Me, a sadist. My new discovery *WARNING. TRIGGER, GRAPHIC*

Ah, well now I think you're talking about something different, that for women doesn't actually have that much to do with sexual orientation.

I could, using your own words, engage in "normal" sexual activity with living men or women, without even being attracted to them. (I'm a female necrophile btw). But that doesn't have anything to do with my sexual orientation. Sexual orientation doesn't perfectly match up to who you have sex with. Ask anyone who has a paraphilia they haven't acted on. It also isn't as simple as "conditioning yourself to a certain stimulus".

Going back to ElKahn's topic though...he happens to have pedophilia and sadism as a sexual orientation of sorts. Based on this, I don't think conditioning will really do much to help him. He was never conditioned to be a pedophile or a sadist so I don't think he can be unconditioned.

Kirill wrote:(some scientists even doubt that pedophilia exists among females)

Those scientists are idiots.

yeah, I am so sick of the bias against female paraphiles. There's so much evidence to say that women can have paraphilias (for example, women on this site).

Well, scientists have a lot of misinformation about paraphilias in general so I guess I'm not surprised they have the demographic information wrong.

I wonder how many of those "scientists" are psychologists of any stripe, let alone qualified sexologists.

Given how many of the "scientists" who deny evolution or global warming are in fields where they wouldn't need to know anything about the subject to do their jobs anyway.

I could, using your own words, engage in "normal" sexual activity with living men or women, without even being attracted to them. (I'm a female necrophile btw). But that doesn't have anything to do with my sexual orientation. Sexual orientation doesn't perfectly match up to who you have sex with. Ask anyone who has a paraphilia they haven't acted on. It also isn't as simple as "conditioning yourself to a certain stimulus".

Maybe discrepancy between number of male paraphilics and number of female paraphilics in scientific literature can be explained by the fact that it is easier for female paraphilics to engage in normal sexual activity without changing the core of their sexuality. I don’t know. Female sexuality is mysterious thing. Maybe you are right, and dramatic differences between male and female sexual plasticity don’t exist in humans.

I'm a female necrophile btw

Hi! I know, I read this forum often. I’m a male with autogynephilia.

yeah, I am so sick of the bias against female paraphiles. There's so much evidence to say that women can have paraphilias (for example, women on this site).

Before this forum i thought that paraphilias don’t exist in females, but i changed my mind.

I wonder how many of those "scientists" are psychologists of any stripe, let alone qualified sexologists.

I have no reasons not to trust to James Cantor or Andrej Tkachenko.

Going back to ElKahn's topic though...he happens to have pedophilia and sadism as a sexual orientation of sorts. Based on this, I don't think conditioning will really do much to help him. He was never conditioned to be a pedophile or a sadist so I don't think he can be unconditioned.

I already have tried it. paraphilias/topic112517.html

is easier for female paraphilics to engage in normal sexual activity without changing the core of their sexuality. I don’t know. Female sexuality is mysterious thing. Maybe you are right, and dramatic differences between male and female sexual plasticity don’t exist in humans.

I think it might be as simple as anatomy differences, to be honest.

I have no reasons not to trust to James Cantor or Andrej Tkachenko.

The page with the info about the second guy is in russian so I can't read it. Also it looks like Cantor only studies pedophilia which isn't a bad thing but I don't think the findings can be extrapolated to all paraphilias. In general I think pedophilia gets so much more attention than other paraphilias, though I can I understand why.

Interesting stuff here.

It looks like we are conflating two things that actually aren't the same. Elements of sexuality might be fluid, but that doesn't mean we can choose to change them. We don't necessarily know why attractions and arousals might become different. The fact that they might move, or seem to move, doesn't mean we can steer them around just because it seems like a good idea at the time.

There's a world of difference between the seasons going hot and cold every year, and being able to make them do it on command.

Also, that bit about male homosexuality being more common than female, and male bisexuality being rare - where is that from? I have studied homosexuality a fair bit in my work, and have not heard this.

Kirill wrote:

I wonder how many of those "scientists" are psychologists of any stripe, let alone qualified sexologists.

I have no reasons not to trust to James Cantor

Whereas I tend not to trust people who generalize from prison samples without calling out the problems with doing so.

Kirill wrote:I imply that it is easier for female with homosexual inclination to engage in “normal” heterosexual activity than for homosexual male. It is facts that number of male homosexuals is more than twice greater than number of lesbians, and that male bisexuality is very rare.

I have read about interesting experiment. Male and female goats were raised among ewes and rams. When they became mature, male goats were able to copulate only with ewes, but female goat were able to copulate with males of both species (goats and rams). Authors of this experiment claimed that this can be explained by differences in the level of plasticity in sexuality of males and females.

I can find this and other studies about difference in sexual plasticity in females and males, if you have interest in this topic.

This is one of the most absurd things I have ever read in my entire life, seriously. I'm not saying it's your fault for saying this, but the so-called "scientists" too often talk huge s*it about things especially when it comes to topics related to sex and paraphilias.

lifelongthing, I did not mean to disrespect you in any way, so I'm saying sorry if I came across as aggressive or disrespecting, in reality I respect every victim of abuse.
What I was trying to say is just that each person has their own experience, genetics, mindset, etc., and what works for someone may not work for someone else. Also, there's a difference between abuse victims or trauma-induced paraphilias and paraphilias present in someone since birth and part of their sexual orientation, tastes and "preference", if you wanna call it that.
Again, I didn't mean to offend anyone or disrespect anyone, sorry.

This is one of the most absurd things I have ever read in my entire life, seriously. I'm not saying it's your fault for saying this, but the so-called "scientists" too often talk huge s*it about things especially when it comes to topics related to sex and paraphilias.

Females and males are very different. There are reasons why autism is more prevalent among males than among females.

"For some time, the 4:1 ratio of male:female occurrence in ASD puzzled researchers, but recent studies now connect autism to the offset of hormone metabolism between genders and various genetic roles in development which may increase phenotypic presentation of symptoms in males. Females with the same mutations that give rise to ASD in males have stronger protection from the effects of these mutations."

Why can’t the similar mechanisms explain discrepancy between number of male paraphilics and number of female paraphilics? Maybe females with the same mutations (or other factors) that give rise to exclusive paraphilia in males have stronger protection from the effects of these mutations and can have more "normal" sexuality, less exclusive paraphilia.