Adaptation or happy coincidence?
Page 3

...close, that it could not have arisen by chance. The human eye, for instance, is so specific in design that there’s no question that it was shaped over evolutionary time for the purpose of sight. The case is not so clear with orgasms.

According to Lloyd, one of the main arguments against female orgasm being an adaptation is that not only is it not required for conception, it’s not even guaranteed through intercourse. As Kinsey’s 1953 study found, less than half of women always or almost always orgasm through intercourse. More current studies put the average around the 30 to 40 percent mark. Lloyd considers this strong evidence that female orgasm is not an adaptation. “If it were an adaptation, it would have evolved to fixation, it would universally appear,” says Lloyd. As Kinsey and his successors have shown, this is not the case.

So far, none of the theories set forth have proven that the female orgasm is an adaptive feature. But the lack of adaptive value, does not make orgasm any less important on a cultural level. Nobody argues that the ability to read and write is an adaptation, Symons points out. It’s just something that humans do, but that doesn’t devalue it in anyway. The ability to read and write is similar to the female orgasm, he notes, “it’s not trivial or unimportant, it just may not occur spontaneously. You have to work toward it.” r

photo credit: Katy Love