According to my theory of orgasm, I am sure male and female never can get two orgasms together. Here I make a table to show the payoffs of two people in sex game (it also applies to same sex.). If player 1 chooses to be active and player 2 chooses to be passive during a sex game, it means player 1 controls the rhythm and power, and how and where he stimulates arbitrarily by his instinct, until he gets his own purpose – orgasm, it means 1 is his payoffs. Frankly speaking as a passive one, player 2 doesn’t get 0 as her payoffs, but -1, because she can’t only get an orgasm as her payoffs, but the sex game costs her time and body as a tool for the other and vice versa. If play 1 and play 2 both choose to be passive in sex, the result is they can’t get orgasm neither, but don’t have to pay any costs, so it is (0, 0). If both are active to each other, it is a little complicated that each one wants to control rhythm and power by their own instinct, and the result is there will be an irreconcilable conflict between them, and neither can get the own purpose, but pay the costs. So it is (-1,-1). Apparently, (-1,-1) is a strictly dominated strategy for both of them.
It looks like a strictly competitive game as zero-sum between male and female. Precisely, that’s it during orgasm mode, but what we should pay attention to is whether we can make sex game from zero-sum to win-win. In today's world, the concept of zero-sum is gradually replaced by concept of win-win, but I think the zero-sum game will never disappear. Win-win is just a cooperative game, and it needs a lot of things as preconditions.
First, you want to negotiate. Well, the problem is when you need a negotiation with the others. Only in one case: when your payoffs directly or indirectly will be affected by other people’s decision, you should ask for a negotiation. This effect can be positive or negative, but the result of your offer may be not successful. For example, in the Prisoner's Dilemma game, confession is a strictly dominate strategy for each side, but finally they both have suffered a heavier sentence, because there is no opportunity for them to have a collusion before.
When your payoffs will not be affected by anyone under any condition, you can control this game all by yourself, and no need to ask for any negotiation. When there is a conflict between your interests and other’s, theoretically you can totally ignore any interests of other people, just do whatever you want to do. There is no need to have any negotiation for you here. For example, if you are alone, you can decide whether and where you have a lunch by your own mind, and no need to care about other people eat or not.
After you ask for a negotiation to someone, it may not be able to achieve a win-win situation. It depends on the following items.
1, both sides must be intelligent and rational decision-makers. They both have a clear understanding to strengths and weaknesses of two sides, and know what the core interests and the deadline of each side. In one word, they share the same common knowledge. Of course, if the other side is psychopath, you do not need to make any effort to get win-win situation, because he can’t play cards by common sense.
2, both sides want to have a benefit exchange. The important thing is the benefit each want to exchange is not their own core interests, and of course what each gets at least more important than each pays. When the core interests contradiction between the two sides, it is impossible to achieve win-win strategy, and then the game between them just becomes a zero-sum game. For example, two gladiators on the battlefield, only a person can survive, life is their core interests, and there is nothing more important than their own life. The negotiation between them can’t be successful, because of the contradiction between their core interests. The game is you die or I die - zero-sum game. You can refute me that Jack sacrifices his life in order to save Rose in Titanic. I will tell you that because in the interest balance system of Jack, rose’s life is more central than his life. There is no denying that jack can’t give up his life for any other one on Titanic.
3, they should trust each other. When you are going to achieve win-win strategy with others, you must have to consider whether the other side you can trust or not. Win-win game is a game which is designed in a way that all participants can profit from it, but not at the same time. In many cases, the payoffs are sequential in a game, can’t happen simultaneously. Maybe you get your benefits right now from the resolution, but the other only can get his benefits after a while. I think you deserve to be trusted more important than trust others.
There are 3 necessary conditions to reach a win-win, like Prisoner's Dilemma, they are both rational people and both want to have a collusion, but they don’t trust each other, and of course they can’t reach a win-win situation. They only can choose to maximize their own payoffs.
In conclusion, not every zero-sum game can be converted into a win-win game. Here I apply these 3 points to sex game, let’s try to figure out how to analyze this game and find some possible resolutions.
1, they are intelligent and rational decision-makers. Males were, but females were not. So far women can’t figure out yet what intelligent and rational decision is for themselves in sex game, I think I can awaken women’s awareness sooner or later after I unlock the mystery of female orgasm to the public.
2, there are some benefits on each side they both want to exchange for. I think it is hard for every rational person, because orgasm is core interests for everyone as physiological needs, male or female both can’t give it up. Human nature is selfish, so this problem is really difficult to solve. Maybe you can do it by yourself, but I think it is not a permanent solution. Maybe you can pay to find a whore, but what if you want to orgasm with some one you love. There is only one way you two have to orgasm one by one.
3, trust each other in sex game. I think you two should trust each other, if you really love each other. Notice that the biggest obstacle between two people in love isn’t the trust problem, but a physiological response - refractory period. Frankly speaking, It is all by human nature and really hard to overcome.
Sorry I really don’t know what Nash equilibrium is.
