In other words, a rose by any other smell will smell as sweet.
On the other hand, it’s possible that the havoc the Pill plays on smell preferences may be contributing to the high rates of divorce in developed countries where Pill use is prevalent. As long as you’re in love with someone, they’re going to smell good to you. But if you fell in love with someone while you were on the Pill, and you’re having relationship difficulties now that you’re off the Pill, it’s possible the situation is adding olfactory insult to relationship injury. And given how repulsive bad odors can be, it’s possible that this change in smell perception makes it very difficult for a couple in this situation to reconcile. Herz believes:
If I now smell you differently given that I’m not on the Pill and I don’t like you much anymore, then your smell is going to become highly offensive. If someone smells bad to you, the act of being intimate with them sexually is, I think, next to impossible. I have wondered whether or not the reason for the consistency of this complaint [about their partners’ smell] and, potentially, the reason for this high, high rate of divorce, has to do with having been on the Pill, then going off the Pill, and the meaning of the man’s scent changing and, therefore, this sort of revulsion setting in and no longer being able to be with the person.
None of this is to say that the Pill is going to destroy your relationship. But it would be nice if there were oral contraceptive options that didn’t interfere with a woman’s olfactory radar, right? Well, guess what may one day be coming to a pharmacy near you?
A male pill. Well, it might be a patch, a gel, or an injection, but you get the idea.
A series of clinical trials has now demonstrated that a mix of hormones administered to men can—reversibly—halt production of sperm. The studies show that normal sperm production resumes in about three months. Most of the formulations under research involve the administration of testosterone together with progestin in one form or another. Some people believe that implanting the drug might make it more effective, which would also give men a “badge of honor” allowing them to certify to their current partners that they’re actually not currently fertile. There’s still a lot of work to be done, but scientists are getting closer. The latest efforts target the testicles directly, which is where sperm are produced. And if that doesn’t work, there’s always soy.
Recent research published in 2008 by a team from Harvard seems to back up the idea that increased consumption of soy and related isoflavones can result in lower sperm counts in men. Soy contains many phytoestrogen compounds similar to those that kept those sheep eating European red clover from getting pregnant. Very importantly, men did not become sterile from soy consumption; their sperm counts just dipped down. Although it may lead to new avenues of future contraception research, it’s still a bit premature for men to turn to tofu instead of condoms.
It’s not clear when a reversible chemical male contraceptive will hit the market—but it’s clear that it’s coming. And that will give us one more opportunity to examine what happens when we try to pull the wool over nature’s eyes. Or nose.
CHAPTER 9
good vibrations
New developments in contraception are just one way scientific discoveries and technological breakthroughs are going to continue to change the way we live together, get together, and have sex. Advances in disciplines as diverse as chemistry, robotics, and communications are multiplying the possibilities for sexual interaction, just as they’re changing the way we live our daily lives. There’s one big difference between technology’s effect on sex and its effect on everything else. You can always go back to the good old days. It’s pretty hard to live in the twenty-first century and avoid electronic communication in some form or another, for example. But when it comes to sex, with its relatively easy mode of use, the old-fashioned way will never go out of style.
As we’ve discussed throughout the book, the intersection of technology and sex isn’t actually new, either: humans have been using technology, in the form of cosmetics and herbal medicine and all kinds of mechanical devices, to sex up our sex lives for thousands of years. There are written records of oral contraceptives that go back more than two thousand years and written records of condoms that go back more than five hundred years. Humans turned to surgery to enhance or fix their sexual appeal centuries before breast implants made their controversial debut. Even the vibrator—the most popular sex toy in the world today—is already about a century and a half old.
None of which should come as much of a surprise, given how important sex is to human life. More or less a prerequisite, in fact. So it makes sense that as long as we’ve had the capacity to innovate, we’ve been innovating our sex lives. In fact, it’s this capacity to take control over our sex lives—and so many other aspects of our lives—that really sets us apart from other animals.
Evolution’s twin imperatives—survival and reproduction—have driven the development of sex in every species that has it. Evolution is behind the development of those species that reproduce asexually too, of course. For starters, remember that sexual reproduction may have evolved as a double-barreled mechanism that allows each generation the best possible chance for survival. It also gives parents a chance to spare their offspring a nasty inheritance of free-loading parasites, and it allows for a genetic reshuffling of the deck that can increase the survival odds of a species with the creation of new traits.
Of course, evolution isn’t the type to just set the table and see who shows up for dinner. Which explains the development of sexual behaviors and rewards. In humans, it is pleasure which promotes bonding between couples. Evolution, in other words, will set the table, pick the flowers, pour the wine, and write the menu—over and over again.
All of this is as true for humans as it is for every other species that uses sex for reproduction. Evolutionary pressures to find the right mate (or mates) and reproduce with them are behind much of our sexual desires and behavior. The cross-cultural preference for hourglass-shaped women is connected to nature’s never-ending preference for fertile, healthy partners with well-suited traits. Who knew that a woman turned on by a man’s smell may actually be enjoying the alluring scent of his human leukocyte antigen, that key part of our immune system? That men may be more appealing to some women if they are darker, because having more pigment in their skin helps them block out UV sun rays that can lower folate levels, which means they have better sperm than their lighter-skinned brethren. Or that, if there is a genetic link to homosexuality in males, it may be a gene or a combination of genes that make heterosexual women especially attracted to men, encouraging them to reproduce more.
We also now know that evolution’s obsession with reproduction may have left its traces in a penchant for infidelity. On the other hand, its equally strong fixation on survival may be found in the way sex reinforces the abiding love that brings and keeps two people together and helps them raise a family. Some researchers even believe that sex is responsible for the most uniquely human trait of them all—our big brains. Psychologist Geoffrey Miller, in his book The Mating Mind, argues that the development of our relatively large human brain may have evolved to meet the demands of courtship and, thus, sex.
If he’s right, that would really bring things full circle. Because it’s that big brain that gives us a chance no other species seems to have. Every other species under the sun is governed by its sexual instincts and urges, but we don’t have to be. We can choose to give in to all those evolutionary pressures and physical instincts, or override them, as challenging as that may seem sometimes. Evolution cannot make anyone unfaithful, and it’s not responsible if you cheat. Instead, evolution has given us the power to be whoever and however we aspire to be. If you have an extra X-or Y-chromosome, are transgendered, straight, gay, or bi, it’s your big brain that gives you the power to stay faithful just as it gives you the power to say no to another helping of cake or go to the gym or pay extra attention to your son’s children even if they didn’t inherit your mi
tochondria.
And new technology is only going to increase our ability to take control of our lives, sex lives included. Cosmetic surgery is one way. Contraception is another. New technology can even help couples in long-distance relationships to maintain a sexual connection when they’re apart. Sexual remote interaction technology—termed teledildonics—allows someone to remotely manipulate a vibrator being used by his or her partner through the Internet. And, of course, it’s not all sexual fun and games. Technology can help us overcome the challenges of sexual reproduction too, giving us new insight and understanding into diseases of sexual development (or intersexuality) and better options to help people manage them. And fertility treatments, which have already given thousands of people with reproductive problems or sexual dysfunction the ability to have children, are constantly improving. We may even see the successful cloning of humans in the next few years.
That’s the great power and gift of humanity. We are not simply ruled by our physical condition, even when it comes to sex, that most intimate and physical of acts. We can ask why, discover an answer, and then ask, what now?
Of course, the more we know, the more we realize how much we have to learn. Most doctors are completely unfamiliar with female ejaculation, for example, sometimes leading to all kinds of unnecessary procedures to “cure” an incontinence problem that doesn’t exist. In the last few years, science has made some startling sex-related discoveries that have enormous potential to save lives—such as the new vaccine against HPV which has the potential to save millions of women from cervical cancer. We’ve learned how herpes can influence an individual’s sexual behavior through “oral exploration,” in order to facilitate its own transmission. We are reminded about the incredible interconnectedness of all life, as a seemingly minor trend in personal grooming—the Brazilian wax—may be pushing a species, the pubic louse, (admittedly a pretty unattractive one) toward extinction.
At the same time that we continue to push the frontiers of sexual science, we need to make sure that people are equipped with the knowledge that they need to have safer, healthier and more rewarding sex lives. It ought to be astonishing, for example, that one in five American high school girls doesn’t know how HIV is transmitted. And millions of adults still don’t know enough about how to get the most out of their relationship with their partners.
You want to know what the magic ingredient to a good sex life is? Understanding.
Realize that it may not be possible to completely escape evolution’s grasp. So what can we do? Be open and adapt. Understand what you like, and why you like it. Learning about the influences that millions of years of trial and error have played in our evolution as a species can bring us closer to breaking free from instincts and make informed choices.
The more we understand how sex works, the greater the opportunity we have to enjoy one of evolution’s greatest gifts.
notes
Chapter 1: Girls Just Want to Have Fun
For a long time, menarche: See K. Zhang, S. Pollack, A. Ghods, C. Dicken, B. Isaac, G. Adel, G. Zeitlian, and N. Santoro, “Onset of Ovulation After Menarche in Girls: A Longitudinal Study,” J Clin Endocrinol Metab 93, no. 4 (2008): 1186–1194.
Something strange is affecting: M. G. Elder, Obstetrics and Gynaecology: Clinical and Basic Science Aspects (Imperial College Press, 2001); see also W. C. Chumlea et al., “Age at Menarche and Racial Comparisons in U.S. Girls,” Pediatrics 111 (2003): 110–113. G. Chodick, A. Rademaker, M. Huerta, R. Balicer, N. Davidovitch, I. Grotto, “Secular Trends in Age at Menarche, Smoking, and Oral Contraceptive Use Among Israeli Girls,” Prev Chronic Disease 2, no. 2 (2005): A12; X. Du, H. Greenfield, D. R. Fraser, K. Ge, W. Zheng, L. Huang, and Z. Liu, “Low Body Weight and Its Association with Bone Health and Pubertal Maturation in Chinese Girls,” European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 57 (2003): 693–700.
According to psychosocial acceleration theory: B. J. Ellis, “Timing of Pubertal Maturation in Girls: An Integrated Life History Approach,” Psychology Bulletin 130, no. 6 (2004): 920–958.
Then there’s a theory: Matchock, R. L., and Susman, E. J., “Family composition and menarcheal age: anti-inbreeding strategies,” American Journal of Human Biology, 18(4) (2006): 481–491.
Another theory that has been: J. Lee, M. P. H. Appugliese, N. Kaciroti, R. Corwyn, R. Bradley, J. Lumeng, “Weight Status in Young Girls and the Onset of Puberty,” Pediatrics 119, no. 3 (2007): 624–630.
One study suggests: W. D. Lassek and S. J. Gaulin, “Brief Communication: Menarche Is Related to Fat Distribution,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 133, no. 4 (2007): 1147–1151.
“This fat is protected: Ibid.
Whatever the biological cause: P. Gluckman and M. Hanson, Mismatch: Why Our World No Longer Fits Our Bodies (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2006).
Human breasts are unique: For additional information see the following study, F. E. Mascia-Lees, J. H. Relethford, and T. Sorger, “Evolutionary Perspectives on Permanent Breast Enlargement in Human Females,” American Anthropologist 88, no. 2 (1986): 423–428.
The average size of breasts: V. Lambert, “Why the British Woman’s Cleavage Has Gone from 34B to 36C in a Decade,” Daily Mail, January 23, 2008.
Zoologist and bestselling author: D. Morris, The Naked Woman: A Study of the Female Body. (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2005).
Men also have breasts and nipples: N. Swaminathan, “Strange but True: Males Can Lactate,” Scientific American, September 10, 2007; J. Diamond, “Father’s Milk—Male Mammals’ Potential for Lactation,” Discover, February 1995.
Scaramanga: B. Howard, H. Panchal, A. McCarthy, and A. Ashworth, “Identification of the Scaramanga Gene Implicates Neuregulin-3 in Mammary Gland Specification,” Genes and Development 19, no. 17 (2005): 2078–2090.
A third nipple is not only: L. S. Gendler and K. A. Joseph, “Images in Clinical Medicine: Breast Cancer of an Accessory Nipple,” New England Journal of Medicine 353, no. 17 (2005): 1835.
Breasts aren’t the only: R. W. Taylor, E. Gold, P. Manning, and A. Goulding, “Gender Differences in Body Fat Content Are Present Well Before Puberty,” International Journal of Obstetric-Related Metabolic Disorders 21, no. 11 (1997): 1082–1084. N. Gungor, S. A. Arslanian “Chapter 21. Nutritional disorders: integration of energy metabolism and its disorders in chidhood” in Sperling MA, ed. Pediatric Endocrinology (2nd ed) Philadelphia, Saunders pp. 689–724.
But here’s where: M. Rozmus-Wrzesinska and B. Pawlowski, “Men’s Ratings of Female Attractiveness Are Influenced More by Changes in Female Waist Size Compared with Changes in Hip Size,” Biol Psychol 68, no. 3 (2005): 299–308.
In the early seventeenth century: John Harrington, as quoted in R. Khamsi, “The Hourglass Figure Is Truly Timeless,” New Scientist, January 10, 2007.
Other social research: B. Low, Why Sex Matters: A Darwinian Look at Human Behavior (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000).
In 1996, Harvard researchers: S. F. Lipson and P. T. Ellison, “Comparison of Salivary Steroid Profiles in Naturally Occurring Conception and Non-Conception Cycles,” Human Reproduction 11, no. 10 (1996): 2090–2096.
A 2004 Polish study: G. Jasienska, A. Ziomkiewicz, P. T. Ellison, S. F. Lipson, and I. Thune, “Large Breasts and Narrow Waists Indicate High Reproductive Potential in Women,” Proc Biol Sci 271, no. 1545 (2004): 1213–1217.
Devendra Singh, the psychologist: D. Singh, P. Renn, and A. Singh, “Did the Perils of Abdominal Obesity Affect Depiction of Feminine Beauty in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Century British Literature? Exploring the Health and Beauty Link,” Proc Biol Sci 274, no. 1611 (2007): 891–894. S. Bhattacharya, “Barbie-Shaped Women More Fertile,” New Scientist, May 5, 2004.
Even more fascinating: W. D. Lassek and S. J. C. Gaulin, “Waist-Hip Ratio and Cognitive Ability: Is Gluteofemoral Fat a Privileged Store of Neurodevelopmental Resources?” Evolution and Human Behavior 29 (2008): 26–34
In the hierarchy of attraction: Many papers have been publis
hed on this topic. See, for example, A. C. Little, C. L. Apicella, and F. W. Marlowe, “Preferences for Symmetry in Human Faces in Two Cultures: Data from the UK and the Hadza, an Isolated Group of Hunter-Gatherers,” Proceedings of the Royal Society, B, no. 274 (2007): 3113–3117; I. N. Springer et al., “Facial Attractiveness: Visual Impact of Symmetry Increases Significantly Towards the Midline,” Ann Plast Surg 59, no. 2 (2007): 156–162; D. Perrett et al., “Symmetry and Human Facial Attractiveness,” Evolution and Human Behavior 20, no. 5 (1999): 295–307; M. J. Tovee, K. Tasker, and P. J. Benson, “Is Symmetry a Visual Cue to Attractiveness in the Human Female Body?” Evolution and Human Behavior 21, no. 3 (2000): 191–200; S. Jasienska, P. Lipson, I. Thune, and A. Ziomkiewicz, “Symmetrical Women Have Higher Potential Fertility,” Evolution and Human Behavior 27, no. 5 (2006): 390–400.
One of the more noticeable: G. Gallup, “Permanent Breast Enlargement in Human Females: A Sociobiological Analysis,” Journal of Human Evolution 11 (1982): 597–601.
A British study published: D. Scutt, G. A. Lancaster, and J. T. Manning, “Breast Asymmetry and Predisposition to Breast Cancer,” Breast Cancer Research 8, no. 2 (2006): R14.
Before we proceed: A few good resource books include: Boston Women’s Health Book Collective, Our Bodies, Ourselves: A New Edition For a New Era, 35th anniversary ed. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2005); C. Livoti and E. Topp, Vaginas: An Owner’s Manual (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2004); N. Angier, Woman: An Intimate Geography (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999).
Even after extreme: E. G. Stewart and P. Spencer, The V Book: A Doctor’s Guide to Complete Vulvovaginal Health (New York: Bantam Books, 2002).
Around the time of: J. Jacobs Brumberg, The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls (New York: Random House, 1997): 98.
Of course, today: C. Hope, “Caucasian Female Body Hair and American Culture,” Journal of American Culture 5, no. 1 (1982): 93.
How Sex Works Page 20