Tag Archives: john sommers flanagan

A Sneak Peek at the Boys and Sex Project

This summer I’m working on a writing project with my daughter Rylee on boys and their sexual development. This is a draft of an excerpt (aka sneak peek) from a chapter focusing on myths of male sexual development. Check it out. Like it if you like it and provide constructive feedback if you don’t. Thanks. Here we go:

We all should know better.

We should know that it doesn’t make good sense to use animal behavior—observations of fruit flies, rats, hamsters, sheep, and other animals—as an explanation or justification for gender-based human behavior. Unless we’re a fancy scientist who can maintain clear objectivity, using animal behavioral models to help explain why boys and girls and men and women behave the way they do is too subjective, self-serving, and risky. But when it involves humor and irony and helps us make a point, resisting this temptation is very difficult.

What Happens When Rams Watch Porn

On a sunny morning in late June, I (John) received a porn ping about Gary Wilson’s TEDx talk titled, “The Great Porn Experiment.” Wilson is an adjunct faculty member at Southern Oregon State University. He’s also co-host, with his wife Marnia Robinson (author of Cupid’s Poisoned Arrow) of the “Your Brain on Porn” website. Wilson’s areas of interest are neuroscience, pornography, and internet porn addiction. In his work he emphasizes the negative neurological and physical consequences of internet porn addiction.

Given all of the above, I was unable to suppress my curiosity and immediately clicked on the link. I was immediately transported to that amazing internet dimension where I could watch and listen to Gary Wilson tell me about The Great Porn Experiment.

Less than 90 seconds into his TEDx talk, Wilson wandered away from talking about humans, moving to something that he obviously found much more interesting—1960 research data on the sexual behavior of rams and ewes (male and female sheep). He stated: “Mother nature likes to keep a male fertilizing willing females as long as any new ones are around.” [He then began discussing a graph of the “minutes to ejaculation” for rams with either the “same old ewe” or with fresh new ewe partners].

Wilson continued: “In that top line, the ram, he needs more and more time to mate with the same old ewe. But if you keep switching females, the bottom line, he, well, it’s just not the same (audience laughter). He can get the job done in two minutes flat and get the job done until he is utterly exhausted. This is known as the Coolidge effect.” (We’ll get to the story about the Coolidge effect later; for now we’re sticking with Wilson and his sheep story).

Reflections on Ram-Ewe Sexual Behavior

Okay. After less than 2 minutes of Wilson’s TEDx talk (ironically, about the same amount of time it took the rams to “get the job done”), I could no longer focus and had to turn off the video to reflect on my thoughts and feelings. I found myself both intellectually stimulated and emotionally annoyed. Intellectually, I began wondering if perhaps it’s perfectly normal and evolutionarily natural for me to find females—other than my wife—more sexually stimulating. I wondered if maybe I should want to behave like a ram and ejaculate every 2 minutes with a new sexual partner (preferably human) until I’m exhausted—because, after all, that’s apparently what Mother Nature wants. Although this sounded intriguing, I instantly decided that due to the sexual partnering messages I’ve gotten for 50+ years through the media, for this arrangement to work, I would need to have the new available sexual partners be supermodels with no pores who are solely interested in my personal sexual stimulation and gratification (with no lingering conversation required subsequent to my 2 minute ejaculations).

Why is it that Wilson’s TEDx talk annoyed me in less time than it takes male sheep to move on to a new partner? Well, because of the amazing processing skills and speed of the human brain, I can formulate my answer to that question even faster than I can click a mouse. My annoyance rose up because there are so many things wrong with taking a research study on the sexual behavior of sheep and generalizing it to humans that hearing the story produced a negative emotional reaction. And what makes this even worse is the fact that I support Wilson’s conclusions (too much internet porn is bad for male sexuality and sexual performance), but lament his intellectual methods.

An Alternative Interpretation (or Are Human Males Only Interested in Ejaculation?)

Let’s start with one, among many, alternative interpretation of the 1960 sheep sex data. If you recall, Wilson noted that the rams “needed more and more time to mate with the same old ewe.” The way he stated this implies that the ONLY or EXCLUSIVE goal in this sexual situation is for the ram to ejaculate. Funny thing: I shared the research results with my wife and she suggested that perhaps the ram felt more comfortable, less anxious, and was able to therefore last longer with his regular ewe-partner. Perhaps they lingered together because, although ejaculation may have been one of their goals, the process of their ram-ewe lovemaking was enjoyable in-and-of-itself?

In fact, if ejaculation is really the only goal for human males—as it appears to be for sheep—then masturbating to internet pornography seems an appropriate venue (and unless my editor snips out this comment, I’d be inclined to suggest that sex with sheep may also be in play). However, it seems that based on 21st century coupling behavior, most human males are also interested in establishing and maintaining sexual and intimate relationships with human females (while some are interested in sexual and intimate relationships with other human males). Alyssa Royse, a freelance writer, Seattle-based sex educator, and Good Men Project, noted that, similar to Wilson, the popular culture also has emphasized that when it comes to sex and intimacy, human males are perhaps more ram-like than may be desirable. In a post on the Good Men Project website, she wrote:

I could go on and on, but that point is that popular culture sets up this idea that men are sexual predators who need to resort to trickery and cologne to fulfill their one and only mission, which is sticking their penis in a girl. (Alyssa Royse, http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-danger-in-demonizing-male-sexuality/)

Royse is observing that popular culture also seems to project the idea that males are more ram-like than human.

Seriously . . . What If Human Males Were Like Wilson’s Rams?

Like Wilson, many scientists, journalists, and people on the street fall prey to the temptation to generalize observations of various female and male animals to human gender-based behaviors. Despite the fact that we (both John and Rylee) think that generalizing the results from sheep research to human males can be silly, we also believe it’s important to take these possible generalizations and implications very seriously. Consequently, we will now look closely at and deconstruct Wilson’s sheep-based generalizations to determine just how well they fit humans. Based on the initial 2 minutes of his TEDx talk, here’s our best effort to take his message and translate it into human male sexual behavior:

  • IF a human male happens to have a frontal lobe the size of a ram and therefore cannot consider the pleasure or interests of a partner or future implications of impregnating multiple females . . .
  • AND IF a human male is in the rather unusual and remarkable situation of having several willing human females available. . .
  • AND IF the available and willing human females happen to have the ample breasts, long legs, plump red lips, full lashes, and lack of pores that human males have been conditioned to find attractive . . .
  • AND IF a human male has no moral or social or health inhibitions about sexual behavior with multiple partners
  • AND IF, like our ram brothers, a human male has repeated ejaculation as his ultimate and exclusive goal . . .
  • THEN it would be highly natural (as deemed by Mother Nature) to ejaculate every two minutes with a different woman until reaching a state of exhaustion (presuming the human refractory period—during which a second ejaculation isn’t possible—cooperates and that the human male doesn’t fall asleep after his first ejaculation).

Another way of making the point we’re trying to make is to say: There is very little serious, relevant, or helpful take home message (for humans) from this research on rams and ewes. However, despite its minimal relevance for humans, these research results may be very serious, relevant, and helpful for rams and ewes, scientists who study rams and ewes, and ranchers who want to breed rams and ewes.

A Few Facts about Children and Teenagers and Antidepressant Medications

Information about Antidepressant Medications: What Parents and Concerned Adults Should Know

By John Sommers-Flanagan, Ph.D.

Why You Shouldn’t Have Your Sad, Cranky, or Depressed Child Take Antidepressant Meds?

Several million American children and teenagers take antidepressant meds. This use of antidepressants is unjustified. Here’s why:

1.   Commonly used antidepressants (like Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Celexa, Cymbalta, etc.) don’t have much scientific support. Much of the research shows that antidepressants are no more effective than a sugar pill for reducing depressive symptoms.

2.   Antidepressants have side effects that include hyperactivity, insomnia, stomach pain, agitation, and increased suicide potential.

3    Sexual side effects are of special concern. For example, most antidepressants delay orgasm and can be used to effectively treat premature ejaculation in males; they also may inhibit orgasm in females. No one knows how these side effects influence sexual development

4.   Several years ago the FDA released a Public Health Advisory warning about increased reports of suicidality in youth who had been treated with antidepressants.

5.   Even psychiatric journals acknowledge that non-drug approaches to treating child and adolescent depression should be used before trying medication treatment.

6.   Generally, adding antidepressant medications to non-drug treatments are no more effective than the non-drug treatments by themselves.

7.   As we all know, life is hard and we all have to face challenging situations—situations that can make us feel sad, angry, and guilty. The problem is that antidepressants don’t teach young people anything about handling difficult emotions and coping with life. As our behavior therapy friends like to say, remember, “a pill is not a skill.”

Why You Should Consider Putting Your Child on Antidepressant Medications?

Here are some reasons you might ask a doctor to prescribe antidepressants to your child.

1.   When other, less risky approaches to dealing with depression, such as exercise, a healthier diet, more time listening and caring about the huge stresses of the teen years, and family assistance coping with life’s joys and disappointments have not provided relief.

2.   When counseling or psychotherapy with a credentialed professional who has a positive reputation working with youth has been tried for at least 10 sessions with no improvement. Studies have shown that counseling or psychotherapy is effective in treating depressed youth and the effects may be maintained after the treatment has ended (in contrast to medications, which often must be continued indefinitely).

3.   Your child is actively suicidal and other options haven’t helped. As strange as it may sound, although newer antidepressants appear to increase suicide risk among non-suicidal youth, they can sometimes reduce suicide risk in youth who are already suicidal.

4.   You, or another parent, have a strong history of depression and that depression was dramatically relieved by an antidepressant drug; if so, it may be reasonable, if your child becomes severely depressed, to begin the same medication. Of course, the medication should be closely monitored and you should make sure you’re not confusing your personal struggles with depression with your child’s unique condition.

5.   For personal reasons, it may be your preference and your child’s preference to try medications. If so, you should proceed with caution and work with a physician with a positive reputation.

This information is provided, in part, to balance most of the promotional advertising generated by pharmaceutical companies. It’s very important for consumers to have access to balanced information. Of course, much more information is available on the internet, but I recommend that you do your best to find balanced informational sources. Pharmaceutical companies tend to overstate antidepressant effectiveness and other organizations may demonize antidepressants. The truth is that antidepressant medications help some young people, but they’re not generally very effective, and they produce disturbing side effects. Choosing whether to have your children or teens take antidepressants is a very difficult decision. This handout is designed to provide you a small amount of information that may be helpful to you as you face this challenging decision.