желания», в которой автор, совмещая эволюционную психологию и масштабный социологический опрос, описывает теорию человеческой сексуальности. Собственно, из этого же состоит и эта книга (только слабее по части фактов), т.е. мы будем встречать отсылки к различным экспериментам с крысами и пр. животными и различные статистические данные на основе, как опросов, так и поисковых интернет запросов.
Однако я хотел бы подчеркнуть, что почти вся первая половина книги будет описывать интересы (в основном мужчин) связанных с предпочтениями в области порнографии. К примеру, авторы пишут, что в определённых странах (вроде речь шла об Индии, как «в особенности») молодые люди (около 20 лет) ищут в интернете или точнее на сайтах порнографию, которую обозначают аббревиатурой MILF (женщины от 30 до 50). Как пишут авторы, молодые мужчины находят таких женщин сексуально привлекательными по той причине (как я это понял), что такие женщины не ждут длительных отношений, которые заканчиваются браком, а также такие женщины более опытны в сексе и знают, что они сами хотят, а из этого (как я понял) и рождается сексуальное возбуждение. И вот так, практически по всем категориям, полный список которого можно найти на любом порнографическом сайте (коротко: список большой). С одной стороны, что-то в этом есть. Однако с другой стороны, мне можно возразить даже в том, что совсем недавно я раскритиковал в своей рецензии книгу «Все лгут» Cет Cтивенс-Давидовиц, которая полностью построена на данных из запросов пользователей Google. Мол, тогда я писал: как можно делать хоть какие-то выводы, основываясь на неизвестно кем заданных запросов в поисковой сети Google (мы не знаем ни возраста, ни пола, ни семейного положения тех, кто делает запросы в Google поисковике). А тут что же? Всё так и есть. Именно поэтому в какой-то момент я даже подумал: а не бросить ли мне чтение? В любом случаи, книгу в тот момент я оценивал не больше трёх баллов. Однако далее авторы наконец-то перешли к нормальным опросам, в которые участвовали реальные люди (а не анонимные люди из интернета). Тем не менее, да, я не могу поставить высший бал книге именно по той причине, что я всё равно не удовлетворён качеством и количеством представленных данных. В любом случаи, дальше авторы уже пишут текст, который больше походит на что-то нормальное и интересное, совмещая темы, которые выливаются в конечном итоге в текст, который одновременно похож и на статьи в глянцевых журналах и на книги по эволюционной психологии. В общем, в данном разделе авторы максимально подробно будут описывать предпочтения мужчин и предпочтения женщин. Тут знакомое нам, «мужчины любят глазами, а женщины - ушами», где авторы будут писать о важности для мужчин визуальной информации, а точнее женских частей тела (самые популярные запросы в интернете: попа, грудь и ноги). Касаемо мужчин авторы будут писать о порнографических сайтах, а когда речь зайдёт о женщинах, то авторы уделят довольно много времени различным вариантам женских эротических романов, как они эволюционировали (и что, в связи с этим, женщин больше всего заводит). Примечательным фактом является то, что ягодицы, единственная часть тела, которая привлекает и мужчин и женщин (разумеется, не в таких пропорциях как это у мужчин). Так же мы тут встретим знаменитый эксперимент, суть которого в том, что если большинство мужчин соглашались на секс с незнакомой привлекательной женщиной, то женщины, каким бы привлекательным не был бы мужчина, никогда не решаться на подобный шаг. В общем, это сборник всех тех экспериментов и тем, что так часто кочуют из одной статьи или книгу в другую. Однако в данном случаи все темы собраны под одной книгой и идеально подогнаны друг под друга.
Далее. Авторы не останавливаются на теме гетеросексуальных пар и также много внимания уделяют гомосексуальным. В подавляющем большинстве тут будут фигурировать предпочтения в гей культуре (довольно подробное, кстати). Тут мы встретим различия между тем кто «под» и кто «над», самая популярная тема в порнографических материалах и что определённая часть геев предпочитает порнографию гетеросексуального направления.
Подводя итог. В принципе, книга скорее развлекательная, так как мы получаем скорее забавные сведения о том, кто и какое порно смотрит (но мы не знаем доподлинно кто этот кто, т.к. это нерепрезентативная выборка, а просто некая неизвестная масса) и что предпочитают женщины и мужчины (тут мы уже имеем некоторые сведения, источники на которые можно опереться), когда дело касается сексуальной тематики. Да, авторы будут писать и о крысах и о других животных, однако меня никогда не интересовали подобные сравнения, т.к. мы (люди) сильно отличаемся от них (животных). Кто бы что ни говорил, а люди движимы не только своими инстинктами. Поэтому эта часть книги была для меня скучна. В остальном же, было забавно и познавательно. Не сказать, что многое можно как-то применить в жизни, но некоторые моменты можно взять на заметку.
In general, the book is not bad and reminds me to some extent of the book "The Evolution Of Desire" by David M. Buss, and in some ways - a glossy magazine. And perhaps because of this it was quite easy to read. Nevertheless, the book has several problems. But before we turn to them, it is worth saying that the book will fit very well into the above book "The Evolution Of Desire", in which the author, combining evolutionary psychology and a large-scale sociological survey, describes the theory of human sexuality. Actually, this book consists of the same (only weaker in terms of facts), that is, we will meet references to various experiments with rats and other animals and various statistical data based on both surveys and Internet searches.
However, I would like to emphasize that almost the entire first half of the book will describe the interests (mainly of men) associated with preferences in the field of pornography. For example, the authors write that in certain countries (I think it was India) young people (about 20 years old) are looking for pornography on the Internet or, more precisely, on websites, which is referred to as MILF (women between 30 and 50). According to the authors, young men find these women sexually attractive because (as I understand it) they do not expect a long-term relationship that ends in marriage, and they are more experienced in sex and know what they want, and from this (as I understand it) sexual arousal is born. Here is such an analysis conducted by the authors in almost all categories, the full list of which can be found on any pornographic site (in short: the list is large). On the one hand, there is something about it. However, on the other hand, I recently criticized in my review the book "Everybody Lies" by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, which is completely based on data from the requests of Google users. I was writing back then: how one can draw any conclusions based on unknown people's requests in the Google search engine (we do not know the age, gender or marital status of those who make queries in Google search engine). That's right. That's why, at some point, I even thought: Should I quit reading? In any case, at that moment I was evaluating the book with no more than three points. However, the authors have finally moved on to more normal polls, in which real people participated (not anonymous people from the Internet). However, yes, I cannot give the highest score to the book because I am still not satisfied with the quality and quantity of the data provided. In any case, further on the authors write a text that is more like something real and interesting, combining the topics that will eventually create a text that is both similar to articles in glossy magazines and books on evolutionary psychology. In general, in this section, the authors will describe in as much detail as possible the preferences of men and women. Here we will meet the generally accepted - "Men fall in love with their eyes and women fall in love with their ears," in which the authors will write about the importance of visual information for men, or rather women's parts of the body (the most popular requests on the Internet: butt, breast and legs). As for men, the authors write about pornographic sites. As for women, the authors devote quite a lot of time to different versions of women's erotic novels and how they have evolved (and what turns women on the most). The remarkable fact is that the buttocks, the only part of the body that attracts both men and women. We will also meet a famous experiment here, the essence of which is that if the majority of men have agreed to have sex with an unknown attractive woman, then women, no matter how attractive the man was, never taken such a step. In general, it is a collection of those experiments and ideas that so often flow from one article or book to another. However, in this case, all the topics are collected under one book and fit perfectly with each other.
Next up. The authors do not dwell on the topic of heterosexual couples and also pay much attention to homosexuals. In the vast majority of cases, there will be a preference for gay culture (quite detailed, by the way). Here we will find differences between those who are "under" and those who are "above", the most popular topic in pornographic materials, and that some gay men prefer heterosexual pornography.
To sum up. In principle, the book is more of an entertainment book because we get more funny information about who and what kind of porn is being watched (but we don't know exactly who it is, because it's an unrepresentative sample, but just a mass of people) and what women and men prefer (we already have some information or sources to rely on when it comes to sexual topics). Yes, the authors will write about rats and other animals, but I was never interested in such comparisons because we (people) are very different from animals. Whoever says what, people are not only driven by their instincts. That's why this part of the book was boring for me. Otherwise, it was funny and informative. Not to say that much can be applied in real life, but some moments can be taken into account.
В целом, книга неплохая и чем-то напоминает книгу «Эволюция желания», а в чем-то - глянцевый журнал. И возможно из-за этого читать было довольно легко. Тем не менее, у книги есть несколько проблем. Но прежде чем к ним перейти стоит сказать, что книга очень хорошо подойдёт к вышеназванной книге «Эволюция желания», в которой автор, совмещая эволюционную психологию и масштабный социологический опрос, описывает теорию человеческой сексуальности. Собственно, из этого же состоит и эта книга (только слабее по части фактов), т.е. мы будем встречать отсылки к различным экспериментам с крысами и пр. животными и различные статистические данные на основе, как опросов, так и поисковых интернет запросов.
Однако я хотел бы подчеркнуть, что почти вся первая половина книги будет описывать интересы (в основном мужчин) связанных с предпочтениями в области порнографии. К примеру, авторы пишут, что в определённых странах (вроде речь шла об Индии, как «в особенности») молодые люди (около 20 лет) ищут в интернете или точнее на сайтах порнографию, которую обозначают аббревиатурой MILF (женщины от 30 до 50). Как пишут авторы, молодые мужчины находят таких женщин сексуально привлекательными по той причине (как я это понял), что такие женщины не ждут длительных отношений, которые заканчиваются браком, а также такие женщины более опытны в сексе и знают, что они сами хотят, а из этого (как я понял) и рождается сексуальное возбуждение. И вот так, практически по всем категориям, полный список которого можно найти на любом порнографическом сайте (коротко: список большой). С одной стороны, что-то в этом есть. Однако с другой стороны, мне можно возразить даже в том, что совсем недавно я раскритиковал в своей рецензии книгу «Все лгут» Cет Cтивенс-Давидовиц, которая полностью построена на данных из запросов пользователей Google. Мол, тогда я писал: как можно делать хоть какие-то выводы, основываясь на неизвестно кем заданных запросов в поисковой сети Google (мы не знаем ни возраста, ни пола, ни семейного положения тех, кто делает запросы в Google поисковике). А тут что же? Всё так и есть. Именно поэтому в какой-то момент я даже подумал: а не бросить ли мне чтение? В любом случаи, книгу в тот момент я оценивал не больше трёх баллов. Однако далее авторы наконец-то перешли к нормальным опросам, в которые участвовали реальные люди (а не анонимные люди из интернета). Тем не менее, да, я не могу поставить высший бал книге именно по той причине, что я всё равно не удовлетворён качеством и количеством представленных данных. В любом случаи, дальше авторы уже пишут текст, который больше походит на что-то нормальное и интересное, совмещая темы, которые выливаются в конечном итоге в текст, который одновременно похож и на статьи в глянцевых журналах и на книги по эволюционной психологии. В общем, в данном разделе авторы максимально подробно будут описывать предпочтения мужчин и предпочтения женщин. Тут знакомое нам, «мужчины любят глазами, а женщины - ушами», где авторы будут писать о важности для мужчин визуальной информации, а точнее женских частей тела (самые популярные запросы в интернете: попа, грудь и ноги). Касаемо мужчин авторы будут писать о порнографических сайтах, а когда речь зайдёт о женщинах, то авторы уделят довольно много времени различным вариантам женских эротических романов, как они эволюционировали (и что, в связи с этим, женщин больше всего заводит). Примечательным фактом является то, что ягодицы, единственная часть тела, которая привлекает и мужчин и женщин (разумеется, не в таких пропорциях как это у мужчин). Так же мы тут встретим знаменитый эксперимент, суть которого в том, что если большинство мужчин соглашались на секс с незнакомой привлекательной женщиной, то женщины, каким бы привлекательным не был бы мужчина, никогда не решаться на подобный шаг. В общем, это сборник всех тех экспериментов и тем, что так часто кочуют из одной статьи или книгу в другую. Однако в данном случаи все темы собраны под одной книгой и идеально подогнаны друг под друга.
Далее. Авторы не останавливаются на теме гетеросексуальных пар и также много внимания уделяют гомосексуальным. В подавляющем большинстве тут будут фигурировать предпочтения в гей культуре (довольно подробное, кстати). Тут мы встретим различия между тем кто «под» и кто «над», самая популярная тема в порнографических материалах и что определённая часть геев предпочитает порнографию гетеросексуального направления.
Подводя итог. В принципе, книга скорее развлекательная, так как мы получаем скорее забавные сведения о том, кто и какое порно смотрит (но мы не знаем доподлинно кто этот кто, т.к. это нерепрезентативная выборка, а просто некая неизвестная масса) и что предпочитают женщины и мужчины (тут мы уже имеем некоторые сведения, источники на которые можно опереться), когда дело касается сексуальной тематики. Да, авторы будут писать и о крысах и о других животных, однако меня никогда не интересовали подобные сравнения, т.к. мы (люди) сильно отличаемся от них (животных). Кто бы что ни говорил, а люди движимы не только своими инстинктами. Поэтому эта часть книги была для меня скучна. В остальном же, было забавно и познавательно. Не сказать, что многое можно как-то применить в жизни, но некоторые моменты можно взять на заметку.
In general, the book is not bad and reminds me to some extent of the book "The Evolution Of Desire" by David M. Buss, and in some ways - a glossy magazine. And perhaps because of this it was quite easy to read. Nevertheless, the book has several problems. But before we turn to them, it is worth saying that the book will fit very well into the above book "The Evolution Of Desire", in which the author, combining evolutionary psychology and a large-scale sociological survey, describes the theory of human sexuality. Actually, this book consists of the same (only weaker in terms of facts), that is, we will meet references to various experiments with rats and other animals and various statistical data based on both surveys and Internet searches.
However, I would like to emphasize that almost the entire first half of the book will describe the interests (mainly of men) associated with preferences in the field of pornography. For example, the authors write that in certain countries (I think it was India) young people (about 20 years old) are looking for pornography on the Internet or, more precisely, on websites, which is referred to as MILF (women between 30 and 50). According to the authors, young men find these women sexually attractive because (as I understand it) they do not expect a long-term relationship that ends in marriage, and they are more experienced in sex and know what they want, and from this (as I understand it) sexual arousal is born. Here is such an analysis conducted by the authors in almost all categories, the full list of which can be found on any pornographic site (in short: the list is large). On the one hand, there is something about it. However, on the other hand, I recently criticized in my review the book "Everybody Lies" by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, which is completely based on data from the requests of Google users. I was writing back then: how one can draw any conclusions based on unknown people's requests in the Google search engine (we do not know the age, gender or marital status of those who make queries in Google search engine). That's right. That's why, at some point, I even thought: Should I quit reading? In any case, at that moment I was evaluating the book with no more than three points. However, the authors have finally moved on to more normal polls, in which real people participated (not anonymous people from the Internet). However, yes, I cannot give the highest score to the book because I am still not satisfied with the quality and quantity of the data provided. In any case, further on the authors write a text that is more like something real and interesting, combining the topics that will eventually create a text that is both similar to articles in glossy magazines and books on evolutionary psychology. In general, in this section, the authors will describe in as much detail as possible the preferences of men and women. Here we will meet the generally accepted - "Men fall in love with their eyes and women fall in love with their ears," in which the authors will write about the importance of visual information for men, or rather women's parts of the body (the most popular requests on the Internet: butt, breast and legs). As for men, the authors write about pornographic sites. As for women, the authors devote quite a lot of time to different versions of women's erotic novels and how they have evolved (and what turns women on the most). The remarkable fact is that the buttocks, the only part of the body that attracts both men and women. We will also meet a famous experiment here, the essence of which is that if the majority of men have agreed to have sex with an unknown attractive woman, then women, no matter how attractive the man was, never taken such a step. In general, it is a collection of those experiments and ideas that so often flow from one article or book to another. However, in this case, all the topics are collected under one book and fit perfectly with each other.
Next up. The authors do not dwell on the topic of heterosexual couples and also pay much attention to homosexuals. In the vast majority of cases, there will be a preference for gay culture (quite detailed, by the way). Here we will find differences between those who are "under" and those who are "above", the most popular topic in pornographic materials, and that some gay men prefer heterosexual pornography.
To sum up. In principle, the book is more of an entertainment book because we get more funny information about who and what kind of porn is being watched (but we don't know exactly who it is, because it's an unrepresentative sample, but just a mass of people) and what women and men prefer (we already have some information or sources to rely on when it comes to sexual topics). Yes, the authors will write about rats and other animals, but I was never interested in such comparisons because we (people) are very different from animals. Whoever says what, people are not only driven by their instincts. That's why this part of the book was boring for me. Otherwise, it was funny and informative. Not to say that much can be applied in real life, but some moments can be taken into account.
June 29, 2018
Awal-awalnya sih seru, tapi lama-lama kok bosenin.
January 12, 2023
Incredibly insightful.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 391 reviews