Tribe.net. Local Connections Raemond http://TransLove.tribe.net/thread/35c39b87-2dc6-43e6-9309-04999ac126ed 2008-08-17T19:56:31Z 2008-07-18T22:37:58Z

<div>Hello, I'm an FTM in NYC and am getting so many rejections based on me being trans. <br/>I thought this was going to be easy since other FTMs have found lovers. <br/>Sometimes, I don't even mention I'm trans and still no dates! <br/>Any thoughts?? Thanks.</div> <div> posted in <a href="http://TransLove.tribe.net">Transsexuals Seeking Relationships</a> - 4 replies </div>

Raemond 2008-07-18T22:37:58Z Bryan Anderson http://TransLove.tribe.net/thread/f66f405e-c5a7-49ab-8fc3-f40c0f4bfecc 2008-07-18T22:40:31Z 2008-05-25T00:09:48Z

<div>hello i'm chris new on here are there any transsexuals from new york on here37 black mail <br/>looking for a real relationship no games no bull . <br/>i have been looking for a long time and looking in the worn places <br/>and im allmost givein up on it so can you be a friend and show me the <br/>right way send me a massage i don't know if i,m doing this right. <br/> thank you</div> <div> posted in <a href="http://TransLove.tribe.net">Transsexuals Seeking Relationships</a> - 6 replies </div>

Bryan Anderson 2008-05-25T00:09:48Z kelly http://TransLove.tribe.net/thread/c6d90d1b-a73d-4125-9078-b74117da59ac 2008-07-12T09:26:56Z 2006-10-15T22:09:27Z

<div>i am at a loss on hoe to meet people who might be looking to hook up with/date ftms. I am open to men and women,,, i have never been, since my transition started 3 years ago, intimate with someone as an ftm,, where are the girls/guys who like us???</div> <div> posted in <a href="http://TransLove.tribe.net">Transsexuals Seeking Relationships</a> - 4 replies </div>

kelly 2006-10-15T22:09:27Z TheNewt http://TransLove.tribe.net/thread/97d2fafc-704f-47c7-af7d-d771392452d3 2008-06-11T01:56:25Z 2008-06-11T01:56:25Z

<div>Anyone here on this tribe from Philadelphia besides me? I am not trans but I'm perfectly fine with dating/having a relationship with trans people.</div> <div> posted in <a href="http://TransLove.tribe.net">Transsexuals Seeking Relationships</a> - 0 replies </div>

TheNewt 2008-06-11T01:56:25Z niymae http://TransLove.tribe.net/thread/31c156c7-86ba-40cc-a715-2c5208cb0ab7 2008-06-09T07:46:25Z 2008-04-20T04:14:36Z

<div>Super Size Orgasms? <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Fri, 2005-07-15 01:32 — Marnia <br/> <br/>brain orgasm <br/> <br/>Not long ago I heard an Australian radio program called "The Orgasmic Brain", hosted by Natasha Mitchell. One of the guests on the program was Gert Holstege, a Dutch scientist who has begun mapping events in the brain during orgasm using brain scans of the event. At the very end of their interview, Dr. Holstege said: <br/> <br/> We are addicted to sex as you know, as everybody is. [It is the] orbital frontal cortex that is controlling whether we can do it or not. And for example people that don’t have this part of the brain - and these people exist - these people really go for [orgasm] all the time. <br/> <br/>Ms. Mitchell then ran out of time and did not ask about the significance of the addictiveness of sex for our intimate relationships. Questions certainly could be asked. Dr. Holstege - in his findings released a couple of years ago - compared the scans of men during orgasm to scans of people shooting heroin. shooting drugsAlas, sometimes the most obvious questions are overlooked or ignored - even by excellent journalists like Ms. Mitchell. In biology, what goes up must come down as the body seeks to rebalance itself. <br/> <br/>Already science is beginning to map what could be called a sexual hangover, i.e., neurochemical shifts, mostly within the "reward" center of the primitive brain, which follow orgasm. For example, after sexual satiation there is a drastic reduction in androgen receptor density, which may take up to 7 days to return to normal - and meanwhile dampens libido and mood. Prolactin also rises after orgasm and high prolactin has been associated with anxiety, low libido, and other unpleasant side effects. Dopamine drops, fueling searches for more dopamine, i.e., kicking off an addictive cycle of quests for highs. And creating lingering psychological distress. <br/> <br/>Science still largely ignores the wider significance of these natural shifts. Its focus is upon the development of lucrative pharmaceuticals and procedures for forcing orgasm artifically. Yet this hangover may be affecting us in powerful ways. The ancient Chinese Taoists observed that violent crimes were often committed during the post-coital letdown. <br/> <br/>If sex, like heroin use, has both a high and a low phase, is it really a good idea to create artificial ways to flood our brains with new drugs that stimulate the same pathways in the brain as heroin without considering the possible aftereffects? How might the low phase be interfering with sexual intimacy over the long-term? Or affecting the harmony in our relationships, as those natural ups and downs change how how we feel about each other? After all, our neurochemical state has major repercussions for our moods, and thus for how we lovers perceive and treat each other. Do we have better options for sustaining and balancing sexual desire, as various sages of the past have suggested? <br/> <br/>Excepting the familiar roll-over-and-snore phenomenon, humans seldom consciously make the connection between orgasm and a neurochemical hangover. Even so, these uncomfortable changes may linger for days, flattening libido - or priming our reward centers to seek another addictive neurochemical rush. We often seek that rush through anything that will raise our dopamine levels again: a new sex partner, a more intense sexual experience, alcohol, binge eating, recreational drugs - or pharmaceuticals that interact with the dopaminergic system (more below). Our distant ancestors didn't have these options for excess in the abundance we do today. Their lifestyles guaranteed a degree of balance we can no longer take for granted. Maybe we need to ask whether orgasm-on-demand could be a problem for our beleaguered reward centers. The experience of porn addicts suggests it would be. <br/> <br/>Dr. Holstege has not taken his findings to the next step: assessment of the implications of the neurochemical hangover. Indeed, he hopes to develop "an orgasm pill" (as he said in an article at the time that his research on male orgasm came out). sex pill cartoonThere can be no doubt that such a pill would certainly be enticing…priced expensively…and undoubtedly very profitable. Yet there is good reason to believe that it would also produce a neurochemical hangover...and foster addiction. <br/> <br/>As Holstege explains earlier in the interview with Mitchell, orgasm occurs in the brain. It is nature’s reward for engaging in an activity that furthers the genetic success of the species. A big part of the thrilling rush up to orgasm is a sharp rise in dopamine levels in the so-called reward center of the brain. This same rush is part of what makes all addictive substances or activities addictive. Any orgasm pill would probably have to raise dopamine levels, which would likely set off a hangover at least as severe as conventional sex. <br/> <br/>In fact, science is already well on its way to developing such a drug. Pharmaceutical companies know how to duplicate the effects of dopamine artificially. The results, however, are already signaling that caution is more appropriate than unbridled enthusiasm. In recent years, pharmaceutical companies have marketed drugs known as dopamine agonists. An agonist is a substance that attaches to nerve cell receptors and imitates an existing neurochemical. A dopamine agonist drug, therefore, produces effects similar to dopamine in the brain. <br/> <br/>These drugs were first developed to control the shaking that accompanies Parkinson’s disease. Now Apomorphine HCl, a dopamine agonist that stimulates erection, is being is being approved, and is already for sale in Europe. And pharmaceutical companies predict that an even bigger market lies in drugs to excite women. <br/> <br/>On July 12,2005, National Geographic News reported that the Mayo Clinic had found that the dopamine agonist drugs used to treat Parkinson's can boost patients' appetites for sex, food, alcohol and even gambling. (One out of ten Scottish patients taking dopamine elevating drugs developed serious gambling addictions.) <br/> <br/> "This is a striking effect," said J. Eric Ahlskog, a neurologist at the Mayo Clinic. Pathological gambling induced by a drug is really quite unusual. In one case, a 54-year-old married pastor gambled daily at the local casino, hiding his losses from his wife. In another, a 41-year-old computer programmer who had never gambled in his life became "consumed" with Internet gambling. <br/> <br/>All the patients were taking a dopamine agonist drug, which affects the dopamine receptors highly concentrated in the reward center of the brain. Dopamine is thought to reinforce such compulsive behavior. <br/> <br/> "These patients … identified these behaviors as being uncharacteristic of their baseline behavior," said Maryellen Dodd, the Mayo Clinic psychiatrist who led the research. "Nearly all the patients who came to our attention had never gambled or gambled very infrequently...." <br/> <br/> At least six patients also developed other problems, including compulsive eating, increased alcohol use, and hypersexuality. At least one patient developed an obsession with pornography and engaged in extramarital affairs...."When our neurologists tapered the patients off the medication, several reported a dramatic resolution of their problem," Dodd said. "One patient said it was like a light switch going off." <br/> <br/>sex pill cartoon Not everyone will recognize the advantages of using intimate relations to balance brain chemistry as described below. An orgasm drug, however, would push users to the opposite extreme. It would be one of the most addictive pills ever produced - and could be marketed more readily than super size fries. Recreational pharmaceuticals would no doubt swiftly follow - "for increased sexual desire to accompany those ever-ready Viagra erections" and then "super size orgasms." (Viagra doesn't stimulate orgasm, just increased blood flow to the penis.) <br/> <br/>Since sexual intimacy is so good for us, why is this a problem? At the risk of being branded a killjoy, I'll mention a few reasons, which - like the unanticipated experience of Parkinson's patients - are universally overlooked by journalists promoting the coming wonders of sexual enhancement drugs. First, people diagnosed as sex addicts already report a high incidence of co-morbidity, that is, addictions to additional substances or activities, such as alcohol, gambling or drugs. <br/> <br/>Second, scientists have shown that rodents who have sex are noticeably more susceptible to substance addiction than virgin rodents. Third, sexually active teens tend to use drugs and alcohol more. Clearly we need to ask a lot more questions before rushing to the marketplace with an orgasm drug that tinkers with the center of the brain that controls both sex and addiction. As Holstege emphatically states, we’re all naturally sex addicts, so vulnerability to these drugs (and any side effects) may well be universal. <br/> <br/>Scientists know that chronically high levels of dopamine have long-term effects on the brain. While dopamine is normally associated with feeling good, excess concentrations are associated with anxiety, schizophrenia, compulsions, and other psychiatric conditions. Some research has even associated high dopamine with ADHD and depression, conditions formerly believed to be the consequence of low dopamine. <br/> <br/> Studies estimate that gay men have about twice the levels of depression than are found in Americans generally. Depression is strongly linked to high-risk behavior, including drug use, alcoholism, and risky sex.1 <br/> <br/>Now scientists are discovering the mechanism by which prolonged exposure to high dopamine does its damage. This mechanism may also cast light on the sexual hangover. In any case, it suggests that a dopamine-agonist orgasm pill could be a very bad idea, with long-term repercussions. <br/> <br/>Part of the lure of sexual enhancement pharmaceuticals is that we think of sexual passion as the best way to cement our intimate relationships - because sexual distance tends to develop as disharmony increases. Yet the hidden culprit in our unions may actually be the addictive cycle of highs and lows in sex itself - a problem that more orgasms will scarcely fix. Consider this honeymoon study from a few years back. Doctor Kiecolt-Glaser set out to discover whether stress hormones rose during marital conflict. To isolate her results to conflict-produced changes she chose 90 newlywed couples…out of the whopping 2000 newlywed couples she and her colleagues interviewed. Only the happiest, healthiest, wealthiest, most stable couples were selected. <br/> <br/>She discovered that conflict indeed raised stress hormones (with possible implications for lowered immunity to disease). However, in following up with the couples, she also discovered that across the board, they reported decreased satisfaction in their marriages by the second year. arguing couple By the time she reported the results of the study, a fifth of her blissful, highly healthy couples were already divorced. (The US Census Bureau reported a few years back that one in two new marriages is expected to end in divorce.) Newlywed couples are known to be the most sexually active (orgasmic) group of all married couples. With such consistently depressing results, we can’t rule out the possibility that humanity faces a biological program that pushes couples apart - a program to which the reward center in the brain and the natural (high/low, i.e., addictive) elements of frequent orgasm may, in fact, contribute. Among scientists, this program already has a name: The Coolidge Effect (the tendency of an animal to choose a new mate after sexual satiation with a previous one). <br/> <br/>Why not isolate the actual neurochemistry behind the widespread breakdown of sexual intimacy before we pour resources into creating orgasm junkies? Otherwise, we may unwittingly be making our problems worse. <br/> <br/>In any case, there is much to be gained from learning to balance our brain chemistry during our lovemaking, thereby promoting harmony naturally. Long-term relationships are associated with both longevity and lower rates of illness. For example, HIV-positive patients in stable partnership progress to AIDS more slowly than those not in such relationships. And marital quality contributes significantly to the prediction of patient mortality for heart failure. With our health and longevity at stake in our intimate relationships, we may want to focus first on what neurochemistry could tell us about how to strengthen our unions, as opposed to our climaxes (and their potentially emotionally-alienating hangovers). <br/> <br/>The neurochemical understanding of sex is in its infancy. Enthusiasm for an orgasm pill is reminiscent of an infant discovering its genitals. A baby’s delight in its potential for unlimited sexual arousal (without the interference of its frontal cortex) is understandable, but does not represent sexual maturity. Maturity takes into account (1) what best keeps us making love contentedly throughout our unions, and (2) the potential downside of the addictiveness of sex and how best to cope with that natural phenomenon. <br/> <br/>couple embracingLike the sages of the past who carefully studied sex from the point of view of increased harmony and improved health, we may one day find that neurochemical balance is far more desirable than the neurochemical excess of an orgasm pill. Radical as the concept now strikes us at this early point in our understanding, touch, companionship and the careful cultivation of sexual energy during lovemaking may best improve our wellbeing. The belief that more conventional orgasms will do so is quite possibly a product of the reflex of the reward center of the brain, which is not equipped to realize that there can be too much of a good thing. <br/> <br/>As the Taoists once taught: <br/>Sex is like fire or water. Fire and water can aid a man...or kill him. <br/> <br/>America’s experience with cigarettes and fast food suggests that humans are very good at researching and exploiting what excites the reward center of the brain, and very bad at acknowledging the addictions that follow from single-minded focus on short-term satiation. As recently portrayed in the documentary "Super Size Me," when big business caters to the profitable cravings of the human reward center, we should anticipate heavy marketing and lobbying of the addictive and the unhealthy. For example, Viagra is still on the market despite substantial evidence that it can cause sudden, irreversible blindness. It had also been blamed for over 600 deaths worldwide by 2001, mostly through heart attack and stroke. <br/> <br/>Let's do what we can to prevent the friesreduction of sexual desire to the status and profitability of fast food, and learn to tap its full potential for health and happiness. In short, let's keep asking the hard questions of our scientists and their pharmaceutical sponsors. There is still much to learn. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>end of super size orgasms. <br/> <br/> <br/>new article: <br/>Healing the Rift <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Sun, 2006-09-17 18:17 — Marnia <br/> <br/>diverging railroad tracksEver heard the familiar complaints: "All he wants is sex!" and "She's just not the hot babe I got together with!"? Well, they seem to be backed up by actual research. A new study shows that women tend to lose sexual interest in their mates, while men lose affectionate interest in theirs. Researchers found that after 4 years, less than half of the 30-year-old women polled wanted regular sex. Men's desire to engage in tenderness for its own sake fell off just as quickly. (Full article and link to research abstract.) <br/> <br/>Researchers didn't bother to explain why the men's affection fell off, and they concluded that a woman loses interest in sex once she "has her mate" in a secure relationship. (However, the declines were not just observed in married couples.) The researchers seem to rest their conclusion on a secondary finding: women who were less well educated than their mates stayed sexually active longer, implying (in the researchers' view) that women's sexual desire is governed primarily by the social status of their mates. 1 <br/>Digging Deeper <br/> <br/>There's enough research on the effects of sex on the brain (via neurochemicals) to support a more illuminating hypothesis to explain these findings. In fact, it saddens us that researchers fail to consider a possible neurochemical explanation, for reasons we will explain in a moment. <br/> <br/>Unpopular as the notion may be, there is growing evidence that the effects of sex on the brain are in some ways similar to the effects of recreational drugs. That is, orgasm is the high phase of a cycle that also has a low phase. disillusioned loverDuring the low phase, lovers' neurochemistry is profoundly different than during the orgasm phase. It changes the way they see each other for the worse. <br/> <br/>In addition to evidence of a low phase in the orgasmic sex cycle, or "passion cycle," there is evidence that may begin to explain why the sexes tend to behave differently from each other after exhausting their mutual magnetism with passion. The study suggests that in most men, this natural drop (which corresponds with a drop in a neurochemical called dopamine in specific parts of the brain) exacerbates the addictive cycle of sex. In most women it causes apathy or mood swings, and may actually dampen libido (unless they move toward the "male" addictive cycle). Over time, these recurring, distinctive withdrawal behaviors drive the sexes apart...and perhaps on to new (or additional) mates. <br/> <br/>Unfortunately, by not addressing our inherent passion cycle, we humans do three things: <br/> <br/> * We perpetuate the belief that the only normal sex is sex that keeps lovers locked in a deteriorating cycle of highs and lows. <br/> * When the lows overtake us, this blindspot leaves us vulnerable to the clumsy, and possibly dangerous, sexual enhancement drugs marketed (and soon to be marketed) by the pharmaceutical companies. <br/> * By indirectly targeting the wrong problem for correction, we discourage ourselves from investigating the various lovemaking traditions that would protect our lovemaking from this addictive cycle, and strengthen our emotional bonds. <br/> <br/>Sex is addictive? <br/> <br/>Recent brain science supports the idea that orgasm is the beginning of a cycle, not unlike shooting heroin.2 (Also see 'Mind-benders: When 'Natural' Is Risky' ) sexual cycle chart Following the initial "bliss" of intense passion, there is a withdrawal phase, which can be uncomfortable. <br/> <br/>The most important neurochemical player in this cycle seems to be dopamine (also dubbed "the molecule of addiction"). At moderate levels dopamine is a wonderful contributor to feelings of wellbeing. It makes us cheerful, optimistic, curious, and willing to try new things. It also helps us stay focused on goals and choose rewarding courses of action - like mating. <br/> <br/>However, too much dopamine in the reward center of the brain is not a good thing because when it goes too high it automatically drops afterward. Until we recover, it remains abnormally low, creating withdrawal symptoms. Indeed, low dopamine3 can give rise to surprisingly intense psychological distress, which profoundly affects mood and outlook. (In the case of orgasm, other brain chemical changes may also contribute to this "hangover" effect, such as a subsequent rise in prolactin,4 and a decrease in testosterone receptors that can last up to a week.5) <br/> <br/>In short, after exhausting their passion, lovers have good reason not to "feel like themselves" for some indeterminate period of time.6 Unfortunately, they then project these natural changes onto each other, so they feel - and behave - differently toward one another. Sooner or later, this recurring malaise often pushes mates out of love. In fact, we believe this natural perception shift will turn out to be the most important factor in the disharmony between the sexes. Yet, it's such a fundamental aspect of our nervous system that we may not recognize it until we make love differently. <br/>His and Hers? <br/> <br/>The results of the study mentioned earlier suggest that the genders tend to react to the underlying cycle in characteristic ways - men by withdrawing emotionally, women by withdrawing sexually. In fact, however, everyone reacts differently to this drop off of dopamine. Apathy, irritability, mood swings, a sense of depletion, emotional neediness, emotional numbness, and an urge to pursue addictive behaviors or substances, are common responses to the post-passion withdrawal phase in both sexes. <br/> <br/>exhausted satyrIn other words, post-passion neurochemical strategies are not strictly gender-specific. It is not always men who want more sex, or women who want more non-goal-oriented affection. In relationships where the woman's libido is higher than her mate's, he often loses interest in sex - and the woman is equally disinclined to be generous with unconditional affection (i.e., affection without orgasm as her goal). <br/> <br/>This phenomenon suggests to us that testosterone may also be a key player in determining sexual strategy. For example, men naturally have more testosterone than women, and testosterone has been shown to stimulate the release of dopamine in the reward center. Similarly, high libido in women is a function of their higher than average testosterone. Such women may also be particularly susceptible to the dopamine cycle, and therefore prone to experience orgasm as especially addictive. In general it seems that the discomfort of the withdrawal phase is more severe for those who are very sexually-active (engaging in pornography/masturbation). Could it be because they are (or become) more dopamine-sensitive? <br/> <br/>In short we hypothesize that the passion cycle has very distinctive effects on "male-model" lovers (whether male or female), and equally distinctive effects on female lovers. Let's consider the differences between these two models in more depth. <br/>Two strategies for staying in love <br/> <br/>Recent research on pair bonding7 suggests that both oxytocin8 and dopamine are necessary for the feeling of being "in love" - that is, to maintain what scientists call a pair bond.9 Both men and women want to remain in that "in love" state. Leaving aside the initial rush of mutual infatuation neurochemistry, which affects both lovers,10 what strategies do lovers use when they strive to retrieve that "in love" sensation - as recurring discomfort shifts perception for the worse? <br/>"My Big Libido" <br/> <br/>We humans tend to believe that an intense urge to have sex is proof of a "mighty libido," but it may turn out that in today's porn-saturated, monster cactus between cowboy's legspro-orgasm culture, it is more often simply proof of "intense withdrawal discomfort" caused by low dopamine following sexual satiation (over-stimulation of the reward center of the brain). In effect, a burning desire to make love is not evidence that the withdrawal (or low dopamine) phase has passed; it may instead signal its nadir. <br/> <br/>As explained, a male-model lover in the "ebb" portion of the passion cycle is desperate to get his dopamine up - something passion can easily achieve. Not only that, orgasm will usually temporarily bump up his oxytocin.11 So his strategy for returning to feeling "in love" is to strive for orgasm with his partner. Briefly, his strategy succeeds. <br/> <br/>Unfortunately, however, when his dopamine plummets shortly afterward, his emotional bond also weakens again. This leaves the post-passion lover in a particularly uncomfortable bind: emotionally distant (because the dopamine, or desire, element of the bonding mechanism is largely absent) and (very soon) sexually-frustrated. One possible outcome is a pattern of cold behavior, completely lacking in affection, punctuated by brief periods of lust (excruciatingly portrayed by Leo Tolstoy in The Kreutzer Sonata).12 <br/> <br/>In a sense, for the male-model lover, libido has two rather distinct faces - which have noticeably different effects on his level of spontaneous affection and his perception of his mate. One type of libido arises from a genuine urge to merge (a search for deeper intimacy with another). The other is primarily the urge to seek relief during the withdrawal phase that follows sexual satiation. During the second one his urge to be affectionate naturally declines and he may perceive his lover as unusually irritating or draining. <br/> <br/>Understandably, humanity confuses these two - very different - underlying states of mind, and fails to recognize an important truth about why a man's lovemaking affects a female partner so differently at different times. A superficial analysis instead concludes that her response is obviously due to her "unhealthy" libido. <br/> <br/>Sex is not, in fact, just sex - regardless of the perspective of the male-model lover suffering from low dopamine. If it were, the more someone masturbated, the happier he would beDaffy and Daisy arguing. Sex to "scratch an itch" leads to fleeting relief, but not to sustained fulfillment.13 Moreover, when one is in a low-dopamine phase during the days after sexual satiation, one may be concerned not with a partner's well-being at all - but only with easing one's own discomfort. While under this influence, affection is most often an unwelcome delay of relief, and confined to the brief moments of intense passion. Such behavior does not indicate a fundamental character flaw; it's largely a consequence of the intent focus on elevating dopamine to comfortable levels as quickly as possible. <br/> <br/>The tragedy is that the harder an uncomfortable male pursues relief, the more he may drive an emotional wedge between himself and his "frigid" lover - and the less inclined she may be to offer the nourishing comfort of sexual intercourse in the future. <br/> <br/>We believe that future research will further clarify the interaction between testosterone and dopamine, and reveal why men (and perhaps anyone who heavily pursues orgasm via pornography, lots of hot foreplay, or masturbation) may be more sensitive to dopamine levels (both high and low).14 Either way, the withdrawal phase can be acutely uncomfortable for the male-model lover. It's difficult indeed to resist the urge to get a big "reward" from raising dopamine via a quick orgasm, with or without a partner. <br/> <br/>Unfortunately, lacking an understanding of the complete passion cycle, a male-model lover fails to realize that a "relief-orgasm" guarantees another dismal withdrawal period just ahead. Like any addict, he has deferred his problem, but not resolved it. Today's media, however, assures him that this uncomfortable addiction cycle defines "healthy sexuality." And if his love life stalls, he is advised to increase the novelty in it (to raise his dopamine).15 <br/> <br/>However, as long as he uses "hot sex" as his benchmark of fulfillment, he is caught in an intensifying addictive cycle. The low points in the cycle can ultimately convince him that he needs sexual enhancement drugs. As one man wrote, <br/> <br/> I think there is a correlation between porn viewing and erectile dysfunction. I am sure that if a study were actually done with honest men, we would see significant results. This is the type of issue people don't talk about. However, I think the porn industry is causing a huge problem in relationships and society in general. The porn industry takes advantage of the uninformed public by charging for the porn. Then the pharmaceutical companies sell us drugs to treat the side effects. <br/> <br/>"My Broken Heart" <br/> <br/>The female response to withdrawal discomfort generally leads to a different overall strategy. It may be heavily influenced by oxytocin, perhaps because a woman naturally produces more oxytocin than a man. As with dopamine, oxytocin has lots of benefits when at balanced levels.sudden broken heart16 Research reveals that oxytocin tends to calm, speed healing, increase sexual receptivity, and counter the effects of cortisol (stress), cravings, and depression. Oxytocin is also linked to emotional bonds. Indeed, we could not fall in love without it. <br/> <br/>However, as with dopamine, excessive oxytocin (or oxytocin binding to the "wrong" receptors) can have quite different effects. Recent research shows that relationship distress is actually associated with higher oxytocin (possibly due to high prolactin) — but does not counter a woman's stress response.17 In other words, her high oxytocin doesn't help her cope when she perceives disharmony in her relationship (a common perception during with withdrawal phase of the passion cycle). Indeed, high oxytocin may exacerbate her insistence upon a closer union (making her clingy, demanding, or irrationally jealous).18 She may also seek relief through processing her relationship woes with friends, shopping, eating chocolate ice cream, and so forth. <br/> <br/>Low dopamine may contribute to the desperation that many women exhibit during this phase. Low dopamine tends to show up in both sexes as a sense of lack. (Other symptoms of low dopamine include depression, sleep disorders, and "restless leg" syndrome.) Yet, whereas low dopamine may make a man may feel depleted and emotionally distant (in between his attempts to self-medicate with orgasm), it takes a different form in a woman. Her sense of lack seems to manifest as a craving for reassurance. <br/> <br/>She may believe that she is simply responding to her partner's changed (and less attentive) behavior. After all, it is often evident to the woman that feelings of genuine affection are absent (or geared strictly toward his arousal), and that he is in a selfish frame of mind. Being used as a "fix" is not at all the same experience as intercourse as a mutual act of nourishing intimacy. However, in our experience, her post-passion mood swings are predictable enough to be linked to her own passion cycle and its fluctuating neurochemicals. In short, regardless of her mate's actual behavior, she is likely to feel like her needs are not being met. As a friend in this phase of her romance wrote, <br/> <br/> He mentioned he doesn't want to feel vulnerable. What happens is that I feel Love for him even more, which is frustrating. I've chosen the wrong man again. <br/> <br/>All of this means that, during withdrawal, just as a man perceives his first order of business to be raising his dopamine with passion, a woman perceives her first order of business to be resolving the relationship disharmony that is associated with her elevated oxytocin (and prolactin?). Her exaggerated behavior not infrequently drives her partner away…indirectly causing her to fulfill evolution's command to end her relationship and move on. <br/> <br/>The media's assurance that a happy sex life is one that conforms to the addictive passion cycle has unwelcome implications for women as well. sexy, but unhappyResearchers tend to pathologize a woman's natural lack of response to a lover suffering from withdrawal (especially during her own withdrawal). Pharmaceutical companies are already seeking approval for drugs that would artificially elevate her dopamine with sexual enhancement drugs. These could very likely have risky side effects. <br/> <br/>In truth, her libido is most likely dormant, not ill (as those who opt for affairs will attest.19) More significantly, such drugs cannot duplicate the subtle, complex neurochemical dance required to keep partners "in love." At best they can inflame the addictiveness of sex, and, sadly, the severity of the withdrawal phase itself - creating even more emotional friction. <br/>Evolution Wins <br/> <br/>Whatever the strategy, neither gender solves the problem of restoring the lost feeling of being "in love." Too often, couples try to duplicate mutual magnetism by fantasizing, watching pornography, engaging in more intense foreplay or novel positions. This tactic sexy, but unhappycertainly has noticeable short-term effects, but, as a dopamine-increasing strategy, it ultimately intensifies the cycle of highs and lows. Therefore, it can create intense mood swings that erode the emotional bond of the couple. <br/> <br/>Frequently, the woman, reflecting on the natural attentiveness of the early days of courtship, mistakenly concludes that the full correction lies in technique. "If only my partner would show more affection or engage in extended foreplay, then I would feel more satisfied." In fact, however, going through the motions of affectionate foreplay cannot entirely duplicate the fulfillment that accompanies mutual desire for deeper union. When either partner is suffering from withdrawal, sex simply doesn't feel the way it does when both are "in love." <br/> <br/>Alas, evolution has shaped both men and women to slide from feeling "in love" toward feeling disillusioned. Selfishness and defensiveness replace mutual consideration as the basis of the relationship. This may explain the brevity of the "honeymoon" period during most relationships. One study found that the glow generally begins to fade in the second year of marriage.20 <br/> <br/>dog loveIn this way intimate relationships tend to become hostile or flat over time - and yet surprisingly rapidly. We say "surprisingly" because friendships and relationships with pets and children don't suffer such rapid, radical deterioration. <br/> <br/>Why is the problem largely confined to intimate partners? To keep us moving on to new mates in order to increase genetic diversity. Unfortunately this evolutionary "move on" command works all too well. Over 95% of all mammals are non-monogamous. <br/> <br/>In our experience, lovers have to change the way they make love if they would stay more affectionate, feel satisfied, and maintain a healthy libido. This solution, which is very ancient and found in diverse cultures, is the best protection against passion's neurochemical roller coaster ride. <br/> <br/> My husband recently said that making love is like inflating a balloon. Having an orgasm is like popping the balloon, whereas if you finish without an orgasm it is like you are a balloon that takes several days to gradually deflate, leaving you much longer to enjoy the inflated feeling. (As I have mentioned before, I love how - even though he does not acknowledge any relationship harmony effects through this style of lovemaking, or anything wrong with orgasm - he prefers avoiding it because he simply feels better after.) <br/> <br/>What really soothes sexual frustration? <br/> <br/>Long ago, the Chinese noticed that ejaculation, although depleting physical reserves, has the opposite effect on sexual desire. "After an immediate postcoital letdown, there is a rapid psychological rebound and an intensification of erotic interest [and wet dreams]." This is consistent with the addiction cycle described above. <br/> <br/>controlled intercourseThis insight also suggests a cure for sexual addiction: "When the ching is full, one is free of lustful thoughts."21 In other words, when one avoids feelings of depletion (low dopamine), one's sexual frustration declines. <br/> <br/>The ancient Chinese solution? Make love frequently, but without the orgasm, and thereby gain the many benefits of sexual intimacy while avoiding the addictive high/low cycle of sex. This course protects mutual magnetism, or healthy libido. (We would define healthy libido as a genuine desire for the deeper intimacy of intercourse - which is not dependent upon climax for satisfaction.) <br/> <br/>It is mutual magnetism, not simply lust, that supports a profound emotional connection with one's mate. The mainstream media cannot envision mutual magnetism without orgasm - or sexual frustration. However, the result of a connection based on love is a natural increase in sexual self-control, as explained by Dr. J. William Lloyd: <br/> <br/> Karezza [lovemaking without orgasm] is easy and successful just in proportion to the abundance of mutual love - hard and difficult just in proportion as mere sex-craving dominates love. If the woman loves her mate so much that his mere presence, voice, touch, are a heaven of joy to her, so much that the sex-relation is only an adjunct and she could be happy if entirely without it, then, by a sort of paradox, not only does she enjoy it twice as exquisitely as her merely sex-craving sister, but can let it go at any moment without a pang. On the other hand the more the man rises above mere sex-hunger in delicious perfection of romantic love, the more easy and natural and effortless becomes Karezza-control, and the less likely is he to [ejaculate]... <br/> <br/>A less-driven, more affectionate, approach benefits us because we stay bonded more easily, granting us the many healthy benefits of trusted companionship (faster healing, increased longevity, better overall health).22 With this alternative approach, dopamine doesn't drop off radically, as it does after orgasm, and generous touch and trusted companionship sustain the production of oxytocin. In short, this other approach to lovemaking protects the neurochemistry that maintains the pair bond. <br/> <br/>Karezza coupleIn the end, the most satisfying sexual encounters occur when we are not making love because we're seeking relief from an uncomfortable withdrawal. Fulfilling lovemaking is a function of an inner sense of abundance (moderate levels of dopamine) and lots of selfless consideration for each other (ideal levels of oxytocin). This state is dependent upon balanced brain chemistry in the reward center of the brain - and the self-discipline necessary to maintain it. Only then can we consistently make love with each other's well-being at heart - and elude evolution's tactic of diverging libidos. <br/> <br/> <br/>end of Healing the Rfit. <br/> <br/> <br/>beginning new article: <br/> <br/>The Coolidge Effect <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Thu, 2005-06-23 20:40 — Marnia <br/> <br/>Same article in GermanArtikel auf Deutsch lesen <br/> <br/>Artikel in het Nederlands lezenArtikel in het Nederlands lezen <br/> <br/>guinea pig When you drop a male rat into a cage with a receptive female rat, you see an initial frenzy of copulation. Then, progressively, the male tires of that particular female. Even without an apparent change in her receptivity he reaches a point where he has little libido-and simply ignores her. However, if you replace the original female with a fresh one, the male immediately revives and begins copulating again. You can repeat this process with fresh females until the rat nearly dies of exhaustion. <br/> <br/>The rat's renewed vigor does not reflect an increase in his wellbeing - although it will look (and temporarily feel to him) that way. His vigor comes from surges of a neurochemical called dopamine, which flood the reward center of his primitive brain... so that he gets the job done. <br/> <br/>roosterIn short, animals do not choose their mates randomly. They identify and reject those with whom they have already had sex. Scientists know this reflex as the "Coolidge Effect." It earned its name many years ago when President Coolidge and his wife were touring a farm. While the President was elsewhere, the farmer proudly showed Mrs. Coolidge a rooster that "could copulate with hens all day long, day after day." Mrs. Coolidge coyly suggested that the farmer tell that to Mr. Coolidge, which he did. <br/> <br/>The President thought for a moment and then inquired, "With the same hen?" <br/> <br/>"No, sir," replied the farmer.President and Mrs. Coolidge <br/> <br/>"Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge," retorted the President. <br/> <br/>The Coolidge Effect has been observed in all mammals that have been tested. Scientists have observed it in females too. Female rodents, for example, flirt a lot more - arching in inviting displays - with unfamiliar partners than with those with which they've already copulated. <br/> <br/>What's behind the Coolidge Effect? And is there a way around it? <br/> <br/>In past editions of this newsletter, we've talked about a post-passion hangover that pushes partners apart. Here's a brief summary for new readers: <br/> <br/>The hangover is the product of perfectly natural neurochemical shifts, which occur in the primitive part of the brain, or limbic system. This limbic system is the center of emotions, drives, impulses, and subconscious decision-making. Within the limbic system is the reward center, which dopamine activates to urge us to take actions that further our survival or pass on our genes, such as eating, sex, bonding with offspring, taking risks. <br/> <br/>limbic system in brainThink of dopamine as the neurochemical of all motivation. You don't actually crave ice cream, or a winning lotto ticket, or a romp in the sack. You crave dopamine. In reality that blast of dopamine is your reward. All addictive substances and activities increase dopamine. It's why they are addictive. (Is orgasm addictive? Yes, it has even been compared to shooting heroin in brain scans.) But addictive substances and activities don't give lasting pleasure. As soon as dopamine successfully motivates a behavior, it drops off, awaiting its next opportunity to push you around. <br/> <br/>One trigger for the Coolidge Effect is novelty itself.1 Another is a drop in dopamine following orgasm. Instead of that delicious sense of aliveness and thrilling anticipation you felt when your dopamine was high, you now feel flat, or even needy or depleted. The orgasms themselves initiate this drop in dopamine. While dopamine is low, you are especially susceptible to anything at all that will raise your dopamine again, such as calorie-rich food, gambling, alcohol, a shopping spree, cocaine, porn on the internet, or sex. (See Sex and Addiction for more on this topic.) <br/> <br/>A new potential sex partner is one of the most effective "cures" for the "dopamine blues." As comedian Chris Rock crudely put it, "There's nothing like new [nooky] to clear the mind!" His reaction is just what biology intends. While you are seeking to feel better, biology is striving to increase the genetic variety of your offspring. Genetic variety ensures that more of your offspring will survive changing conditions to pass on genes. <br/> <br/>book about cheating spousesA brand new partner briefly raises your dopamine more than sex with a familiar partner, however loving. Yet, despite this passing thrill, you don't actually increase your overall wellbeing by following biology's script. You'd be better off in a close, committed relationship. (More on that in a moment.) The point is that biology's strategy is not truly a cure for your uncomfortable post-orgasm let down. Chris' head won't stay clear - and his primary partner may just hit it with a frying pan when she finds the condoms he left in his pocket. <br/> <br/>The Coolidge Effect reflex is strictly a temporary fix that will ultimately leave you feeling even more depleted. Your new partner will not satisfy you any more than your previous one. Like a spinning wheel in a rodent's cage, the Coolidge Effect leads us in dizzying circles that do not improve our wellbeing - only our genes' chances. <br/> <br/>A man from LA, who had stopped counting at 350 sex partners, once mentioned that he was genuinely puzzled why he had lost interest (sexually) in each of them so quickly. The Coolidge Effect is the answer to his perplexity. Glen Wilson described its usual trajectory in The Science of Sex: <br/> <br/> Before marriage it is usual for men to initiate intercourse at a fairly high frequency with their fiancée. After a few years of marriage, however, the husband's sexual appetite begins to wane and an apparent reversal of libido may even occur, with the now frustrated wife demanding more lovemaking than her 'tired' husband is able to supply. He, of course, is still perfectly capable of being aroused by his mistresses and office girls and, if fortunate enough to secure an invitation to an orgy, would have little difficulty completing intercourse with two or three anonymous young women in the course the evening's festivities. Sex therapists see many men who are reported as 'impotent' by their wives, but who privately confess to considerable prowess with a succession of mistresses. <br/> <br/>cartoon of President ClintonWhy do we fall for the same trick over and over? Because we assume that the intensity of our (dopamine-driven) anticipation equals the value to us of the behavior it's urging us to engage in. We are accustomed to relying on this subconscious dopamine reward mechanism to make sound decisions in many areas of our lives. <br/> <br/>When it comes to sex, however, this inner gauge misleads us. Evolutionary biology prizes quantity of offspring above quality of life. It doesn't care what makes us harmonious, happiest or healthiest. As a result, our ancient ancestors who impulsively had sex, lost interest, and wandered after their next partner were the most likely to pass on their genes…and their lovemaking habits. <br/> <br/>Another reason the dopamine reward system fails us is that it's set to react to the short-term repercussions of certain choices. For example, it's geared to give you a buzz when you select high calorie, sweet fare. This preference may have served your ancestors in selecting among the foods on the plains of Africa. However, it doesn't serve you in a culture where high-calorie, sugar-laden food is over abundant and made even more enticing by advertising geared to stimulate the reward center of your brain. <br/> <br/>Similarly, your reward system doesn't take into account the full repercussions of sex. It gives you a buzz for pursuing fertilization opportunities, especially with new partners (even two-dimensional ones), without adjusting for how you will feel afterward, or how those feelings of depletion may damage your relationship - when you project them onto your partner. You won't even suspect what is at work when you later perceive your partner as needy and over-controlling, or selfish and insensitive. <br/> <br/>This mechanism will also disregard the value of a committed relationship entirely in the interest of propelling your genes onward. It asks no small sacrifice in return for its offer of possible genetic immortality. happy coupleAccording to Dr. Dean Ornish in Love &amp; Survival, love and intimacy are more powerful determinants of health than stopping smoking, more exercise, genetic make-up, improved diet, or prescription drugs. Trusted companionship has been shown to speed recovery, lower rates of illness, and increase longevity. Clearly, you would be better off working toward lasting harmony with a partner than pursuing a roller coaster ride of thrills and heartaches. <br/> <br/>The best protection against the Coolidge Effect may be to learn to make love without the fertilization-driven sex that leaves you so susceptible to its siren song. If the ancients could do it, we can too. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>End of the Coolidge effect. <br/> <br/> <br/>beginning new article: <br/> <br/>Freud, Fraud and Sexual Health <br/>Marnia's picture <br/> <br/> <br/>Did you ever wonder how Western sexual health professionals became so certain that orgasm is more vital to our wellbeing than virtually any other aspect of intimacy? We've argued that the current preoccupation with sexual gratification is, in effect, the default behavioral program for all mammals, and likely also reigned in primitive hunter-gatherer tribes.1 <br/> <br/>Yet until recently - and as far back as the ancient Greeks - sexual self-control was a respectable objective in Western thought. Moreover, praise for self-control wasn't confined to the sex-negative Church and its puritanical progeny. For example, all of the authors whose sacred sex classics are reproduced on this site (see right-hand margin) are notably sex positive – even John Humphrey Noyes, who graduated with a degree in divinity early in the nineteenth century. And there are centuries of parallel wisdom in China and India (See the "Wisdom" page for relevant links). <br/> <br/>These days, however, most people poke fun at, or severely castigate, anyone who suggests that sexual self-control might have advantages (other than the fleeting advantage of producing more orgasms in a partner). One unintended benefit of this modern disdain is that all four of the sacred sex classics mentioned above are no longer protected by copyright, and may be read freely and shared with others. <br/>Along came Freud <br/> <br/>Psychiatrist Rudolf von Urban, the author of the sex classic Sex Perfection and Marital Happiness, who immigrated to the United States from Europe, was heavily influenced by Freud. His work Freud's name platetherefore marks the historic turning point in the Freudian direction. <br/> <br/>Wise man that he was, he counseled self-control to avoid "depleting the sex hormones" - and the marital disharmony that follows. He also explained why an attempt to ease sexual tension with masturbation is both natural – and somewhat self-defeating - and proposed educating children frankly so they could avoid the pitfalls of both repression and excess. Yet despite years of practical experience with clients who benefited from sexual self-control, he delayed the publication of his book until he was in his seventies because his colleagues warned that he would be ostracized if he published it. <br/> <br/>Writes von Urban: <br/> <br/> Many of my scientific friends urged me not to publish my experiences before they had been tested and proved scientifically [which, von Urban noted, would be very difficult given the delicate nature of sex research]: otherwise, they warned me I would arouse great opposition. <br/> <br/> As I have already stated, I followed their advice for more than thirty years, since, if someone else had told me about such occurrences, I could not have helped either doubting his sincerity or believing him the victim of some mistake or hallucination. Even though I knew my experiences to be true and not the result of any mistakes or hallucinations, I realized that it would be advisable to keep silent about such incredible events, inasmuch as my experiments were of such a delicate and private nature that it was not possible to demonstrate them. <br/> <br/> I recalled the fate of Marco Polo who died under a cloud of contempt. Men of his time thought him a fake; nobody believed in the existence of the China he had seen and described. <br/> <br/> But now, at seventy years of age, anxiety over such skepticism no longer troubles me. I am firmly convinced that, however justified it may seem today, it will disappear, post mortem, when my findings are verified. <br/> <br/>Despite his courage, and despite the benefits of Karezza with which he was familiar, he emphasized delaying orgasm rather than avoiding it altogether. Even so, his colleagues were right. The American Journal of Psychotherapy criticized his work, <br/> <br/> It is unfortunate that von Urban’s laudable desire to promote marital happiness has tempted him to lay down sex hard and fast “rules” for sex…. <br/> <br/>By the time von Urban published his book in 1949, Freudian analysis had captivated Western culture, convincing people that repressed sexual desire was behind most of humanity’s ills. Accepting this premise (and those of Freud's pupil, Wilhelm Reich, who clamored even more loudly for unrestrained sexual expression), most people naturally concluded that the untrammeled expression of sexual energy was vital to their wellbeing. This general "hard and fast rule" has not changed since, despite its unfulfilled promise. feast or famine(Religious extremists also continue their brand of unhealthy repression.) <br/> <br/>There’s no question that sexual repression can be harmful. Yet, as von Urban himself noted, humanity needn’t choose between feast and famine where sex is concerned. A well-regulated sex life can offer benefits that neither too much nor too little sex can deliver. As he points out by way of an analogy, the decision to drive on one side of the road curtails our freedom, but offers so much benefit that we all happily adopt this convention. <br/>Warnings <br/> <br/>In 1949, von Urban warned how vital it was to get our sex lives flowing in a healthy, unselfish direction, and away from ignorance and self-indulgence. He made these remarks, which have proven prophetic: <br/> <br/> In 1936, the divorce rate in Europe averaged 5 percent, exceeding that of Australia, Canada, South Africa and China. But in America the rate was over 10 percent. Ten years later, in 1946, the divorce rate in this country had reached the alarming figure of 37 percent. Yet this represents only a fraction of the couples who want a divorce. One out of every two or three of the remaining married couples desires divorce but refrains out of moral compunctions, consideration for the children or financial difficulties. This brings us to the startling conclusion that out of every hundred marriages in this country, perhaps ninety are unsatisfactory. [NOTE: In 2002 the US Census Bureau predicted that one of every two marriages now occurring could end in divorce.] <br/> <br/> We have to try to comprehend the full extent of the catastrophe which the consequences of this failure of the marriage relationship will produce during the next two decades. We have to bear in mind that children from broken homes incline toward juvenile delinquency, psychosomatic diseases, mental disturbances, perversion, and, later, impotence, frigidity, alcoholism, crime and prostitution. Therefore it is clear that every effort to build up a better marital life means not only saving the government billions of dollars for hospitals, detention homes, reformatories, and prisons but, what is even more important, procuring for America a more mature, happy and healthy population whose energies are not wasted in domestic conflicts that are exhausting. <br/> <br/>Who was Sigmund Freud? <br/> <br/>'Unauthorized Freud' coverSo who was this giant whose insights have indirectly played a major role in our resistance to exploring the benefits of controlling our sexual desire, and how did he reach his conclusions? <br/> <br/>In investigating this question I learned that Freud supported his conclusions with only six full case studies. Some of the patients were not even his. <br/> <br/>Since Freud’s lifetime scholars have dug up letters and contemporaneous case notes that demonstrate Freud did not, in fact, produce dramatic cures in these cases. In 1998 professor Frederick C. Crews published a series of essays by experts, called Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend.2 <br/> <br/> Was the father of psychoanalysis a fraud? … The myth: Sigmund Freud was the heroic investigator who …[freed] a culture from its dependence on sexual denial. The reality: Professor Crews argues that Freud devised a self-validating method of inquiry, deluded himself about his patients' illnesses, and failed to cure them. He founded a doctrinaire movement that has excommunicated dissenters while trying to evade empirical scrutiny. <br/> <br/>As one reader said: <br/> <br/> The essays show Freud as a fabricator of his patients' confessions, a liar, a cheat, a ruthless censor, a myth creator (about himself), a paranoiac, an icy remorseless opportunist, a jealous and imperious character full of a priori's, a megalomaniac, an impostor, a tyrant and a misogynist ('the self-evident superiority of male to female sex organs'; 'civilisation was a male creation.') <br/> <br/> He projected his own obsessions on his patients and on his analytical writings ... He could himself not show one single validated psychoanalytical cure! More, he was even not interested in cures: 'I prefer a student ten times more than a neurotic.' <br/> <br/>Here’s a tongue-in-cheek account of one the six famous Freudian case studies.3 <br/> <br/> 'Dora' was a depressed and "hysterical" seventeen-year-old (not eighteen, as Freud claimed) who reluctantly came to Sigmund because of problems involving friends of the family, Mr. and Mrs. K. <br/> <br/> Dora was upset because (1) Mr. K. obviously wanted a piece of her and had even made passes at her when she was thirteen and sixteen, and (2) she rightly believed that her father and Mrs. K. were getting it on. The good doctor immediately sussed what was really happening: Not only was Dora in love with Mr. K., she also wanted to give her father a blowjob and hop into the sack with Mrs. K. <br/> <br/> Not surprisingly, Dora thought this was a load of crap and abruptly quit seeing Freud after eleven weeks. She was still a mess when she died. <br/> <br/>Although an impressed reviewer of Crews' book declared the Freudian Revolution dead, that revolution is still reverberating throughout the educations of today’s sexologists. <br/>The Freudian (addictive) cycle <br/> <br/>FreudIt is worth noting that Freud’s own reward circuitry (in the brain) was apparently out of balance. He used cocaine for years, and publicly touted its supposed benefits, even claiming that it could cure addiction to morphine. <br/> <br/>He was fatally addicted to tobacco. He smoked 20 cigars a day, and did not quit even when he was diagnosed with cancer of the jaw. He was operated upon more than two dozen times before the disease finally killed him. Even when his entire jaw had been replaced, he continued to smoke all day, every day. <br/> <br/>Following a rare period of abstinence from tobacco, engaged in at the insistence of his physician, he wrote:4 <br/> <br/> "I have not smoked for seven weeks since the day of your injunction. At first I felt, as expected, outrageously bad. Cardiac symptoms accompanied by mild depression, as well as the horrible misery of abstinence. These wore off but left me completely incapable of working, a beaten man. After seven weeks I began smoking again...Since the first few cigars, I was able to work and was the master of my mood; before that life was unbearable." <br/> <br/>In short, we are still governing our sex lives based on the advice of an addict. This is significant, since sex is governed by the same reward circuitry as all addictions. It seems likely that many of Freud's sexual "insights" were unwittingly based on addict-think. Clearly, if the best answer lies in moderation and inner equilibrium, Freud could not have found it. For him, the way to treat the discomfort of withdrawal was indulgence, however deadly. <br/> <br/>Those of us who have grown up steeped in Freud's influence find it hard to conceive of a world where children and adults are taught the benefits of a middle path. Yet the pendulum may one day swing in the direction of an approach to sex that calls for no sexual repression based on threats of hell, but instead advises making love regularly - with a clear understanding of the benefits of self-control. <br/> <br/>Just think how good it will feel when we stop beating our heads against the Freudian wall. <br/> <br/>_____ <br/> <br/>Much of Freud's influence has come through his pro-orgasm pupil, Wilhelm Reich. Yet consider these observations of Reich: <br/> <br/> The more exactly I had my patients describe their behavior and sensations in the sexual act, the firmer became my clinical conviction that all of them, without exception, suffered from a severe disturbance of genitality. This was especially true of those men who bragged the loudest about their sexual conquests and about how many times a night 'they could do it.' There was no doubt; they were erectively very potent, but ejaculation was accompanied by little or no pleasure, even the opposite, by disgust and unpleasant sensations. An exact analysis of the fantasies accompanying the act revealed mostly sadistic or self-satisfied attitudes in the men, anxiety, reserve or masculinity in the women. To the so-called potent man, the act had the significance of conquering, piercing, or raping the woman. They wanted to give proof of their potency, or to be admired for their erective endurance. This 'potency' could easily be destroyed by laying bare its motives. It served to cover up serious disturbances of erection or ejaculation. <br/> <br/> <br/>End of Article. <br/> <br/> <br/>Beiginnging new Article: <br/> <br/>Mind-benders: When 'Natural' Is Risky – Part I <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Fri, 2007-10-26 21:51 — Marnia <br/> <br/>sexy waitressIn science-speak, tasty sugary/fatty food and intense sexual stimulation are the two most potent 'natural reinforcers.' That is, these two perfectly natural attractions are likeliest to affect your brain somewhat like drugs (the term 'drug' includes substances like nicotine and alcohol).1 Specifically, they produce neurochemical events in the reward circuitry of the brain that are designed to bend your priorities. <br/> <br/>This is what makes them risky – their power to reorder your priorities in ways that do not serve you, and that you would not choose if you were thinking clearly. To give an extreme example, in New York City, HIV cases in gay men under 30 have jumped 33% since 2001.2 The cause is widespread 'barebacking,' that is anal sex without a condom. Could this be occurring because the reward circuitry of these men's brains is valuing some aspect of a condomless experience more highly than their safety and the safety of their future partners? <br/> <br/>If so, research related to addiction may explain this seemingly irrational result. The brain chemistry that makes addicts focus on their chosen substances or activities, even if their lives fall apart as a result, is also a major factor behind humanity's tendency to get its priorities wrong when confronted with the intense lure of junk food and potent sexual stimuli - especially empty-calorie junk food and affectionless sexual stimuli. <br/> <br/>'Changed Priorities' signIt's almost as if there's a 'judgment-bending continuum,' at one end of which are substances and activities that distort judgment so tyrannically that they prove highly addictive (think of heroin and methamphetamine). At the other end there are substances and activities that register as enjoyable, but don't prevent us from steering for our true wellbeing (socializing with friends, a favorite meal). <br/> <br/>In between are substances and activities that have a wide range of effects on people's judgment. Under their influence, some people become obsessed and behave self-destructively (or destructively toward others). Other people simply make decisions they later regret or develop habits they don't want. Other people suffer attitude changes and mood shifts that alter their perceptions unconsciously - causing them to perceive and value experiences and people differently than they otherwise would. Still other people manage to stay on a reasonably even keel. (Most of us don't react the same way all of the time, of course.) <br/> <br/>In any case, of the natural, non-drug enticements, junk food and sexual stimulation have the greatest potential to distort judgment and erode self-control. Let's consider why. <br/>Why Junk Food and Sexual Stimulation? <br/> <br/>We evolved in ancestral environments poor in both concentrated sugars and erotic movies, ads, and images. Honey was a rare source of concentrated sugar, and cave girls were no doubt cute, but their erotically-posed images weren't airbrushed to perfection and projected all over every cave wall. Nor did ubiquitous ads promise great pharmaceutically- or surgically-enhanced sex for men and women. <br/> <br/>too much stimulationAlthough sexual arousal and sugar are natural, our brains don't seem to be all that well adapted to today's abundant levels of these stimulants. Exposure to supranormal, i.e., above normal, stimulation sends especially powerful neurochemical reward signals to the brain. Our subconscious registers that something really, really valuable is before us. In such circumstances, we are designed to override our self-control mechanisms so we don't miss an apparent golden opportunity...for a sugary snack or some quick, hot sex. In effect, exposure to these things produces a 'false positive' message. If we were to steer for our true wellbeing, we'd usually say "maybe just this once," or "think I'll pass." Instead we find ourselves saying "I'd be a fool to pass this up whenever I have the chance!" Unfortunately these 'golden opportunities' sometimes end up to be habit-forming for reasons explained below. They bend our minds by subtly altering our brains in ways we aren't conscious of. <br/> <br/>This is a hazard of having an out-dated brain in a modern environment. Think of Native Americans and the disastrous consequences of their vulnerability to the strong alcohol to which they had not adapted. Now, obesity in the US has increased to the point where, for the first time, our life span is predicted to be shorter than that of our parents. And knee-jerk pursuit of the erotic leads people to undervalue the other aspects of intimate relationships, to their detriment,3 as they get hooked on 'hotness' (even two-dimensional) above intimacy. <br/> <br/>How does the brain cause us to give so much attention to these attractions that we lose sight of our true wellbeing? <br/>Reinforcers and Exaggerated Focus <br/> <br/>The term 'reinforcer' refers to a substance or behavior that exaggerates our learning about it – and anything associated with it. Recreational drugs are examples of reinforcers. They trigger surges of the neurotransmitter dopamine in the nucleus accumbens (part of the reward circuitry of the brain). <br/> <br/>Scientists have shown that the natural activities of eating and sexual behavior also trigger surges of a neurochemical known as dopamine. For example, from the moment a rat senses a potential mate behind a screen until the finale of copulation itself, dopamine rises in the nucleus accumbens. A Dutch research scientist remarked that brain scans of men ejaculating resemble those of people shooting heroin. And dopamine has also been found to be linked with obesity.4 This dopamine-reward response makes food and sex 'natural reinforcers,' so it's not surprising that "highly palatable foods and potent sexual stimuli" have an effect on the brain like drugs.5 Also see this article in which Dr. Larry Young says: <br/> <br/> Past studies have found the dopamine system of the nucleus accumbens produces the rewarding and sometimes addictive effects of sex, food and drugs of abuse. <br/> <br/>A big dopamine surge tells us that the substance or activity we are focused on is either good or else better than expected. This message feeds back to exaggerate our learning about it, to direct our future attention to anything associated with it, and to cue our motor cortex to 'go for it.' <br/> <br/>'When Making Important Decisions Go with Your Gut'Here's one of the most important points for understanding why natural reinforcers are potentially risky. The key element that causes you to find something especially rewarding is not the nutrient, substance, or activity itself, but the dopamine released in your brain. Dopamine surges can be powerful "this is great; pay attention!" messages – and they can occur whether a stimulus is artificial or natural, and even though the stimulus may be perfectly benign in small quantities. <br/> <br/>Alas, a powerful "Focus on this!" command doesn't necessarily mean that the activity or substance is actually worthy of your exaggerated attention (and your consequent inattention to other things or people in your life). To figure out your ideal priorities, you need the input from the higher centers of your brain. (More on that in a moment.) <br/> <br/>Incidentally, your mind-bending reward circuitry (seat of the dopamine mechanism) is, in some ways, an unreliable measurer of pleasure. According to the late Swiss neuropsychiatrist Klaus Grawe, your reward circuitry is more sensitive to surprises than to actual levels of pleasure. It readily learns to ignore familiar sources of pleasure in favor of things that initially registered as 'unexpectedly good,' whether or not they still provide pleasure, or have even grown unpleasant. <br/> <br/>For this reason a daring, spontaneous sexual exploit, such as making love in the office stairwell, will register as more rewarding than an afternoon of nourishing, affectionate lovemaking with a mate. The first was unexpected, even if uncomfortable, while the second, however delicious and truly rewarding, was more predictable. Whatever the true level of pleasure involved, you are programmed to record the first experience as more rewarding, and, all things being equal, to seek similar experiences again. <br/> <br/>So what then keeps us from behaving like compulsive novelty seekers all of the time? The new brain, or forebrain, inhibits impulsivity by integrating past experience and the wisdom of avoiding risk. Ideally, as we focus on long-term consequences it tempers dopamine activity in the reward circuitry of the brain, allowing us to reframe our impulses more wisely. <br/> <br/>In the case of supranormal stimulation, however, we produce extra dopamine or otherwise disturb our neurotransmitter ratios. This moves our attention away from the reasons for moderating our behavior, and directs it toward the stimulus. Moreover, our brain won't let us forget about such 'wonderful' events. It produces a substance called glutamate, which rewires memory and learning pathways. Thereafter, we detect cues connected with the stimulant more efficiently than before. Think of an alcoholic having an urge to drink when she walks past a bar and smells beer, or hears the sound of clanking bottles. In short, our exaggerated learning can cause us to place way too much value on certain objectives, reordering our priorities away from our deeper values. <br/> <br/>This tendency to focus keenly on whatever the brain decides is most rewarding (dopamine-stimulating) has the potential to lead us away from the balancing behaviors that would naturally protect us. Both a rich dessert after a healthy meal or an orgasm after leisurely, affectionate lovemaking are less likely to result in a regrettable behavior pattern than junk food or intense sexual stimulation alone. In other words, the real risk is the logical, but dangerous, focus on the most intensely stimulating aspects of eating or sex. Healthy food and heart-centered lovemaking are protective because they strengthen equilibrium at a neurochemical level, making us less impulsive. The reward circuitry of the brain discounts the true value of these protective factors in its pursuit of stimulation for its own sake. <br/> <br/>Research is showing that some people are especially vulnerable to the dopamine signals that exaggerate learning. For them some activities or substances more easily become so compelling that they lose sight of their best interests. For example, fewer dopamine receptors (possibly genetic), and childhood stress have both been associated with susceptibility to addiction or alterations to the dopamine system.6 <br/> <br/>Some characteristics of stimulation are also more likely to strengthen reinforcement – regardless of the individual's innate vulnerability. For example, novelty-on-demand releases lots of dopamine. Rodin's ThinkerAn example would be slot-machines, with their constant promise of thrilling (high dopamine) anticipation at the pull of a lever (or swipe of a card). Novelty-on-demand is also a big part of the lure of Internet sex websites, with their promise of more lurid images at the click of a mouse. Pursuit of novelty no doubt also exaggerates the appeal of casual sexual encounters. <br/> <br/>In other words, in these instances, we are exposed to greater risk of having our minds "bent" than we realize. <br/> <br/>So what does all this mean? In the following article, we'll look at some of the implications of 'natural reinforcement,' and its parallels with drug use - including signs that may indicate our minds are 'bending,' possible effects on our intimate relationships, and suggestions for maintaining equilibrium in the modern world. <br/> <br/>End of mindbenders: when natural is risky -Part One. <br/> <br/>being part 2: <br/> <br/>Mind-benders: When 'Natural' Is Risky – Part II <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Mon, 2007-11-05 02:47 — Marnia <br/> <br/>Mae WestPart I of this article explained that junk food (especially high sugar/high fat nutritionally-empty foods) and sexual stimulation (especially with the emphasis on climax rather than affectionate contact), although natural, have the potential to distort sound judgment. Both are examples of supranormal (unusually intense) stimulation, which reinforce learning – that is, they draw our exaggerated attention to anything associated with experiencing them. 'Learning reinforcement' is the same brain mechanism that distorts addicts' judgment, and locks them into their destructive behaviors. It occurs in the reward circuitry of the brain, and the neurochemical dopamine plays a critical role. <br/> <br/>A key point is that our brains are not geared to handle supranormal stimulation, even from natural sources like sex and food. Mae West didn't know this when she said, "Too much of a good thing...is even better." Despite the compelling messages from our reward circuitry about how 'good' these things are, 'too much' is a potential problem when the 'good thing' entails release of excess dopamine in the reward circuitry of the brain. <br/> <br/>Not everyone becomes an addict, of course. But nearly everyone's judgment is distorted now and then by natural reinforcers. (There is even evidence that high dopamine may distort sexual preference.) We binge on what is not good for us; we pursue sexual gratification in circumstances that risk unwanted pregnancy, disease, or destruction of our primary relationship. We also run a very real risk of creating unwanted dependency. <br/> <br/>We may blame our behavior on our character deficiencies, the inadequacy of our mates, or the fabled devil. Yet perhaps it would be wiser to learn more about supranormal stimulation, its effects on our behavior, and its potential risks. We could more easily engage the evolved parts of our brain and make sounder decisions when temptation presents itself. In the case of supranormal stimulation, it's far better to choose wisely at the outset. The more we unsettle our equilibrium, the harder it is to change course. After all, our brain is literally rewiring itself to focus more and more of our attention on the stimulant. <br/> <br/>To state it differently, our willpower is eroding where our chosen enticement is concerned. As a result, our judgment about its value to us is also likely to be increasingly distorted. Too often this means that our perception of those around us – especially if they impede our satiation – suffers. Our mate, for example, may seem unusually irritating or unable to meet our needs (because our needs 'Mental Distortions' signhave become exaggerated). We may discard a mate for reasons that have more to do with our own distorted thinking than with our mate's true value to us. <br/> <br/>Unwittingly, we are also risking long-term depression, the loss of pleasure from milder stimulation, uncomfortable withdrawal symptoms, increased attraction to other addictive substances or activities, and an unruly desire to repeat unwise behavior. <br/> <br/>All of these risks apply especially strongly to stimulants promoting compulsive eating and cyberporn addiction. However, even conventional sex can trigger supranormal stimulation. For millennia, careful observers have remarked on its power to hijack our judgment and inflame desires. Less careful observers have watched their lives turn into soap opera plots without a clue as to the true significance that intense sexual gratification plays in the process. <br/> <br/>In this article we'll first consider how the labels 'addictive' and 'non-addictive' can obscure important information where learning reinforcers are concerned. All of them are, in fact, on the same reward circuitry spectrum, which is largely governed by dopamine. Next we'll look at some research that may highlight the inherent risks in supranormal stimulation, whatever its source. Then we'll address strategies for coping with our susceptibility. <br/>'Addictive' or 'Not Addictive' <br/> <br/>Sex isn't always addictive, but we have only to consult our novels, TV episodes, and usually our own past experience to see that it is very frequently perception distorting. For example, a liaison with Monica Lewinsky no doubt seemed to Bill Clinton like a good idea at the time. Instead it turned out to be a huge error in judgment - not unlike a teenager's casual use of recreational drugs. In Clinton's case, this error had negative consequences on the entire country, making possible the election of the current administration. <br/> <br/>Actually the question, "Is sexual stimulation or junk food addictive?" is a bit of a red herring. It implies that the issue is black and white, and that there is no difference between balanced meals and fries, and no difference between caring intercourse and an isolating porn habit. The better question is, "Is this substance or activity likely to absorb my attention in such a way that it could sabotage my powers of discernment?" The answer to this question determines whether something is potentially harmful. <br/> <br/>The medical profession does not ask this question. It traditionally thinks in black and white terms because it has to decide whether to define a particular condition as suitable for medical intervention - using pharmaceuticals, for example.1 doctorIt draws the line between pathological and non-pathological somewhat arbitrarily. Not only that, this boundary changes over time. Not long ago, doctors did not recognize alcoholism as a disease calling for medical intervention. On the other hand, despite the official reluctance of the profession, some doctors now suggest that compulsive eating and sexual compulsion should be recognized as pathologies. <br/> <br/>Meanwhile, the mainstream is perhaps lulled into a false sense of security by the fact that the medical profession hasn't officially warned us of the addictiveness of natural reinforcers like junk food and intense sexual stimulation empty of affection. <br/> <br/>One result is that we tend to assure each other that nearly any sexual behavior is healthy and harmless if enough people appear to be doing it. Yet should commonplace be the test of harmlessness? Maybe the question should be "Does a behavior easily seize the attention in a way that distorts judgment?" Or "Does it escalate compulsive behavior because of its natural tendency to reinforce learning?" <br/> <br/>For example, our culture is flooded with increasingly explicit sexual images. This trend is framed as a free speech debate. Yet should we frame it as a risky natural reinforcer debate? Could we educate ourselves to avoid dangerous content because of its supranormal stimulation? In fact, explicit sexual imagery is not all about freedom. At a biological level, it's quite the opposite. Recklessly, and from an early age, many of us are being induced to focus increasing attention on supranormal sexual stimulation. Over time, supranormal stimulation changes the brain, drawing users ever more powerfully toward the targeted stimulant. In reality, advertisers' calculated coercion of the human will is the very opposite of freedom. <br/> <br/>Whether or not officials stamp something as an addiction, if it has the power to usurp our judgment, we're on a slippery slope. If someone is likely to be unable to form a health-giving intimate relationship because his reward circuitry will signal him that erotic stimulation is more rewarding than the trusted companionship of a real person, shouldn't he be warned - even if his situation is not officially recognized as pathological? <br/>Telltale signs? <br/> <br/>The substances and activities that are officially recognized as addictive, such as methamphetamine, gambling, alcohol and so forth, have been studied quite a bit in the last decade or so. Not only that, researchers have conducted experiments on the effects of elevated dopamine. (Again, dopamine is the craving neurochemical behind all learning reinforcers, both natural and otherwise, whether or not they have been labeled addictions.) <br/> <br/>While there's much still to learn, the unwelcome effects of supranormal stimulants are coming into focus - and there is already some evidence that natural reinforcers can alter the brain and behavior in ways similar to recognized addictive substances. brain chemicals and desireFor example, recent neuroimaging studies in humans have discovered neuroadaptations in the brain of obese individuals that mimic those previously observed in individuals addicted to cocaine and other drugs of abuse. 2 Overconsumption of sugar has produced behavioral and neurochemical signs of opiate withdrawal.3 And, as we pointed out in Part I of this article, Dutch researchers found that brain scans of ejaculating men resembled brain scans of people shooting heroin.4 Such parallels between learning reinforcers make sense, as dopamine is common to them all. <br/> <br/>As you read the following list, consider whether you, or someone you know, may be suffering from the effects supranormal stimulation, via a natural reinforcer. <br/> <br/> * Depression <br/> Scientists used to think dopamine surges were fleeting. That is, they rose, motivated behavior, and dropped back to normal levels without leaving long-term changes in the brain. Now research suggests that some receptors in the brain respond to dopamine over a longer period, turning off a regulatory protein known as Akt, and may affect the brain indefinitely. Mice exposed to prolonged elevated dopamine later behaved like they were depressed in response to stress. <br/> * Decrease in normal pleasure <br/> One potential drawback of supranormal stimulation is that, over time, it may make normal pleasures seem less rewarding – at least until our brains recuperate. For example, recovering cocaine addicts say that they do not feel pleasure in anything for a while after they stop using.5 Recovering porn addicts have reported the same thing. According to addiction researcher and Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Nora D. Volkow, MD, the dopamine function is markedly disrupted in addicted individuals. There are decreases in dopamine release and in dopamine D2 nerve cell receptors in the striatum. Low dopamine may lead to diminished reward, motivation and inhibitory controls.6 <br/> * Withdrawal symptoms <br/> When dopamine surges, the brain seems to protect itself by shutting down some of the nerve cell receptors for dopamine - or related proteins - for a time. This can result in physical discomfort. (Also see 'The pain of withdrawal.' Here are the remarks of a man withdrawing from porn use: <br/> <br/> Today the whole day I have been shaking with jitters similar to how it felt when I had quit smoking. My body has been jolted with what felt like an unusually intense energy especially in my spine. I would feel tense and stiff for a while and then as if my spinal bones are being popped and a big relief and then tension and then relief. It just came out of the blue and has been subsiding. <br/> <br/> * Desire to repeat unwise behavior <br/> Dopamine also surges when we want out of an unpleasant situation – and even higher when we are offered a chance to escape it. This means that when temptation presents itself during the discomfort of withdrawal, we probably feel even more motivated to reach for a stimulant than we did at initial exposure to it.7 Unfortunately, the primitive part of our brain doesn't understand the inherent risks in potent reinforcers. It simply registers them as a quick way out of the immediate discomfort of withdrawal. <br/> * Devaluing what truly nourishes <br/> As explained, intense sexual stimulation can cause us to exaggerate the importance of the novel or erotic aspects of sex, and undervalue the long-term, health-giving benefits of close, trusted companionship. We can grow especially irritable and resentful toward anyone we perceive as an impediment to "relief," or anyone who is not meeting our (now) inflated desires. Junk food use can cause similar distortions of judgment about which foods are 'good.' <br/> * Cross-tolerances <br/> dual diagnosisAnother risk of supranormal stimulation is what scientists call 'cross-tolerances.' That is, such stimulation can make someone more likely to reach for other potent stimuli. For example, hamsters that have previously mated are more likely to use amphetamines than are virgin hamsters.8 Teens who are sexually active use more recreational drugs than those who are not.9 Sugars have produced cross-tolerance with drugs of abuse.10 <br/> <br/>If you suffer (or someone you care about suffers) anxiety, depression, irritability or intense cravings in connection with the use of a natural reinforcer like junk food or sexual stimulation, it might be wise to treat these effects as warning signals that your 'mind is bending.' It could be time to let go of the behavior, however harmless it may seem, and regain your equilibrium. <br/> <br/>Of course, it's seldom that we recognize our discomfort is related to supranormal stimulation. Instead we tend to blame those around us for our stress or anxiety. Sadly, stress itself can veil the return to clear perception. It has been shown to trigger the dopamine system and promote the use of addictive substances. 11 <br/>Coping <br/> <br/>Once we understand that supranormal stimulants can alter our brain even if they are natural, we can steer around these risks. Here are some suggestions: <br/> <br/> * Use junk food and potent sexual stimuli sparingly - especially junk food without a balanced meal, and sexual stimuli without affectionate interaction. <br/> It's not clear how long the average progression is from casual use to full-blown addiction. Natural reinforcers are believed to take more time to reinforce learning than recreational drugs. However, a recent experiment revealed that sugar, which is quite natural, is powerful. Even rats addicted to cocaine preferred intensely sweet substances – sucrose and saccharine – to cocaine.12 Avail yourself of the window during which it is relatively easy to let go. Don't just keep going back for more easy gratification; you are likely to find it much harder to quit on down the road. (The impermanence of this window suggests that kids need early education about the effects of porn and junk food.) <br/> * Avoid 'novelty-on-demand.' <br/> The brain is particularly susceptible in situations where it can obtain novel thrills on demand. In fact, the availability of predictable anticipation may be a bigger factor in the compulsion behind internet porn use than love of naked bodies. Using internet porn is like being in front of a slot machine. People trying to avoid porn report that it's very hard to resist finding out whether there's a new picture at a porn site. <br/> * Don't wait for the medical profession or the mainstream press to confirm the risks of these two potent natural reinforcers. <br/> Even though food and sex are known to be learning reinforcers, which, when used unwisely, cause a lot of avoidable misery, the medical profession is unlikely to define them as addictions - until pharmaceutical companies begin to market the lucrative drugs to 'treat' these conditions. This event may be closer than expected. Already drugs are being developed to tamper with the reward circuitry of the brain to counter drug addictions. And doctors are surgically addressing compulsive eating. Meanwhile, although your doctor generally won't tell you that natural reinforcers can alter your brain, he/she will promptly write you a prescription for antidepressants for the depression that often accompanies unwitting overindulgence. Such drugs are not miracle cures. They modify the brain; they are costly; and all have side-effects of varying severity, some of which depress (or inflame) libido. Don't wait for the medical profession to fix (with a hammer) the problems that you can avoid in the first place. <br/> * Value your partner. <br/> Supranormal stimulation can distort your perception. It may even be part of biology's plan to keep humans moving on to new mates to increase the genetic variety of their offspring. Counter this subconscious program by finding reasons to be grateful for your partner every time you feel annoyed or irritated. <br/> * Strengthen your equilibrium. <br/> Controlled intercourse is an excellent way of increasing balance in the reward circuitry of the brain. More than two thousand years ago, Taoist master Lao Tzu noted that it eases cravings and promotes harmony. Also try meditation, tai chi, spiritual study, yoga, prayer, Qi gong, generous touch, singing, exercise, heart-felt, supportive exchanges with people you care about (via gatherings, the internet, smiles, and so forth), or service to others. All of these behaviors make you less susceptible to the call of dopamine. This is probably due to the effects of oxytocin.13 <br/> <br/> brain <br/> * Remember the brain is malleable. <br/> Even someone who has slipped down the natural reinforcer slope can heal. Food and sexual addictions are neither rare, nor incurable. Seek help if your needs often feel overwhelming and impossible to resist despite the fact that such behavior could damage your personal and/or professional life. (Visit our blogs to see how others are coping with this challenge.) <br/> <br/>Value your freedom <br/> <br/>Junk food snacks are NOT just another food. Cyberporn sex is NOT just another way to orgasm. Let advertisers sell you designer water, a CD, or the latest gizmo, but think twice before consuming junk food and using potent sexual stimuli. They aren't mere indulgences. At our current stage of evolution they can be mind-benders. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>end of Article. <br/> <br/> <br/>Beginning new article: <br/> <br/>Ruthless Eugenics <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Tue, 2005-07-12 00:40 — Marnia <br/> <br/>couple with sexual chemistry "He’s a great guy, but I’m worried about the sex appeal factor. It seems like there should be more sparks between us." A friend said this about a man her age, whom she had finally met after speaking with him for many hours on the phone. Their phone conversations were long, candid, and filled with laughter…but in person he was a bit shy, and waited for her to take the lead. Something seemed amiss. <br/> <br/>"I’m used to dating older men, whose physical touch is confident," she lamented. Those men, who skillfully swept her off her feet with Hollywood passion, also tended to dance on to the next partner with equal dexterity. The last one, after a brief affair, had left my friend with the classic line: "You’re just too good for me; we have to end this." <br/> <br/>Now she was wondering if she should trust her gut, which said, "only go for men with whom the sparks are flying?" Or put up with the unfamiliar chemistry between her and this gracious, generous man, and see if he would relax into a confident mate? <br/> <br/>may-september romanceIn thinking about her dilemma, I flashed on a major "aha." The flip side of men wanting women who are twenty, or look like they're twenty (very fertile), is women picking men because they're talented seducers. Why? They are promising vehicles for passing genes into future generations.1 <br/> <br/>At first this isn’t obvious. Logically one would think that men who are drawn to monogamy would be the best insurance for seeing one’s female genes safely into the future. But the subconscious program I’m referring to no doubt evolved during the millions of years that our ancestors lived in tribes. Children weren’t dependent upon insular couples; they were literally raised by a village. <br/> <br/>Monogamy was expendable as a survival factor, so other genetic imperatives took precedence. Females unconsciously chose qualities that would make their male offspring more dominant. This tendency is common to many species. Peahens pick the peacock with the biggest tail display - even though his fancy tail makes him easy prey. Cow seals pick the bull with the most blubber, even though he’s not too mobile on land. And a woman picks a guy who can easily seduce her (and everyone else) even though he won’t stick around. All can expect that their male offspring will inherit the same tail, blubber, or magnetism…and be more attractive to the females of the next generation. seal coupleIn this way, these discriminating females’ genes will live on, even though their love lives will likely be brief, or even emotionally excruciating. <br/> <br/>So it is that women often find themselves with the self-destructive urge to surrender sexually to males who easily attract lots of females. Not because they make better mates. They don't. Not because their offspring will make better mates. They absolutely won’t. But because seductive males will improve the women’s genetic success in the next generation. In this way, women perpetuate the "Don Juan" curse. Without realizing it at all, these women value themselves more as gene machines than as individuals with other contributions to make to the world. <br/> <br/>Men, too, serve as gene machines above all else when they know they "have to have a younger woman because they just aren’t attracted to women their age, and they can't help it." <br/> <br/>As the saying goes, like attracts like. So if you're subconsciously choosing your mates to win The Great Gene Competition, you will attract lovers who are, too. Don JuanOn the other hand, if you want a man who sees you for more than your body, you will have to see him for more than his skills as a Don Juan. <br/> <br/>All this is a long way of saying that many of us are blind when it comes to mate choice as long as we trust our guts. No matter how good our gut reactions may be in other areas of our lives, they may well be set on "maximum genes" in our sex lives. <br/> <br/>What to do? <br/> <br/>Become aware of this programming, and realize that your gut doesn’t have your best interests at heart if your goal is deeper union or lasting companionship. <br/>Do a lot of inner listening, meditating, or praying about mate selection instead of relying on first impressions of chemistry. couple with sexual chemistryIf quiet listening isn’t an option, listen to friends’ advice. Often they can see what you can’t. <br/> <br/>Realize that a lack of chemistry can be overcome with a bit of patience and a new approach to intimacy. Move your focus to putting your partner at ease. Create ways for you to touch each other that are not foreplay: dancing, hand massages, foot massages, etc. When you put your attention on another’s wellbeing, you increase your ability to bond with him (or her). You also bring out the best in your partner. <br/> <br/>If you have ever improved your diet, you know that, with time, your taste actually changes to reflect the shift. You start to prefer healthier food. Changing your approach to courtship from "getting" what your genetic programming wants to "giving" what will put your partner at ease, may well change your taste, too. <br/> <br/>The seduction game grows less appealing. You may find yourself genuinely turned on by generosity, thoughtfulness, humor, companionship, etc. The hot passion of surrendering to become another member of an alpha male's harem is no longer as inviting. <br/> <br/>missionFinally, recognize that if you want to accomplish your life’s work with contentment and inner balance, you probably don't have time and energy for impulsive gene shopping with its brief, dramatic highs and heartache, and its discouragement and inherent fear of aging (because your mate will predictably be seeking younger, more fertile women as you grow older). You will have to choose consciously, rather than unconsciously, if you want a mate who can help you make a difference in the world. <br/> <br/>Many people today insist that any of us can have whatever we want by "getting clear about it" and "focusing our intention." But when we want a mate who will ultimately sadden us and hamper our purpose on the planet, what then? This is the hidden danger of gut dominance in decision-making on mate selection. <br/> <br/>Back to my tale. What did my friend choose? She's visiting him again right now. I'll let you know soon. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>End of Article. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>Beginning new article: <br/> <br/> <br/>The Big 'O' Isn't Orgasm <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Thu, 2005-06-23 21:08 — Marnia <br/> <br/>The Dreamer AwakensResearchers are always seeking answers to fundamental questions about illness: "What is the cause of cancer?" "How does stress damage your cells and organs?" "What causes plaque to build up inside your arteries?" <br/> <br/>The flip side of such questions is "what is the mechanism by which love and affection positively affect health?" The answer to this question is oxytocin. Oxytocin is a hormone and neurotransmitter. Once believed to confine its effects to inducing labor and milk ejection, oxytocin actually has far-reaching effects on both sexes. You could not fall in love without it. These days it goes by nicknames such as "the bonding hormone," "the cuddle hormone," and even "the love hormone." <br/> <br/>infant monkeyThe primary conscious behavior or thought process that increases oxytocin is caring for another. Appreciation, generous touch, gratitude, and emotional connections with others also raise oxytocin levels. In addition, oxytocin appears to be behind many of the health benefits from meditation, massage and acupuncture. We see one of oxytocin's most powerful effects at birth - when the mother and father bond with their child. At that moment, oxytocin surges causing a rewiring of both parents' brains so that they will do anything for their little screaming creature. Under ordinary circumstances they remain permanently in love. <br/> <br/>We all form similar connections with friends, lovers, cats, gurus, or even God. And the benefits to us of these deep connections are great. Oxytocin is the reason why people with pets tend to recover more quickly from illness, why married people tend to live longer, why support groups benefit those with cancer, addictions and chronic disorders, and why care-giving primate parents, whether male or female, live longer than the non-care-giving parents. <br/> <br/>healthy coupleHow can oxytocin produce such tremendous health benefits? The exact mechanism is not clear, but the key seems to be oxytocin's ability to counteract the effects of stress. To state this differently, if you listed all the conditions and diseases related to stress or aggravated by stress, you'd have to list nearly every known condition. By easing stress, oxytocin helps to heal them all. <br/> <br/>Consider some of the other research on this important hormone: <br/> <br/> * Oxytocin reduces cravings. When scientists administered it to rodents who were addicted to cocaine, morphine, or heroin, the rats opted for less drugs, or showed fewer symptoms of withdrawal. (Kovacs, 1998) Oxytocin also reduces cravings for sweets. (Billings, 2006) <br/> * Oxytocin calms. A single rat injected with oxytocin has a calming effect on a cage full of anxious rats. (Agren, 2002) <br/> * Oxytocin increases sexual receptivity and counteracts impotence. (Pedersen, C.A., 2002), (Arletti, 1997) <br/> * Oxytocin counteracts the effects of cortisol, the stress hormone. (Legros, 2003) Less stress means increased immunity and faster recovery. <br/> * Oxytocin appears be a major reason that SSRIs (like Prozac®) ease depression, perhaps because high levels of cortisol are the chief culprits in depression and anxiety disorders. (Uvnas-Moberg, 1999) <br/> <br/>In addition to oxytocin's powerful effects on the body, it strongly affects your mind and behavior. It is nature's antidepressant and anti-anxiety hormone. It creates feelings of calm and a sense of connection, so it actually shapes how you view the world. The whole universe looks like a better place when you feel tranquil and loving. Oxytocin also reduces cravings, which makes it the key to healing addictions of all kinds. For example, rats addicted to heroin used less of the drug when experimenters raised oxytocin levels in their brains. <br/> <br/>hands givingHave you heard the saying, "the more you give, the more you get?" Well, it applies to oxytocin, too. The more you nurture and connect with others, the more responsive your body and brain become to it. This makes it an unusual neurotransmitter. Compare it with substances like alcohol or caffeine. The more you use them, the greater the quantity you require to obtain the same effect. Oxytocin is the opposite. The more you give and nurture, the more strongly you respond. <br/> <br/>You can't take a pill to obtain these benefits because oxytocin would swiftly breakdown in your stomach. Not even an injection would work because the body gets rid of it so quickly. The only artificial way to keep oxytocin up would be to receive a continuous IV, and still that would have no effect on your brain - which is where it must be released to affect social bonds. (Yes, there are oxytocin nasal sprays, but they are riskier and less specific in effect than learning to produce this neurochemical organically by choosing activities that produce it in ideal quantities and locations within your brain and body.) <br/> <br/>Yet it is within your power to release oxytocin within your brain and body - short of having a child or an orgasm (see below). Consciously stick to behaviors that promote its production in areas of the body and brain that yield beneficial effects. couple in bedMeditate, nurture others, reach out to connect with people, and make love in a way that keeps your heart open. And avoid relationship distress.1 <br/> <br/>Because of oxytocin's roles in bonding and reducing cravings, we believe it is the key to authentic monogamy and, of course, peace between the sheets. That is, if you want to stay in love, you need to sustain the production of oxytocin. This happens effortlessly…until some point after conventional sex enters the equation. <br/> <br/>Here's why. Falling in love calls forth a soup of neurochemicals, including oxytocin's bonding effects. However, as we've explained in other articles, conventional sex tends to over-stimulate the pleasure/reward center deep within the brain. screaming lioness Specifically, a neurochemical called dopamine (ideal levels of which are also necessary for attraction between mates) drops after orgasm. Therefore bonds can erode. Low dopamine can also create psychological distress. <br/> <br/>Over time, this roller coaster of highs and lows leads to subconscious defensiveness and emotional distance between partners. Once uneasiness enters your intimate relationship, the bond between the two of you tends to weaken. That is, you produce less oxytocin. So you can see how biology's agenda unravels your relationships over time despite oxytocin's bonding properties. <br/> <br/>The situation is confusing, even to scientists, because levels of oxytocin (at least in the bloodstream) rise sharply in most of us at the moment of orgasm. However, research suggests that this 30-second surge of oxytocin may have little to do with emotional bonding, and more to do with inducing the contractions associated with orgasm (to move the sperm along). Oxytocin, remember, also produces birth contractions. Even if there is a corresponding surge of oxytocin in the brain at the moment of orgasm, it is obvious that people can have sex without bonding. Some get up and leave; others roll over and snore.2 <br/> <br/>The best plan? Consciously encourage oxytocin production with caring behavior. In this way you protect and strengthen the bonding connections in your brain and tap the health benefits discussed above. <br/> <br/>valentine candySadly, the normal relationship pattern is for couples to get together, think they will love each other forever, and then end up fighting and splitting up, or simmering in resentment and stagnation. This roller coaster of passion-followed-by-separation is behind the decline in oxytocin. The result? The honeymoon ends. <br/> <br/>loving coupleOur experience, making love without orgasm, has been just the reverse of this typical pattern. Our relationship stays light-hearted and romantic and has grown closer with time. We believe this positive trend is the result of consciously avoiding the behaviors that create subconscious uneasiness between partners. In this way we maintain our initial levels of oxytocin. And, as we've become increasingly responsive to "the Big 'O'," that is, oxytocin, our connection grows stronger and healthier. It will work for you, too! <br/> <br/>NOTE: For a more current look at oxytocin research see Oxytocin Revisited. <br/> <br/> 1. Oxytocin actually rises in women whose relationships are causing them lots of stress for reasons that are not fully understood. Whatever the reason, high levels of oxytocin in this situation do not offset the effects of stress. <br/> 2. Oxytocin does rise in rats' brains for hours after mating. It appears to make them engage in riskier-than-normal behavior. See Centrally released oxytocin mediates mating-induced anxiolysis in male rats <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>End of Article. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>Beginning new article: <br/> <br/> <br/>The Monogamy Challenge <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Thu, 2005-07-14 19:42 — Marnia <br/> <br/>unhappy Charles and Diana <br/> <br/>"I think I suffer from terminal dick brain," confessed a friend recently, after engaging in casual sex he later regretted. He is not alone; humans are built for promiscuity. The advent of DNA testing has all but extinguished the myth of the sexually monogamous mammal (or bird). For millions of years evolutionary biology has molded us to engage in "extra-pair couplings," as science terms them. So valuable are the rewards of wantonness (from evolution’s perspective) that biologists now describe monogamy as a major risk factor for extinction.1 (For an excellent discussion of just how un-monogamous we are, see Deflating The Myth of Monogamy by David P. Barash. Also see a more recent article, The Shelf Life of Bliss. <br/> <br/>Our innate lack of sexual restraint poses a nasty impediment to lasting harmony in long-term relationships. Clearly, advancing life-long companionship is not in Mother Nature’s job description; her task is the propagation of genes. <br/> <br/>As Burnham and Phelan point out in their book Mean Genes: From Sex to Money to Food, Taming Our Primal Instincts, we receive an enticing brain chemistry "buzz" for various behaviors that furthered our forbearers’ chances of passing on their genes - but which do not serve us as individuals. Mean Genes coverFor example, our hunter-gatherer ancestors were best served by grabbing whatever came by without dwelling on the risks. Today, this short-term thinking too often translates into "buy now, pay later." Reaching for high-calorie foods once meant survival; these days too many extra fries can shorten lives. High-risk ventures sometimes paid big dividends; gambling seldom does. And, of course, having impulsive sex with a new mate once sustained scanty populations; now it fosters unwanted pregnancies, overpopulation, and the spread of disease. <br/> <br/>Worse yet, that enticing buzz does not truly benefit us. Instead it sets off an addictive cycle consisting of "brief thrill followed by uncomfortable period of increased discontent." If the inevitable letdown in turn primes us for new amorous adventures, Mother Nature is especially pleased. <br/> <br/>The intense sensation we experience when pursuing and having sex with a new lover is in part composed of dopamine. The dopamine lure is so powerful that rats will cross an electrically-charged metal plate to get the equivalent of a dopamine buzz, although they will not cross it to get food…even if they are starving. This penchant for sexual enticement lurks in all mammalian brains. No wonder lovers committed adultery even when the punishment was to burn at the stake. By means of this effective, well-hidden mechanism deep in the brain, Mother Nature persuades us that any sacrifice (including death) is worth the chance of gene propagation. <br/> <br/>Perhaps you are beginning to see just how big a challenge we face when we vow to remain monogamous. Given our two-timing blueprint, is it worth it to wrestle against this powerful programming? And if it is worth it, what’s the best way to go about it? <br/>Why Fight It? <br/> <br/>Buchard's Harem paintingWhy strive for monogamy at all? Certainly polyandry, polygyny, or polyamory appear to offer the paths of least resistance. However, just like our longing for extra fries, the urge to abandon monogamy is a product of our innate short-term thinking. It serves our genes, not us. Let’s look at how Mother Nature’s plan to keep us bed-hopping hurts us as individuals. <br/> <br/>The dopamine "reward" mechanism, triggered when we mate with a new partner (or satiate ourselves sexually), sets off a neurochemical cycle that touches every aspect of our lives. After the intense high, our neurochemistry shifts into a low-dopamine, or hangover, mode. Some of us predictably react by reaching for substances or activities that send our dopamine soaring again: alcohol, Internet porn, high-calorie foods, reckless spending. We are soon on a treadmill of dissatisfaction, punctuated with brief highs - wondering how the joie de vivre went out of our lives. The fast-food industry makes billions (and lots of obese people) marketing food with lots of fat and sugar to our vulnerable reward centers. <br/> <br/>Eventually the periods of discontent outweigh the benefits of the brief thrills. We make unsound decisions in pursuit of our self-inflamed desires. In the long run we would be better off with the innate happiness that comes with equilibrium. (Think of children who haven’t yet fallen into this cycle; simple pleasures truly delight them.) <br/> <br/>When our neurochemistry is in hangover mode, we tend to project our feelings of disillusionment onto those around us. The unfortunate result? Our partner just doesn’t look as appealing. Often we react by pulling away from (or driving away) our lover. In this way we erode our intimate relationships. Scientists suggest that, for most couples, this seemingly irreversible emotional distance creeps in within a year of two of marriage (ending the "honeymoon period"). As a result, mates often split up - or add a lover (or addiction) on the side. <br/> <br/>cuddling hamstersIn the process, they lose the benefits that come from genuine intimacy. Repeated studies associate close, trusted companionship with increased longevity (HIV patients with a partner, for example, live longer and develop AIDS less rapidly), faster healing (wounded hamsters paired with another hamster recovered twice as fast), and lower rates of illness, depression and alcoholism. (See, for example, a new report, "Marital Status and Health: United States, 1999-2002".) <br/> <br/>Regardless of Mother Nature’s priorities, genuine intimacy is better for us as individuals than genetic success (especially on an overcrowded planet). As Dean Ornish wrote in Love &amp; Survival, "if love and intimacy came in pill form, doctors who failed to prescribe it would be guilty of malpractice." He says trusted companionship is a more powerful determinant of health than more exercise, better diet, genetic make-up, stopping smoking, or prescription drugs. <br/> <br/>The bottom line? Yielding to our promiscuity programming offers not the bountiful bliss it promises, but quite the opposite: roller coaster ride after roller coaster ride of an addictive search for more dopamine highs to counter the inevitable hangovers…and fragile, often shallow, relationships. <br/>Finding True Satisfaction <br/> <br/>To be sure, stagnant monogamy is itself a recipe for misery and hypocrisy. Although humans may be somewhat better off statistically if they remain married - living an uneasy stalemate, perhaps punctuated with open hostility, is hardly a recipe for wellbeing. For many it is unbearable. <br/> <br/>We recommend a solution that goes right to the heart of the problem by neutralizing the mechanism that actually splits couples apart. Making love differently allows lovers to master the reward center in the brain. In this way they elude the cycle that so often propels them into "extra-pair couplings" or bleak stagnation. <br/> <br/>chocoholicTo be sure, passing up an attachment to regular blasts of dopamine in the form of intense orgasmic experiences initially appeals to those on Mother Nature’s plan even less than passing up chocolate appeals to a chocoholic. However, this other way of making love is far more satisfying than one would imagine. This is because, when it is done carefully, one’s brain chemistry actually shifts away from the ultimately unfulfilling hunger/satiation cycle. Operating on a different, oxytocin-rich, brain chemistry, lovers rediscover a childlike zest for simple pleasures even as their mutual attraction intensifies. <br/> <br/>The keys to this other way of making love are lots of caring affection and an approach to lovemaking that lets us "tiptoe" around Mother Nature’s secret weapon - the dopamine trigger in the primitive part of the brain. The ancient Taoists, the Gnostic Christians, and others throughout the ages all practiced this gentler, but more satisfying, way of making love. Deeper union, rather than fertilization-driven sex, is the goal. Lovers thereby elude the typical cycle of infatuation-followed-by-discontent. <br/> <br/>Partners report complete satisfaction using this technique, after a gradual adjustment period. They also report contented monogamy. Oxytocin heals cravings (including sexual hankerings) while increasing sexual receptivity in males and females. This combination makes authentic monogamy surprisingly effortless once the transition period has passed; one's partner looks better and better. At the same time, oxytocin counteracts stress, heals depression, improves immunity to disease, calms, and connects us deeply with others. It is associated with all the gains that trusted companionship yields. Some couples also report that relationships with their children also improve. <br/>Puppeteers or Biology's Puppets? <br/> <br/>mantisWarm-hearted monogamy serves us better as individuals. Multiple partners serve us better as gene machines. Unlike animals, we humans have a choice. Before you make your choice, consider the following bit of biological trivia: at mating, the female praying mantis chomps the head off of the male. In the process, he delivers his packet of sperm to the next generation. Mother Nature smiles benevolently on this "successful" behavior. Yet it makes for very short relationships, and promptly extinguishes all other ambitions of the hapless male. <br/> <br/>Perhaps it’s time to outsmart Mother Nature, learn to sustain harmonious monogamy, and free additional energy for creative pursuits on other levels. Both ancient wisdom and modern neuroscience suggest that with clear vision, a conscious approach, and a bit of practice, this goal is within our grasp. <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>end of article. <br/> <br/> <br/>beginning new article: <br/> <br/>Promiscuity breeds better babies, study shows <br/> <br/> AntechinusThere is ancient lore to the effect that learning to make love without orgasm is protective of health. Here's some research showing that too much fertilization-driven sex can suppress the immune system. <br/> <br/> Males of the species Antechinus stuartii are "overtly preoccupied with copulation and die abruptly at the conclusion of the mating season."1 Autopsies of males revealed a variety of disease states, all associated with suppression of immune and inflammatory responses. However, inhibition (or removal) of androgens allows the animal to mount an effective immune response. Could learning to make love without orgasm also balance androgen levels? The ancient Chinese noted that this practice actually decreased sexual frustration.2 <br/> <br/>Australian researchers have found that a mouse sized marsupial with a promiscuous sex life breeds much healthier babies than her monogamous sisters. <br/> <br/>A team of scientists based at the school of botany and zoology (BoZo) at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, has spent the past two years studying the sex life of the brown antechinus. <br/> <br/>The brown antechinus is a small carnivorous marsupial, about the size of a mouse, which belongs to the same family as the Tasmanian devil and the quoll. <br/> <br/>The research team, led by Dr Diana Fisher, found that promiscuous females of the species were more likely to give birth to healthier offspring than those which had mated with only one male. <br/> <br/>"Scientists have developed many theories to explain why some female animals have multiple sex partners, whether it's trading sex for food and protection, dealing with infertile males or avoiding the negative effects of inbreeding in species that can't recognise their relatives," Dr Fisher said. <br/> <br/>"Another theory is that mating with multiple males would result in sperm competition. <br/> <br/>"This means that males with the strongest sperm are more likely to become sires and father better quality offspring. <br/> <br/>"Until now this theory hasn't been demonstrated convincingly." <br/> <br/>The Brown Antechinus, which is found in forest in south-eastern Australia, usually has a short and intense single mating season. <br/> <br/>When the males are about 11-months-old they begin a two-week breeding frenzy in order to father as many young as possible. <br/> <br/>Each male will mate for about six hours at a time with as many females as it can then die of sheer exhaustion at the end of the mating season. <br/> <br/>The stress of their vigorous mating and aggressive encounters with other males with which they compete for the females, usually results in their death. <br/> <br/>The females have a much better chance of survival and usually live to breed for a second or third year. <br/> <br/>The researchers studied a group of the marsupials in captivity - one where the females were only allowed to mate with one male and the other where the females were allowed multiple partners. <br/> <br/>"In one year we released families back into the wild when the babies were still in the mother's pouch," Dr Fisher said. <br/> <br/>"The result was that survival of babies with promiscuous mothers was almost three times as high as those in the monogamous group. <br/> <br/>"The next year we kept families in captivity until the babies were almost weaned. <br/> <br/>"Again babies of promiscuous mothers did much better. <br/> <br/>"Paternity tests showed that the sperm of some males were far more successful than others and ... that babies fathered by these males were twice as likely to survive." <br/> <br/>The researchers concluded that the females who had the most partners were more likely to have healthier offspring because they increased their chances of mating with males who had the strongest sperm. <br/> <br/>The findings of the study will be published in the latest edition of Nature magazine. (Nature, vol 44, p 89). <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/> <br/>end of article. <br/> <br/> <br/>beginning new article: <br/> <br/> <br/>Three Myths about Porn <br/>Marnia's picture <br/>Thu, 2007-07-05 00:24 — Marnia <br/> <br/>porn keyboard with worn P*O*R*N keysAlthough our website is devoted to the wisdom and neuroscience suppo