Copyright The New York Times
Meredith Chivers is a creator of bonobo pornography. She is a 36-year-old psychology professor at Queenâ€šÃ„Ã´s University in the small city of Kingston, Ontario, a highly regarded scientist and a member of the editorial board of the worldâ€šÃ„Ã´s leading journal of sexual research, Archives of Sexual Behavior. The bonobo film was part of a series of related experiments she has carried out over the past several years. She found footage of bonobos, a species of ape, as they mated, and then, because the accompanying sounds were dull â€šÃ„Ã® â€šÃ„Ãºbonobos donâ€šÃ„Ã´t seem to make much noise in sex,â€šÃ„Ã¹ she told me, â€šÃ„Ãºthough the females give a kind of pleasure grin and make chirpy soundsâ€šÃ„Ã¹ â€šÃ„Ã® she dubbed in some animated chimpanzee hooting and screeching. She showed the short movie to men and women, straight and gay. To the same subjects, she also showed clips of heterosexual sex, male and female homosexual sex, a man masturbating, a woman masturbating, a chiseled man walking naked on a beach and a well-toned woman doing calisthenics in the nude.
Skip to next paragraph
Ryan McGinley/Team Gallery
Share your thoughts on the biological underpinnings of human desire.
* Post a Comment Â¬Âª
* Read All Comments (84) Â¬Âª
While the subjects watched on a computer screen, Chivers, who favors high boots and fashionable rectangular glasses, measured their arousal in two ways, objectively and subjectively. The participants sat in a brown leatherette La-Z-Boy chair in her small lab at the Center for Addiction and Mental Health, a prestigious psychiatric teaching hospital affiliated with the University of Toronto, where Chivers was a postdoctoral fellow and where I first talked with her about her research a few years ago. The genitals of the volunteers were connected to plethysmographs â€šÃ„Ã® for the men, an apparatus that fits over the penis and gauges its swelling; for the women, a little plastic probe that sits in the vagina and, by bouncing light off the vaginal walls, measures genital blood flow. An engorgement of blood spurs a lubricating process called vaginal transudation: the seeping of moisture through the walls. The participants were also given a keypad so that they could rate how aroused they felt.
The men, on average, responded genitally in what Chivers terms â€šÃ„Ãºcategory specificâ€šÃ„Ã¹ ways. Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women. They were mostly unmoved when the screen displayed only men. Gay males were aroused in the opposite categorical pattern. Any expectation that the animal sex would speak to something primitive within the men seemed to be mistaken; neither straights nor gays were stirred by the bonobos. And for the male participants, the subjective ratings on the keypad matched the readings of the plethysmograph. The menâ€šÃ„Ã´s minds and genitals were in agreement.
All was different with the women. No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, they showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men. They responded objectively much more to the exercising woman than to the strolling man, and their blood flow rose quickly â€šÃ„Ã® and markedly, though to a lesser degree than during all the human scenes except the footage of the ambling, strapping man â€šÃ„Ã® as they watched the apes. And with the women, especially the straight women, mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad werenâ€šÃ„Ã´t in much accord. During shots of lesbian coupling, heterosexual women reported less excitement than their vaginas indicated; watching gay men, they reported a great deal less; and viewing heterosexual intercourse, they reported much more. Among the lesbian volunteers, the two readings converged when women appeared on the screen. But when the films featured only men, the lesbians reported less engagement than the plethysmograph recorded. Whether straight or gay, the women claimed almost no arousal whatsoever while staring at the bonobos.
â€šÃ„ÃºI feel like a pioneer at the edge of a giant forest,â€šÃ„Ã¹ Chivers said, describing her ambition to understand the workings of womenâ€šÃ„Ã´s arousal and desire. â€šÃ„ÃºThereâ€šÃ„Ã´s a path leading in, but it isnâ€šÃ„Ã´t much.â€šÃ„Ã¹ She sees herself, she explained, as part of an emerging â€šÃ„Ãºcritical massâ€šÃ„Ã¹ of female sexologists starting to make their way into those woods. These researchers and clinicians are consumed by the sexual problem Sigmund Freud posed to one of his female disciples almost a century ago: â€šÃ„ÃºThe great question that has never been answered and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my 30 years of research into the feminine soul, is, What does a woman want?â€šÃ„Ã¹
Full of scientific exuberance, Chivers has struggled to make sense of her data. She struggled when we first spoke in Toronto, and she struggled, unflagging, as we sat last October in her university office in Kingston, a room she keeps spare to help her mind stay clear to contemplate the intricacies of the erotic. The cinder-block walls are unadorned except for three photographs she took of a temple in India featuring carvings of an entwined couple, an orgy and a man copulating with a horse. She has been pondering sexuality, she recalled, since the age of 5 or 6, when she ruminated over a particular kiss, one she still remembers vividly, between her parents. And she has been discussing sex without much restraint, she said, laughing, at least since the age of 15 or 16, when, for a few male classmates who hoped to please their girlfriends, she drew a picture and clarified the location of the clitoris.
Click to read more
Daniel Bergner – The New York Times
Copyright The New York Times