do women take a big cock for granted nowdays?

[D_Reuben Stallpisser]

If I may, I'd like to bullet point some of my thoughts, just to keep this post from being completely disjointed:

- I have to wonder how young you are. I find that it is common for younger people to be less forgiving in the physical appearance department. Age is the ultimate equalizer and we all go south eventually. I hope you never have to be on the receiving end of such severe judgment.

-Size does matter, but I do believe it is relative. While I do think all women (including myself) are fascinated by big cocks (hence, their face lighting up), there is a certain reality to the mechanics. I know for a fact that I can't take any bigger than 8x5 and I know I'm not alone. I've had enough sex partners to know that there are men with big cocks that couldn't use them if their life depended on it and there are men with 5 inchers that can fuck so well that women have to be peeled off the ceiling after the experience. Size (or lack thereof) will never be an excuse for being a lazy, inattentive lover and that will always be the deciding factor in the long run. So I'm sorry to say that having a big dick is not a fail safe in the bedroom or life in general.

-Finally, I applaud your honesty. I do believe that your attitude will change eventually, though. As we grow and change, so does our ideas about beauty. A breast cancer survivored scarred by her masectomy is just as beautiful as a woman with youthful, healthy breasts...maybe even more so. There's something to be said for battle scars.

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm going south myself. I'm 46. I'm not as attractive as I was when I was younger, and I'm aware of that. If I were single and shopping, my options would be more limited now. I know that there would be many women not attracted to me, and I accept that. It doesn't mean they're shallow, it just means they're not attracted.

I've been married for 20 years, and my wife's changes in appearance don't matter to me in the least. She is still as beautiful to me now as she was on our wedding day. That said, if something were to happen, I could not start a new relationship with someone I didn't find attractive. Now my definition of attractive has changed as the years have passed, but I still have standards. That may be shallow, but I bet you have standards too. You may think you don't, but if you think hard and really evaluate the kinds of people you have relationships with and the kind you don't, you'll see that you also cull people based on some measure of physical accceptability. If you don't, you are a very rare person indeed.

 

[D_Rosalind Mussell]

BBW - I don't think it's strictly an age thing, when it comes to unforgiving requirements. I think it's an options thing. People in higher demand can afford to be pickier. It's just that both men and women tend to get less attractive as they age as well as more fearful of lonliness. So their attractive value drops and the fear of not having that desired companionship becomes more real, and that drives a lowering of standards.

I agree with what you're saying to a point. It's a logical leap to say that people in higher demand can afford to be pickier...but that doesn't guarantee they will always pick people that fit societal standards of beauty. I do think that age will factor in somewhere eventually as well, as we can't help being shaped by our life experiences.

Regarding the "attractive value", it's subjective just like size or anything else. Some of us need more than looks to feel attracted to someone. Even the most physically perfect people can be ugly if they are rude/narrow-minded/etc. It's an instant turn-off for me, it doesn't matter who that person is or what they look like. However, I am the kind of person that adores imperfections, though. While the fresh vibrancy of youth has it's rightful value, I have developed a deeper appreciation for scars and imperfections as I mature...and since it's completely logical to assume that I'm not alone in having this opinion, I have to disagree with you. This attractive value quotient only applies to people that live their lives according to perceived societal standards anyway. Let the "beautiful" people have each other. I will take a salt n pepper, slightly paunchy man in his mid-40s with scars and crows feet over an inexperienced younger stud any day of the week.

 

[B_subgirrl]

But don't you see what I'm saying? I do not have the choice to line men up cocks pointing out and say "I'll take that one":tongue: BUT I'm not for one moment going to say I would not choose a larger one.

I just do not want anyone thinking that is all that matters. I guess if I were a random sex girl it might be the deciding factor. But I can't speak for those women only for myself.

I do agree with you that a whole lot more comes into the equation than penis size. A large penis without all the other good stuff would not keep a person very happy for very long in a LTR.

But I'm a little different to you. In a random encounter penis size would matter LESS to me. Average sex is OK in a casual (especially once-off) relationship. So a small penis would be fine coz it doesn't matter too much if I'm not wholly satisfied. In a LTR I would need a larger penis because I don't want to be dissatisfied for the rest of my life.

 

[thetramp]

I do agree with you that a whole lot more comes into the equation than penis size. A large penis without all the other good stuff would not keep a person very happy for very long in a LTR.

But I'm a little different to you. In a random encounter penis size would matter LESS to me. Average sex is OK in a casual (especially once-off) relationship. So a small penis would be fine coz it doesn't matter too much if I'm not wholly satisfied. In a LTR I would need a larger penis because I don't want to be dissatisfied for the rest of my life.

So basically your saying you are ok with a small penis, but if you consider that this might be the last one you get it better be a good one?

 

[HiddenLacey]

I do agree with you that a whole lot more comes into the equation than penis size. A large penis without all the other good stuff would not keep a person very happy for very long in a LTR.

But I'm a little different to you. In a random encounter penis size would matter LESS to me. Average sex is OK in a casual (especially once-off) relationship. So a small penis would be fine coz it doesn't matter too much if I'm not wholly satisfied. In a LTR I would need a larger penis because I don't want to be dissatisfied for the rest of my life.

Ready to laugh?

If I seriously considered having NSA sex with someone I think I would have to say "show me the goods":tongue:

Otherwise for me, what would be the point? I have a vibrator, several as a matter a fact. If I'm considering someone for NSA they would have to have something pretty darn special, meaning I want to limp out of there. And I am NOT saying I would want to be in a relantionship forever with someone with an extremely small cock, just because I'm incrediably kinky and I WANT more:biggrin1: of everything, all the time. I just want someone with the same sex drive as me for starters.

 

[D_Reuben Stallpisser]

Ready to laugh?

If I seriously considered having NSA sex with someone I think I would have to say "show me the goods":tongue:

Otherwise for me, what would be the point? I have a vibrator, several as a matter a fact. If I'm considering someone for NSA they would have to have something pretty darn special, meaning I want to limp out of there. And I am NOT saying I would want to be in a relantionship forever with someone with an extremely small cock, just because I'm incrediably kinky and I WANT more:biggrin1: of everything, all the time. I just want someone with the same sex drive as me for starters.

So size DOES matter? :wink:

 

[HiddenLacey]

So size DOES matter? :wink:

:damnit:

I guess so IF I GET TO PICK one. But that does not happen in real life, unless your a bed hopper.

 

[B_subgirrl]

So basically your saying you are ok with a small penis, but if you consider that this might be the last one you get it better be a good one?

LOL :biggrin1: Yeah sort of. If I'm in a LTR it's hopefully for the rest of my life (although rarely works out that way :smile. And I don't want to be sexually unhappy forever. Also, if I am sexually unhappy it will probably leak out into the rest of the relationship.

 

[B_subgirrl]

Ready to laugh?

If I seriously considered having NSA sex with someone I think I would have to say "show me the goods":tongue:

Otherwise for me, what would be the point? I have a vibrator, several as a matter a fact. If I'm considering someone for NSA they would have to have something pretty darn special, meaning I want to limp out of there. And I am NOT saying I would want to be in a relantionship forever with someone with an extremely small cock, just because I'm incrediably kinky and I WANT more:biggrin1: of everything, all the time. I just want someone with the same sex drive as me for starters.

Okay I'm laughing :biggrin1:. It's just so the opposite of me.

The kinky and the sex drive things definitely apply to me :smile:

 

[D_Rosalind Mussell]

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm going south myself. I'm 46. I'm not as attractive as I was when I was younger, and I'm aware of that. If I were single and shopping, my options would be more limited now. I know that there would be many women not attracted to me, and I accept that. It doesn't mean they're shallow, it just means they're not attracted.

I've been married for 20 years, and my wife's changes in appearance don't matter to me in the least. She is still as beautiful to me now as she was on our wedding day. That said, if something were to happen, I could not start a new relationship with someone I didn't find attractive. Now my definition of attractive has changed as the years have passed, but I still have standards. That may be shallow, but I bet you have standards too. You may think you don't, but if you think hard and really evaluate the kinds of people you have relationships with and the kind you don't, you'll see that you also cull people based on some measure of physical accceptability. If you don't, you are a very rare person indeed.

I'm not saying I don't have standards. I'd be a liar if I said I didn't. It's called natural selection, we biologically can't fight that. I guess what I'm trying to say is that not everyone measures beauty by the same yard stick so it's not so easy for me to believe that attractiveness is that cut and dry of an issue. As far as my standards go, it has more to do with a person being a sum of their parts. It's not all physical, it's not all mental. While I am married, I do know how my tastes run. I am drawn to expressive eyes, beautiful lips, a fierce intellect, a good heart, passion, a sense of humor, emotional strength, sexual heat, etc. When I am attracted to someone, I am attracted to more than their physicality. Somehow, the whole package has to just work for that person, that's all. I've also experienced a lot of things that people my age haven't been through, so I matured ahead of my peers a long time ago. Traditional good looks don't impress me if there isn't something else to the equation, I can't help it.

As far as you are concerned, I wouldn't be quick to say that many women wouldn't be attracted to you if you became single for whatever reason. If you love your wife the way you say you do (and I suspect you truly do) then you might be more forgiving than you think. It's very difficult to back-peddle into traditional standards of partner selection once you've experienced that level of connectedness.

 

[D_Reuben Stallpisser]

:damnit:

I guess so IF I GET TO PICK one. But that does not happen in real life, unless your a bed hopper.

Ha! Don't take me seriously. I know what you mean, and I get it. At the same time, I agree with what Subgirl says. If the sex isn't good, it could be toxic to the relationship. And before everybody flames me, I know size isn't the key to being good. Attentiveness to your partner's needs as well as your own is the key, but being big doesn't hurt. Well, sometimes, apparently ...

 

[HiddenLacey]

Ha! Don't take me seriously. I know what you mean, and I get it. At the same time, I agree with what Subgirl says. If the sex isn't good, it could be toxic to the relationship. And before everybody flames me, I know size isn't the key to being good. Attentiveness to your partner's needs as well as your own is the key, but being big doesn't hurt. Well, sometimes, apparently ...

I'm not angry:tongue: I was being silly! I can honestly say if I got to pick and choose one I would go for a 7x6 model, BUT I wouldn't turn down a smaller or maybe even larger one.

 

[D_Reuben Stallpisser]

I'm not saying I don't have standards. I'd be a liar if I said I didn't. It's called natural selection, we biologically can't fight that. I guess what I'm trying to say is that not everyone measures beauty by the same yard stick so it's not so easy for me to believe that attractiveness is that cut and dry of an issue. As far as my standards go, it has more to do with a person being a sum of their parts. It's not all physical, it's not all mental. While I am married, I do know how my tastes run. I am drawn to expressive eyes, beautiful lips, a fierce intellect, a good heart, passion, a sense of humor, emotional strength, sexual heat, etc. When I am attracted to someone, I am attracted to more than their physicality. Somehow, the whole package has to just work for that person, that's all. I've also experienced a lot of things that people my age haven't been through, so I matured ahead of my peers a long time ago. Traditional good looks don't impress me if there isn't something else to the equation, I can't help it.

As far as you are concerned, I wouldn't be quick to say that many women wouldn't be attracted to you if you became single for whatever reason. If you love your wife the way you say you do (and I suspect you truly do) then you might be more forgiving than you think. It's very difficult to back-peddle into traditional standards of partner selection once you've experienced that level of connectedness.

Thank you. And I think we agree more than we disagree. Physicality is one part of the whole. While there are physical things that would rule people out for me, there are also more nebulous traits. For example, I couldn't have a (longterm) relationship with a bitch. :biggrin1:

 

[sbat]

Note, I was careful not to define the standards of those high demand folks. I also didn't say that those standards didn't change, simply that those with options, no matter the age, will be pickier.

In terms of attractive value, of course its subjective. On the other hand, there are folks who draw attention from folks with all sorts of standards - universally attractive if you will. These are the folks who are in highest demand and can afford to be the pickiest.

You can talk all you like about preferences being relative, and you'll be right to an extent. While there is variation in human sexual preference, it is bounded by certain natural parameters. There have been numerous studies to illustrate this point using both visual stated preference and chemical attraction, and certain generalized traits have been highlighted by these studies including waist/hip ratio in women, shoulder/waist ratio in men, as well as ratios in certain facial features in both genders.

I agree with what you're saying to a point. It's a logical leap to say that people in higher demand can afford to be pickier...but that doesn't guarantee they will always pick people that fit societal standards of beauty. I do think that age will factor in somewhere eventually as well, as we can't help being shaped by our life experiences.

Regarding the "attractive value", it's subjective just like size or anything else. Some of us need more than looks to feel attracted to someone. Even the most physically perfect people can be ugly if they are rude/narrow-minded/etc. It's an instant turn-off for me, it doesn't matter who that person is or what they look like. However, I am the kind of person that adores imperfections, though. While the fresh vibrancy of youth has it's rightful value, I have developed a deeper appreciation for scars and imperfections as I mature...and since it's completely logical to assume that I'm not alone in having this opinion, I have to disagree with you. This attractive value quotient only applies to people that live their lives according to perceived societal standards anyway. Let the "beautiful" people have each other. I will take a salt n pepper, slightly paunchy man in his mid-40s with scars and crows feet over an inexperienced younger stud any day of the week.

 

[teasedsilly]

agree to disagree. it is a little different being a man, all we really need is friction and a warm hole, and i will wholly admit that; but in general if specific physical attributes are deal breakers in your relationships, i think that is a bit shallow.

First of all, please stop speaking for all men. And I think there is a difference between a preference that is superficial (which will evaporate around someone you have feelings for) and what I'd call lifestyle preferences that are apparent in someone's figure or grooming. You notice, for example, that gamer couples have very similar couch potato features, as runner couples are thinner. People seek out partners who enjoy the same kind of activities as they do, which is reflected in appearance in different ways.

A person might likewise have sexual preferences that are encouraged or frustrated by certain physical features. Just as I wouldn't try to tell a runner they are being superficial if they want a partner who runs, I wouldn't tell a woman she's being superficial if she wants to orgasm a certain way.

 

[B_subgirrl]

Thank you Teasedsilly :smile:

 

[D_Rosalind Mussell]

Note, I was careful not to define the standards of those high demand folks. I also didn't say that those standards didn't change, simply that those with options, no matter the age, will be pickier.

In terms of attractive value, of course its subjective. On the other hand, there are folks who draw attention from folks with all sorts of standards - universally attractive if you will. These are the folks who are in highest demand and can afford to be the pickiest.

You can talk all you like about preferences being relative, and you'll be right to an extent. While there is variation in human sexual preference, it is bounded by certain natural parameters. There have been numerous studies to illustrate this point using both visual stated preference and chemical attraction, and certain generalized traits have been highlighted by these studies including waist/hip ratio in women, shoulder/waist ratio in men, as well as ratios in certain facial features in both genders.

You are right, there are people who are universally attractive and this is most likely due to the phenomena studied in the scientific experiments you noted. I am familiar with some of those studies and I find them very interesting. I guess in a way that we sort of agree, just in different ways? It's not that I don't appreciate those hard-wired standards of beauty. I am drawn like any other person, but I am quickly turned off if that is all there is. Perhaps I am just more unusual than others in my sexual proclivities? Either that or it's just reflective of my age/experience/stage in life. I even have a similar aesthetic when it comes to my preferences in art as well, so perhaps it's not even strictly sexual for me.

 

[D_Rosalind Mussell]

First of all, please stop speaking for all men. And I think there is a difference between a preference that is superficial (which will evaporate around someone you have feelings for) and what I'd call lifestyle preferences that are apparent in someone's figure or grooming. You notice, for example, that gamer couples have very similar couch potato features, as runner couples are thinner. People seek out partners who enjoy the same kind of activities as they do, which is reflected in appearance in different ways.

A person might likewise have sexual preferences that are encouraged or frustrated by certain physical features. Just as I wouldn't try to tell a runner they are being superficial if they want a partner who runs, I wouldn't tell a woman she's being superficial if she wants to orgasm a certain way.

:clap:

 

[B_subgirrl]

You are right, there are people who are universally attractive and this is most likely due to the phenomena studied in the scientific experiments you noted. I am familiar with some of those studies and I find them very interesting. I guess in a way that we sort of agree, just in different ways? It's not that I don't appreciate those hard-wired standards of beauty. I am drawn like any other person, but I am quickly turned off if that is all there is. Perhaps I am just more unusual than others in my sexual proclivities? Either that or it's just reflective of my age/experience/stage in life. I even have a similar aesthetic when it comes to my preferences in art as well, so perhaps it's not even strictly sexual for me.

BBW36, physical looks aren't high on my list of what's necessary to be attractive. I've had sex with people who were not at all good looking to others, but were very attractive to me. One example is a guy who looked very like Rupert from Survivor (see link).

http://sugarzine.com/rupert_boneham_lg.jpeg

He's not physically attractive to most people, but to me he was immensely attractive because of his personality.

 

[D_Rosalind Mussell]

BBW36, physical looks aren't high on my list of what's necessary to be attractive. I've had sex with people who were not at all good looking to others, but were very attractive to me. One example is a guy who looked very like Rupert from Survivor (see link).

http://sugarzine.com/rupert_boneham_lg.jpeg

He's not physically attractive to most people, but to me he was immensely attractive because of his personality.

I agree with you, as my personal tastes travel the same parallel as yours. I tend to find certain people attractive (that other's don't) also. I am very big on personality, self-confidence, comfort with one's self, etc. My best sexual experiences were with people that share those traits. No matter what anyone says, looks do not guarantee a great sexual experience.