Vaginal Fantasy Book Club discussion

Kushiel's Dart (Phèdre's Trilogy, #1)
This topic is about Kushiel's Dart
2012 Archives > Jun 2012: Twenty-seven for men and forty-five for women

Comments Showing 1-9 of 9 (9 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Erin (new) - added it

Erin | 4 comments "Twenty-seven places on a man's body and forty-five on a woman's that provoke intense desire when appropriately stimulated" pg 31

After I read this I became really curious about why so little for men. I'm also kind of curious what these spots all are. Did anyone else find this kind of a curious statement?

I can only speculate on what they are now, unless they say further on in the book. I'm only a little past the page I read this on.

What do you think? Is elbows included? Maybe behind the knee? 25 and 47 are big numbers!

message 2: by Jes (new) - rated it 2 stars

Jes (tiaama) | 110 comments Oh yes... that statement made me stop and contemplate for a while. I thought "hey women have more spots yeah!" and then tried to figure out what they were. I am running out of places to think about!
I am thinking it may be based on sexual reflexology, but I am wary of clicking on the wrong link on google!Sexual Reflexology: Activating the Taoist Points of Love

message 3: by Erin (new) - added it

Erin | 4 comments Jes, I told my boyfriend about it and he thought the numbers seemed high too. I'll have to take a look at that link to see if it helps grasp the largeness of the numbers.

Ashlynn | 22 comments I don't know if this makes sense at all but I could lend one possible theory. A friend had told me about a study which actually had to do with why 50 Shades of Grey is so popular. But strangely enough I think I can relate it to this. Males tend to need very direct stimulation whereas females tend to be more in their minds about things (which can both help and hurt). In that article it was comparing girls reading things like 50 while men tend to prefer to actually have visual stimulation. So getting to my point maybe a similar principle applies to touch. Women can anticipate and imagine more from a simple touch then men perhaps and therefore there are more "spots". Just conjecture of course.

Karly (karlycay) Eh, women are aroused by visuals just as much as men are. Women might ALSO be turned on by novels more than men (haven't read a study on that), but women respond to visual stimuli just as well, I think they are just less likely to admit it.

I think the popularity of 50 shades is just a testament to the power of word of mouth and the fact that women love sex, not a testament to women loving a certain kind of book or a certain kind of sex. But that's off topic.. I have no idea what the spots could be. Whoops.

AnnaBanana Pascone (snapdragnful) | 89 comments I thought it was just part of the fiction. Like, the D'Angelines are so far advanced in comparison to normal people that they know more than we ever could. Or because they have angel blood, they actually HAVE more than normal people. Good heavens, finding them all would be exhausting.

AnnaBanana Pascone (snapdragnful) | 89 comments Off topic: 50 Shades of Grey is Twilight fan fic. How many men are fans of Twilight in comparison to women? I don't think you need a study to figure out why women are more likely to read it.

Ashlynn | 22 comments The article was about 50 Shades cause that's the current fad, but really it could apply to any kind of romance novel/erotic fiction. Women can be just as stimulated visually as men. I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case. The point was females tend (and this is only a generalization I'm sure there are exceptions) to be more receptive to less direct stimulation.
Whether this line is true or not is another story, but I could see where it might be possible.

message 9: by Erin (new) - added it

Erin | 4 comments AnnaBanana wrote: "Good heavens, finding them all would be exhausting. "

I definitely agree that it would be exhausting! How would you be certain that you didn't already count the one you just counted...Yeah. It can't be real.

back to top