<h3>No, men and women process sexual stimuli differently.</h3>
<p>Put succinctly, men are aroused by seeing sexual things, but women typically are not. Women, by contract, are more aroused by sexual relationships, which is why the female equivalent of a pornographic movie is a romance novel.</p>
<p>Here's a quote on the topic from <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evolution-the-self/201205/the-triggers-sexual-desire-pt-2-what-s-erotic-women" rel="nofollow noreferrer">an article</a> on Psychology Today, which is in turn quoting the book <em>A Billion Wicked Thoughts</em> by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;Women respond to a truly astonishing range of cues across many domains. The physical appearance of a man, his social status, personality, commitment, the authenticity of his emotions, his confidence, family, attitude toward children, kindness, height, and smell. . . . Unlike men, who become aroused after being exposed to a single cue, women need to experience enough simultaneous cues to cross an ever-varying threshold. Sometimes, just a few overwhelming cues can take a woman there. Other times, it takes a very large number of moderate cues ... For women, no single cue is either necessary or sufficient&quot; (p. 212).</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-06T10:34:57.517Z
2021-12-06T10:34:57.517Z
nick012000
<p>This goes along with <a href="https://labs.psych.ucsb.edu/roney/james/other%20pdf%20readings/Bem%25201996%2520Exotic%2520becomes%2520erotic.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bem's (1996)</a> developmental theory that proposes that the exotic becomes erotic.</p>
<p>More specifically, this is called the EBE (exotic becomes erotic) theory.</p>
<p>Generally speaking, EBE unravels the biological correlates of sexual orientation. More specifically, Peplau et al. (1998) explains that the theory proposes</p>
<blockquote>
<p>that adults are erotically attracted to the gender-based class of
peers (males or females) who were dissimilar or unfamiliar to them in
childhood.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This theory has been criticized as having several limitations. For example, <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-01102-009" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Peplau et al. (1998)</a> explains that EBE can not be applied to gender diverse individuals</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bem's conceptualization of erotic desire and his analysis of gender
nonconformity illustrate this problem.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Moreover, the theory is also criticized for being biased towards the perceptions of men, discounting perceptions of women and gender diverse.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-01T20:53:40.913Z
2021-12-01T20:58:59.023Z
2021-12-01T20:58:59.023Z
stephan_phd
<p>Heterosexual men love to ogle breasts; the bigger(usually) the better and often are one of the first things they look at. Women have more erroneous zones than men and they don’t really have the pleasure of seeing the male penis since it is always covered up. So do women get the same charge out of seeing a phallus like a man would seeing breasts?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-01T18:49:11.190Z
Possible duplicate of [What does scientific research say about the relationship between penis size and attractiveness?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/4055/7001)
Arnon Weinberg
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-01T21:23:32.620Z
I disagree. The linked question has very little in the way of being a duplicate. "How sexually stimulating is a penis compared to breasts" (I think the question could be generalized and academicized a lot better) is not "are bigger penises more sexually stimulating"
Feryll
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-01T22:25:55.600Z
I agree the question needs to be more focused to asking for research and theory in this area (in psychology and related fields)
stephan_phd
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-02T02:52:20.283Z
[Your Erroneous Zones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_Erroneous_Zones) spent 64 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list.  Perhaps reading that book would help.
Ray Butterworth
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-07T01:17:53.193Z
Note that in some cultures, breasts are normally left exposed and not generally considered sexual parts.
Ray Butterworth
<sexuality><sex-differences><arousal>
Do women see the phallus with the same amount of sexual excitement as a man seeing breasts?
Max
# Do women see the phallus with the same amount of sexual excitement as a man seeing breasts?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-01)

Heterosexual men love to ogle breasts; the bigger(usually) the better and often are one of the first things they look at. Women have more erroneous zones than men and they don’t really have the pleasure of seeing the male penis since it is always covered up. So do women get the same charge out of seeing a phallus like a man would seeing breasts?

**Tags:** sexuality, sex-differences, arousal

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Possible duplicate of [What does scientific research say about the relationship between penis size and attractiveness?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/4055/7001)  
> **username_2**: I disagree. The linked question has very little in the way of being a duplicate. "How sexually stimulating is a penis compared to breasts" (I think the question could be generalized and academicized a lot better) is not "are bigger penises more sexually stimulating"  
> **username_3**: I agree the question needs to be more focused to asking for research and theory in this area (in psychology and related fields)  
> **username_4**: [Your Erroneous Zones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_Erroneous_Zones) spent 64 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list.  Perhaps reading that book would help.  
> **username_4**: Note that in some cultures, breasts are normally left exposed and not generally considered sexual parts.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2021-12-06. Score: 1

### No, men and women process sexual stimuli differently.

Put succinctly, men are aroused by seeing sexual things, but women typically are not. Women, by contract, are more aroused by sexual relationships, which is why the female equivalent of a pornographic movie is a romance novel.

Here's a quote on the topic from [an article](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evolution-the-self/201205/the-triggers-sexual-desire-pt-2-what-s-erotic-women) on Psychology Today, which is in turn quoting the book *A Billion Wicked Thoughts* by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam:

> "Women respond to a truly astonishing range of cues across many domains. The physical appearance of a man, his social status, personality, commitment, the authenticity of his emotions, his confidence, family, attitude toward children, kindness, height, and smell. . . . Unlike men, who become aroused after being exposed to a single cue, women need to experience enough simultaneous cues to cross an ever-varying threshold. Sometimes, just a few overwhelming cues can take a woman there. Other times, it takes a very large number of moderate cues ... For women, no single cue is either necessary or sufficient" (p. 212).


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2021-12-01. Score: 0

This goes along with [Bem's (1996)](https://labs.psych.ucsb.edu/roney/james/other%20pdf%20readings/Bem%25201996%2520Exotic%2520becomes%2520erotic.pdf) developmental theory that proposes that the exotic becomes erotic.

More specifically, this is called the EBE (exotic becomes erotic) theory.

Generally speaking, EBE unravels the biological correlates of sexual orientation. More specifically, Peplau et al. (1998) explains that the theory proposes

> that adults are erotically attracted to the gender-based class of
> peers (males or females) who were dissimilar or unfamiliar to them in
> childhood.

This theory has been criticized as having several limitations. For example, [Peplau et al. (1998)](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-01102-009) explains that EBE can not be applied to gender diverse individuals

> Bem's conceptualization of erotic desire and his analysis of gender
> nonconformity illustrate this problem.

Moreover, the theory is also criticized for being biased towards the perceptions of men, discounting perceptions of women and gender diverse.


---

