Talk:Female copulatory vocalizations

Similar female vocalization during solitary masturbation and as a unconscious response during partner sex

Some women will vocalize during solitary masturbation where they are clearly not trying to excite their partner or send any sort of message to a partner. They don't do so necessarily with intent, the vocalization just seems to come out. The same can be said of some women during sex where the women was making noises prior too and especially during her own orgasm while being sexually stimulated in some way by a partner. They dd not concisely think about making noises but it just seem to come it provided they just let themselves go. In some cases where they did not want to be making noises such where they where worried about others overhearing them or about being caught masturbating or having sex or, they had to actively work to suppress the noises. So while this article is mainly about vocalization by females during copulation and other partner sex activities, I think sometime about how similar vocalizations can and do occur in women during solitary masturbation should be mentioned. Also, the fact that some women make noises during sex without conscientiously thinking about it (in other words it just sort of seems to happen if they just let themselves go and don't actively try to suppress it,) needs to be mentioned too in think.--50.152.139.176 (talk) 01:23, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The current section on human copulatory vocalizations for women appears to be written from the male gaze. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is almost no mention of copulatory vocalizations occurring in women without it being discussed in relationship to utility for her male partner. This ignores the vast amount of experiences and perspectives that are valid yet not explored in the current and underdeveloped literature base on this topic. There is a seemingly credulous attitude toward the literature on this topic, with no mention of the limitations of the research articles mention and posits the conclusions of these studies as facts (ex. "On the other hand, recent studies have indicated that most copulatory vocalizations in women do not accompany their own orgasm, but rather their partner’s ejaculation.")

Is FCV restricted to primates?

I see no reference in this article for a source that defines FCV as restricted to primates. I will look in the literature and if I can find no source, I will change the article to reflect FCV as relevant to animals in general. Michaplot (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

No - a larger Google Scholar literature search using the term "female copulatory calls" reveals that there's been a good deal of documentation of this phenomenon in many bird and mammal species. This is one of the many places where the article could use expansion. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 14:34, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Topic needs expansion/more sources

I've been doing a Google Scholar search on the topic of "copulatory vocalizations" or as it's more commonly called in the scientific literature, "copulation calls", and it seems this is a much broader topic than the fairly limited scope of this article. There's a good deal of literature on this phenomenon in birds and non-primate mammals which is not mentioned here. There's also a smaller set of literature on male copulation calls, and additionally, literature on pre- and post-copulation calls, which are distinct phenomena in some species. It seems like there needs to be a broader article on the topic than this, with the "female" part of the title dropped in favor of broader coverage of the topic.

It would also seem that the phenomenon of copulatory vocalizations in human beings is a large enough topic to get its own breakout article, and should be include cultural attitudes and literary/artistic depictions of sexual vocalization.

In any event, I'm not sure there needs to be a separate article covering female and male copulatory vocalizations, though at least in humans, female vocalization is more pronounced and more studied, and would occupy the bulk of an article on copulatory vocalizations in human beings.

I'm somewhat concerned about the over-reliance on "Sex at Dawn" as a source, a popular work who's scientific validity has been called into question. It would be best if the original papers that Christopher Ryan cites were looked at directly and that research summarized. Ryan's own take on these studies is largely speculative, however. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 15:22, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

RFC genderneutral section

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There's no consensus to add some such thing. Kraxler (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

---

Do you support adding a genderneutral section such as this or a variation thereof or should this article remain solely focused on women? Freidnless lnoner (talk) 02:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• Support. For three reasons: (a) As the nominator (b) because the article seems a bit short and (c) the article incorrectly implies only women make copulatory vocalizations. Freidnless lnoner (talk) 02:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC) blocked sockpuppet
• Support. I had suggested this during the AfD and no one mentioned any concerns, and the change will accommodate content such as the male tortoise noises reported here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose - and send this article to AfD. BMK (talk) 03:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
• Comment in the gender neutral text 'and some jurisdictions have laws against such incidents when they get too loud' is sourced to a BBC story, there is no such law in the UK. The law used in this specific (very rare, possibly unique) case is a law prohibiting ANY persistent, unreasonable disturbance to neighbours. The text should be rephrased if used. On the general proposition I am unsure, parts of this article seem to be about human sexuality, parts about social norms and parts about animal behaviour. Theoretically I see no need to seperate by gender if research exists for both sexes. Though I also see no need for the article itself as a subject distinct from human sexual intercourse or human orgasm or in the respective animals.Pincrete (talk) 13:19, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
• Comment: An article about copulatory vocalisations is valid and encyclopaedic. Why do we have an article about female vocalisations exclusively? I support an expanded, scientifically-oriented article touching on all species and sexes. As such, including a gender-neutral section in an article titled "female vocalisations" makes no sense whatsoever. Naturally, such an article would touch on differences between sexes and their corresponding behaviours, and would appropriately have a Human subsection wherein socially and culturally acceptable practices would be highlighted in a neutral and reliable manner. This needs an overhaul. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:03, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
• OpposeThere is a corpus of literature on female copulatory vocalization as distinctive and much less on male copulatory vocalization. The focus of the article on female is appropriate as this is an area of active research. I can see a section within the article on distinctions between or comparisons with male vocalizations. Or the article could be retitled as Copulatory Vocalizations and have sections of males (would be short) and females. However I am fine with the way it is and don't think we need the gender neutral bit.Michaplot (talk) 23:23, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Chimpanzees

In addition to the baboons, where the copulatory vocalization serves announcing sexual availability, in other primates the copulatory vocalization servers other purposes. For example, according to the paternity confusion hypothesis, chimpanzees want to confuse males and and make them unsure wether they are the father or not, in order to reduce the probability of infanticide. So in addition to the baboon paragraph in this article, a paragraph dedicated to the copulatory vocalization in chimanzees could be added.

See also: Townsend SW, Deschner T, Zuberbühler K (2008) Female Chimpanzees Use Copulation Calls Flexibly to Prevent Social Competition. PLoS ONE 3(6): e2431. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002431 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octavius93 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography additions

I intend to edit this article over the next few weeks. Here are some relevant sources that may be used:

Pradhan, G. R., Engelhardt, A., van Schaik, C. P., & Maestripieri, D. (2006). The evolution of female copulation calls in primates: A review and a new model. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 59(3), 333-343.

Hasegawa, T. (1989). Sexual behavior of immigrant and resident female chimpanzees at mahale. Understanding chimpanzees. (pp. 90-103) Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Oda, R., & Masataka, N. (1995). Function of copulatory vocalizations in mate choice by females of japanese macaques (macaca fuscata). Folia Primatologica, 64(3), 132-139.

Peretti, A., Eberhard, W. G., & Briceño, R. D. (2006). Copulatory dialogue: Female spiders sing during copulation to influence male genitalic movements. Animal Behaviour, 72(2), 413-421.

Oryx7892 (talk) 23:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia Project Bibliography

Sources that my group and I intend to use:

Dixson, A. (2013). Primate Sexuality: Comparative Studies of the Prosimians, Monkeys, Apes, and Humans. Oxford: UOP.

Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2008). The Evolutionary Biology of Human Female Sexuality. Oxford University Press. p.97

Hauser, M. (2000). The Evolution of Communication (4th ed.). The MIT Press.

Kappeler, P. M., & van Shaik, C. (2000). Sexual Selection in Primates: New and Comparative Perspectives. Cambridge University Press. p.59 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roja123 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography for the Wikipedia Project (University of Warwick)

Oryx7892, Roja123 and I (Octavius93) intend to improve this article using sources such as:

Semple, S., McCOMB, K. A. R. E. N., Alberts, S., & Altmann, J. (2002). Information content of female copulation calls in yellow baboons. American Journal of Primatology, 56(1), 43-56.

Hnezi, P. S. (1996). Copulation calls and paternity in chacma baboons. Animal Behaviour, 51(1), 233-234.

Hauser, M. D. (1993). Rhesus monkey copulation calls: honest signals for female choice?. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 254(1340), 93-96.

Nikitopoulos, E., Arnhem, E., van Hooff, J. A., & Sterck, E. H. (2004). Influence of female copulation calls on male sexual behavior in captive Macaca fascicularis. International Journal of Primatology, 25(3), 659-677.

Brewer, G., & Hendrie, C. A. (2011). Evidence to suggest that copulatory vocalizations in women are not a reflexive consequence of orgasm. Archives of sexual behavior, 40(3), 559-564. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octavius93 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Peer review

This is a really well informed article. The level of detail included is of a very good standard, especially the facts and figures used at the beginning which add some context to the information being presented.

It may make the article easier to read if any images could be included (e.g. in the non-human primate section) to make it look more interesting and to break up the text.

Another suggestions could be to avoid use of phrases such as 'on the other hand' and 'furthermore', to make the article sound less like an essay.

In terms of content, a few sentences could be added explaining the main ways in which female copulatory vocalisations can differ from male copulatory vocalisations for example, explanations for why they differ in frequency. Also, whilst there is some description of the different types of female copulatory calls in female humans, that may also be useful to say this in the 'among women' section and to describe the frequency of different types of copulatory calls before talking about the reasons.

There is ongoing research in this area, so it may be worth mentioning that a lot of the findings are only suggestions by experts and more research needs to be done in this area to clarify some of the reasons and functions of copulatory calls. Navinadgandhi (talk) 02:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Update: I have copyedited the page and made the following changes: I have changed the title of the last section to ‘In humans’ to keep it more consistent with they way that the other sub-headings have been phrased. I have also added two commas to the last sentence under the subheading ‘in non-primates’ before and after the word ‘however’ to help the sentence flow better. Lastly i have split the second paragraph under the sub-heading ‘in non-human primates’ to two separate ones to make it easier to read.Navinadgandhi (talk) 02:44, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions, they are very useful, especially the idea of talking about different calls! I will add something on it. Roja123 (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Peer review II:

Overall this is a good article with interesting and insightful information. Throughout, appropriate words and phrases are hyperlinked to other related wikipedia pages. I do have a few suggestions to further improve the article as follows:

- Under the heading 'in non-primates', expand on what you mean by the vocalisations having 'different purposes'. Perhaps provide examples of what these might be. Furthermore, consider changing the the order of information presented here; it may be better to follow the example of the Mice calls in Hz from when you mentioned 'different frequencies'- at the moment the information appears quite fragmented.

- I would also perhaps advise separating the section on humans into the biological/evolutionary perspective (e.g. 'ensure that the seminal pool is available for her cervix to dip into as her vagina relaxes after her orgasm), and the the more social/psychological aspects of copulatory vocalisations (e.g. 'boost his enjoyment or self-esteem'), - at the moment, the different aspects of human copulatory vocalisations appear to be mixed. (R.g.rooney25 (talk) 20:31, 14 March 2016 (UTC))

I have made a few small alterations concerning the grammar and punctuation: Under the 'Non-primates' heading, for now, I have altered the sentence 'different purposes, different properties and frequencies.' to 'different purposes, properties and frequencies' (However, as I mentioned above, I would consider separting these 3 aspects and elaborating further with them). I have also changed 'African Elephants, however..', to 'However, African Elephants' as I believe it reads better. Under the heading 'humans', I think it's better if the phrasing of 'men's' and 'man's' is changed to 'male'- for example, I have changed the phrase 'which men’s vocalization typically lacks' to 'which male vocalization typically lacks',and I've changed 'Reasons for wanting to boost the man’s self-esteem included..' to 'Reasons for wanting to boost male self-esteem included..', as again, it reads better. (R.g.rooney25 (talk) 22:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC))

Peer review III:

I think the article has been really well considered and the structure is really good, especially with the way you have made access to other wiki pages really easy through hyperlinks. All I can really recommend is focusing a little bit more in the evolutionary advantages/disadvantages of the human copulatory vocalisation, and maybe explain what a few terms mean (e.g. the seminal pool) so that the article maintains how accessible it is to people who know lots about this topic and people who don't. It's really good though, I've just been nit-picking! Robotsbackspaceraomeow (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• World 06 temp-1416046030-546725ce-620x348.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Male copulatory vocalizations?

Is there no corresponding page?

Should there not be a single “copulatory vocalizations” page with subsections? 2600:1700:BA0:FC40:3129:F66E:1FEF:F6C4 (talk) 03:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC)