Woman: An Intimate Geography (14 page)

Read Woman: An Intimate Geography Online

Authors: Natalie Angier

Tags: #test

BOOK: Woman: An Intimate Geography
8.02Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
page_65<br/>
Page 65
in the first place. Maybe you've pondered along these lines yourself. Maybe you've idly rolled the old sexual chestnuts around in your mind and wondered why it is that women are the ones with the organ dedicated exclusively to sexual pleasure, when men are the ones who are supposed to be dedicated exclusively to sexual pleasure. Men are portrayed as wanting to go at it all the time, women as preferring a good cuddle; yet a man feels preposterously peacockish if he climaxes three or four times in a night, compared to the fifty or hundred orgasms that a sexually athletic woman can have in an hour or two. Maybe you thought it was some sort of cosmic joke, in the same category of sexual dissonance as the fact that a man is at his libidinous peak before he is quite a man, by age eighteen or twenty, while a woman doesn't reach full flower until her thirties or even forties (about the time, a female comedian once put it, that her husband is discovering he has a favorite chair). Or maybe you've thought the clitoris is a kind of accident, barely there, more Ariel than anatomical. The clitoris is small, after all, and hardly distinct from the surrounding folds and crevasses of the vulva. For women who are anorgasmic, who cannot climax no matter how they thrash and struggle, the clitoris may seem the most overhyped and misleading knob of flesh this side of Pinocchio's nose. Sure, it works for some, but for others it is notoriously undependable. Marilyn Monroe, the most elaborated sexual icon of the twentieth century and surely the source of autoeruptive glee for thousands of fans, confessed to a friend that despite her three husbands and a parade of lovers, she had never had an orgasm. Could even Immanuel Kant, said to have died a virgin, be considered such a sorry sexual naif?
As it happens, evolutionary thinkers are engaged in a vigorous debate over the point, or pointlessness, of the clitoris and its bosom buddy, the female orgasm. They are asking whether the capacity for orgasm does a woman any good and thus can be counted an adaptation that has been selected over the wash of time, or whether it is, to borrow a phrase from Stephen Jay Gould, a glorious accident. The debate is good clean dirty cortical fun, so much more amusing than being adjured, as we were in the 1970s, to get a mirror and inspect our genitals for ourselves. It gives the clitoris a jaunty new consequence; a brush with Darwinism can do that. But it is also an unnerving debate. Some researchers have argued, in print, that the female climax may be so unnecessary as to be on its

 

page_66<br/>
Page 66
way out. One unlucky lurch of the evolutionary wheel, and those fibers may fire no more. But let's not get ahead of the game. Let us take a look at the clitoral balance sheet with a dispassionate eye and consider the theories behind its provenance. You can then decide independently whether you can relax in confidence of the organ's enduring purpose or whether it's time to break out the offerings to the goddess Klitoris and her earthly ecclesiastic, Bonobo-à-go-go.
There are three basic verities to bear in mind about the clitoris and female climax. First, let's admit it up front: the female orgasm is dispensable. A male ordinarily must reach orgasm if he is to reproduce, whereas a female can conceive perfectly well without feeling a thing, and even, in the case of rape, while feeling fear and revulsion. Second, the female orgasm is capricious, its reliability and frequency varying greatly from woman to woman. Third, there's the matter of genital homology the fact that clitoris and penis develop from the same genital ridge of the fetus.
We are not done with bundles of three. The physiological verities in turn suggest three possible evolutionary categories into which our star organ might fit, three overarching explanations for why the clitoris is there and does what it does (or sometimes fails to do). And though I hate being anthropocentric, the scenarios below apply specifically to women rather than to mammalian clitorises generally. To wit:
1. The clitoris is a vestigial penis
. A girl has one because the body is inherently bisexual, poised as a fetus to grow either male or female sex organs. In the event she had been designated a male, she would have needed a functioning, ejaculating, innervated penis. Instead she received a penile remnant, a small nubbin of sensory tissue with the same underlying neuronal architecture as that found in a genuine phallus. The clitoris, then, is like nipples on a man, an atavism, the faint signature of what might have been but no longer really needs to be.
By this scenario, the clitoris and female climax do not rank as adaptations. The ejaculatory penis, a.k.a. the DNA delivery van, is the adaptation, the point of it all, while the clitoris is the booby prize.
Which doesn't mean that we can't make the best of happenstance. Stephen Jay Gould, one of the more prominent proponents of the vestigial penis theory, considers the female climax to be a prime example of a spandrel in Saint Mark's Cathedral, his famous metaphor for a

 

page_67<br/>
Page 67
body part or trait that looks like an adaptation but is really the byproduct of something else. When you first see the lavishly ornamented spandrels in the Venetian basilica, you might think that they have an independent purpose, that the master builder said, I want spandrels there, there, and there. But it turns out that you can't build an arch or a dome without incidentally making a triangular bit of wall the spandrel. The spandrel is not the goal; it's a means to the goal, the goal being the construction of an arch. Yet once the spandrel is in place, you can go ahead and gild it. Make it gorgeous. Enjoy sex all you want, or can. And if it sometimes seems that it's rough work scaling the peaks of ecstasy, hey, it could be worse. Have you ever seen a lactating man?
2. The clitoris is a vestigial clitoris
. The previous scenario posits that the clitoris is not now and has never been an adaptation; it's a residual penis. Another argument has it that the clitoris may not be of obvious utility today, but that in the past it was an adaptation it shone with the light of a whole damned byzantine dome. In this parable, our ancestral sisters behaved rather as the bonobo does, using sex as the universal key to curry friendships, to placate tempers, to solicit meat or favor from any number of partners, and to disguise issues of paternity. The clitoris gave females incentive to experiment, to shop around, to play the erotic entrepreneur. Such a notion could explain why women are slow to burn: their sexuality is geared toward serial encounters with multiple hair-trigger males. Well, that one didn't quite do it; I'd better go out, cruise the brush, and finish what I started.
Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, one of my favorite evolutionary biologists, is an adherent of the once-upon-a-time theory. In her view, the organ's fitful behavior, its demand for sustained and perhaps collective attention to perform at its optimum, is evidence of its transitional status from adaptive to nonadaptive. If female climax were a core feature of monogamy and pair bonding, the old saw has it, if it were designed to encourage intimacy between loving partners, then the human clitoris would be far more efficient than it is, Hrdy has said. It would be readily responsive to the motions of copulation alone, and it would rest easy once the man was through. Instead, only a minority of women are capable of orgasm strictly from wham-bam intercourse; most need a bit of prior groundwork. And then there's the asymmetry between a man's ejaculatory limits and a woman's trick birthday candle, the one that keeps

 

page_68<br/>
Page 68
popping back no matter how hard you blow. All of which suggests that women once were promiscuous, appetitive, roving diplomats, as many female primates are. They caroused with as many consorts as was practical, and took on the risks that come with multiple matings to quench what Hrdy sees as the far more dire and pervasive threat of infanticide the tendency of males to kill babies they think are not their own. Well might our ancestresses have shuffled their Latin and cried, Vidi, veni, vici!
In today's world it is hardly adaptive for a woman to flit about like a Barbary macaque, and in some cultures such wanton behavior is punishable by death. As a result, the clitoris may no longer be considered a woman's best appendage. Indeed, Hrdy and others propose that because its personal and reproductive benefits no longer apply, the organ has been shrinking slowly over the millennia, retreating ever further behind Venusian blinds. If such trends continue . . . well, I'm not going to spell it out. I'm just going to stand here and scream.
3. The clitoris is the music of Johann Sebastian Bach
. I have listened to the music of Bach and thought, Without this there would be nothing. I have listened and thought, It was inevitable. Evolution has no goal, with the possible exception of giving the world the Second and Fifth Brandenburg Concertos, the Goldberg Variations, and the Well-Tempered Clavier. The dinosaurs died so that Bach may live.
In other words, the clitoris is an adaptation. It is essential, or at least strongly recommended. It is also versatile, generous, demanding, profound, easy, and enduring. It is a chameleon, capable of changing its meaning to suit prevailing circumstances. Like Bach's music, it can always be reinterpreted and updated. So perhaps we should start exploring this thesis with a simple question: would the planet now hold six billion people if women did not seek sex? And can you expect them to play a fugue if their organ has no pipes?
Proponents of the idea that the clitoris has merit and motive that it is an adaptation and has been selected start by turning certain assumptions on their head. We said earlier that, generally speaking, a man must reach orgasm if he is to reproduce, so it seems clear that male orgasm is a product of evolutions hand. But Meredith Small, a primatologist who can always be depended on to question biology's bromides, has pointed out that male orgasm is not really necessary for insemina-

 

page_69<br/>
Page 69
tion. The penis begins releasing viable sperm well before it ejaculates, and those gun-jumpers can thrash their way toward an egg just fine, which is why coitus interruptus is such a poor form of birth control.
Moreover, who is to say that the experience of orgasm was a prerequisite when the details of male physiology were being selected? As the archaeologist Timothy Taylor has noted, a male theoretically could inseminate a female through a system like urination, a kind of hypodermic injection, no ecstasy required. Chances are that male insects, with their relatively simple nervous systems, operate in just such a no-nonsense manner, releasing a spermatic package as anhedonically as a female later dispenses eggs. If the orgasmic experience evolved in "higher" males for reasons other than mechanical necessity, if we decouple the logic behind male pleasure from the details of gamete conveyance, then we lose a big part of the argument that the female climax is an atavistic echo of something indispensible to men. All pleasure, by this rendering, becomes hypothetically optional. Yet pleasure does not appear to be beside the point. Indeed, nearly all of us are born with the capacity to seize or be seized by it. And nothing defines an adaptation so well as universality.
If we agree that the clitoris and female climax are adaptive, then we can delve into the particulars of their performance. Let us assume that the clitoris exists to give us pleasure, and that pleasure provides the spur to seek sex that without the promise of great reward we'd be content to stay home and catch up on our flossing. Then we must revisit the matter of disappointment, the frequency with which the clitoris fails us. Why do we have to work much harder for our finale than men do? The clitoris is an idiot savant: it can be so brilliant, and so stupid. Or is it a Cassandra, telling us something that we ignore to our grief?
In my view, all the intricacies we've been mulling the apparent fickleness and mulishness of the clitoris, its asynchronicity with male responsiveness, and the variability of its performance from one woman to the next can be explained by making a simple assumption: that the clitoris is designed to encourage its bearer to take control of her sexuality. Yes, this idea sounds like a rank political tract, and body tissue has no party affiliation. But it can vote with its behavior, working best when you treat it right, faltering when it's abused or misunderstood. In truth, the clitoris operates at peak performance when a woman feels

 

page_70<br/>
Page 70
athunder with life and strength, when she is bellowing on top, figuratively if not literally. The clitoris hates being scared or bullied. Some women who have been raped report that their vaginas became lubricated even as they feared for their lives and a good thing too, for the lubrication prevented them from being ripped apart but women almost never have orgasms during a rape, male fantasies notwithstanding. The clitoris will not be hurried or pushed. A woman who worries that she is taking too long for her partner will take that much longer. A woman who stops watching the pot sends a message to the clitoris I'm here! and within moments the pot boils over.
The clitoris loves power, and it strives to reinforce the sensation of playing commando. Sex researchers have found that women who are easily and multiply orgasmic have one trait in common: they take responsibility for their pleasure. They don't depend on the skillfulness or mind-reading abilities of their lovers to get what they want. They know which positions and angles work best for them, and they negotiate said postures verbally or kinesthetically. Moreover, the positions that offer many women the greatest satisfaction are those that give them some control over the sexual choreography: on top, for example, or side by side. A movie that shows a woman reaching frenzied crescendo while being hoisted up and slammed against a wall in classic
Last Tango in Paris
fashion is not a movie directed by a woman.
In addition, most women get better with time and experience. The 1950s Kinsey report on sexuality found that 36 percent of women in their twenties were anorgasmic, while for those in their thirties or older the number dropped to 15 percent. Several studies done since then have found a greater capacity for orgasm among all women, yet still the older women as a group remain more orgasmic than their younger counterparts. Of course, part of the explanation could be that the older women are having sex with older men, who are defter and less precipitous than young men and who have enough self-control to sustain a session for as long as it takes their partners to climax. However, older lesbians are more easily roused to orgasm than young lesbians, suggesting that we are not talking about the deficiencies of callow Quick-Draw McGraws. Instead, the power of knowing yourself, a power cultivated over the years, translates into greater collaboration from below.
The clitoris not only applauds when a woman flaunts her mastery; it

 

Other books

Cryptozoica by Mark Ellis
Children of Dynasty by Carroll, Christine
Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens
Frost by Wendy Delsol
Beetle by Jill McDougall, Tim Ide
Harmony by Stef Ann Holm
Forevermore by Lynn Galli
Outcast by Alex Douglas