I wanted an unfiltered glimpse into the male sexual psyche...

[sodominsane]

@aheidla I do find your comment about getting cats to be on the mark... I have 7 ferals that I feed... They are better than most humans!

Well certainly they are not better than all humans…. You are feeding the ferals

not the other way around

 

[aheidla]

we’re all capable of this irrespective of gender, sex or orientation.

I should've been a bit more specific: most men are capable of desiring sex/being aroused by someone without romantically loving them. Obviously, there are women who are like this. However, if one were to compare the sexes, this is definitely more common with men than women.

This leaves us with a discussion on unrequited romantic love and whether it’s existence in men is a falsehood, even though you offer no ability to have any experience based opinion.

To be fair, two of them did say "I love you" to me. I just didn't/don't believe them and never will (especially not the first one). I was friends with them for months and years before both situations "escalated." I don't believe them because it makes no objective sense and is impossible to romantically love someone after barely a month of being with them romantically, prior friendship or not.

People lie and say "I love you" all of the time. That statement no longer holds any real meaning because it gets tossed around so casually for the purpose of gaining something from the targeted party.

I do have "experience" with being told that. I merely experienced lies.

This can’t be an empirical observation either, because the world seems full of apparent unrequited love either by choice or not, by religion, culture or not.

I believe that men confuse "loving someone" with just desiring them sexually. In that regard, unrequited "love" from the male side is actually more rare because what they believe to be love is truly lust.

That said, the men in my life definitely "lusted" after me. They did not love me. They were confusing the two either intentionally or unconsciously. But it was not love.

 

[aheidla]

I do find your comment about getting cats to be on the mark... I have 7 ferals that I feed... They are better than most humans!

I have no rebuttals to this statement. The accuracy cannot be denied.

Although, my mom is currently having an issue with her male cat spraying her plants even after being neutered. We can't figure out the mystery or how to stop the behavior, and even the vet is stumped after exhausting all suggestions for my mother to get him to stop.

At the very least we can count on most human guests in one's home not to be that rude. At least not while sober, anyway.

 

[PsyPro]

Most men are incapable of romantically loving someone without sex, but they are capable of engaging in sex with someone without romantically loving them.

Thanks.

For the 2nd portion, yeah but that's the case with most humans regardless of gender.

The first portion is interesting. It's a generalization, but there's truth to it. I think a lot of the push-back is when people confuse the presence of truth with "true" or "the truth". There are plenty of anecdotes of the devoted husband to go along with the cheater. I'm not up on the current data to assess "most".

But if you want a glimpse into the male psyche:

Hormones and puberty do weird things to animals. Your puppy starts inexplicably humping your leg, and male humans masturbate into gym socks. It is a humorous side of evolutionary forces. Although we humans are gifted with reason, there's a lot of evolutionary force (which is to say: nature) for it to overcome.

That force is no small thing. Look at some examples for women. The "biological clock" manifestation can completely override previous (or even current) opinion(s) of having children. "Nesting" behavior is another, or even simple emotional variation as part of PMS. Women understand hormones and fluctuations.

Our hormone is testosterone. It fluctuates too, and it's built in. Part of our literal nature. An irrational desire to stick an appendage into something (or create some facsimile of the experience), because hormones. Humorous sides of evolutionary forces? That's the one we got stuck with. You think guys are happy about having to go to the ER because they got their pecker stuck in something?

Consider it sympathetically for a moment. It sounds absurd on the face, but think of this hormone-driven behavior as our "PMS". We don't get it monthly, we have it all the time (it fluctuates too, of course) and it's not completely uncontrollable. There's variance across the spectrum, and some of that is captured on this site.

But independent of all that is a human need for intimacy, which includes men. I'm not sure you've weighted this properly in your hypothesis. I, like most men, have jumped through the hoops because there was sex at the end. But I also have loved 3 women, and knew it before becoming involved. The first two didn't work out, but I married the 3rd (almost 30 years ago). Sex in those 3 instances was never simply hormonal, or carnal. It was part of romantically loving someone. It fulfilled intimacy. It wasn't the reason I loved them, or the reason I love my wife. We'll eventually hit an age where our junk stops working. I'm ok with that, because sex isn't the reason I love her.

But I'm just a sample of 1.

 

[aheidla]

@PsyPro I am aware of the evolutionary purpose of the male sex drive and psyche. Its structure and function are necessary for the propagation of the species. The male needs to be ready and willing to breed and create lots of offspring at all times.

The male must also be willing to be separated from his home to provide for and protect his offspring from threats by obtaining resources (hunting) and eliminating competition to his bloodline (other males). Therefore, the human male is wired to prioritize sexual attraction over emotional bonding, and the human female works backward from this model. Emotional bonding is what ensures the male returns home to his chosen mate and offspring.

I also have loved 3 women, and knew it before becoming involved.

Question: how were you able to differentiate between feelings of lust for these women and actual love?

Men are visual and usually drawn by physical and sexual attraction. If that is what initially draws men, how can they sincerely say (or even believe) that they love someone when the first feeling they feel for a person is lust?

Lust can cloud one's perception and judgment of reality as it is driven by the section of the brain responsible for reward and motivation. This is especially true for males who, due to testosterone, seem to lose all executive function and reasoning skills whenever their sexual interest (read: lust) is piqued.

 

[PsyPro]

I am aware of the evolutionary purpose of the male sex drive and psyche.

Fair enough. Just restated because sometimes we seem to forget in the societal criticism.

Therefore, the human male is wired to prioritize sexual attraction over emotional bonding,

I'm not sure that follows, but it's valid as a statement on it's own. The main caveat I would have is that each of those are two separate variables on a spectrum - not two on opposing ends of one spectrum.

Question: how were you able to differentiate between feelings of lust for these women and actual love?

To some extent, that's like trying to answer "how were you able to differentiate between feelings of hot and cold". They felt nothing alike.

I assume women understand the difference between lust and love. They may fantasize about some actor or chippendale's dancer at the bachelorette party... but that's not love.

It's the same for men.

Men are visual and usually drawn by physical and sexual attraction. If that is what initially draws men, how can they sincerely say (or even believe) that they love someone when the first feeling they feel for a person is lust?

Lust can cloud one's perception and judgment of reality as it is driven by the section of the brain responsible for reward and motivation. This is especially true for males who, due to testosterone, seem to lose all executive function and reasoning skills whenever their sexual interest (read: lust) is piqued.

All generally true, but it seems a little absolutist in the assumption that the first thing they are drawn to is physical / sexual attraction - or that the first thing they feel is lust. We're simple, but not that simple.

I lived in a barracks in the 80's, in cold-war Europe. My late teens/early 20's, with 150 or so other dudes in similar circumstances. A completely (young) masculine environment, to include being turned loose on the red-light districts with a pocket full of money over the weekends. I understand lust and the male sex drive.

But the environment was otherwise devoid of women. One (older) guy had an (even older) girlfriend. He was like 28 and she was 30! (the 19 year old thought). She made a few of us dinner. We sat and chatted about all sorts of things. I learned then about intimacy and femininity, distinct from sex. I'm not a fan of Jung, but there's merit to the notion of an archetype (a feminine one in this case). I experienced it's absence. We were babies and little boys with mothers. It's as unique as girls and their dads, I suspect. A different paradigm on gender relationships, ideally Platonic although the universe is much more cruel than that.

In the case of the 3 women I loved, I knew them first. Either they or I (or both) were in different relationships at the time, but in each case a time arose where we were both free. There's a lust switch or something in my head, and I turn it off (or it gets turned off). I have no desire for anyone outside my relationship. No one else can compete. That is also the case for women in relationships. I'm not interested, to include lust being piqued. I know guys who will comment on other guys' partners, and I know guys like me who think it's inappropriate and it never occurs to. There's not one bucket for us all to fit into.

That's a great joke with my wife, who apparently was lustful from the start.

 

[aheidla]

I assume women understand the difference between lust and love. They may fantasize about some actor or chippendale's dancer at the bachelorette party... but that's not love.

I'm not a woman capable of feeling lust/sexual attraction for a person and am afraid that this example goes beyond my personal level of understanding. I can, however, understand your point.

I lived in a barracks in the 80's, in cold-war Europe.

I'm beginning to suspect that the only men on here who disagree with my position that most men are motivated by sex are from an older generation; specifically the generation of my parents and grandparents. It's no secret that relations between men and women were different 30, 40, and 50+ years ago. Courting was still a common practice and there was actually mystery involved with men courting women.

Now? Our media and entertainment are saturated with sexual images on a regular basis. Porn is more easily accessible causing the men of my generation and younger (Millennials and Gen-Z) to have almost become"programmed" to be sex-obsessed and to have sex as their primary motivation for seeking relationships with other people. Not love. What's worse is that due to porn, the type of sex they're motivated to seek is neither healthy or realistic.

The perspective I'm operating from is very different. It is far more difficult to gauge the true intentions of men under 42. As a result, younger women (my age) are becoming less and less interested in dating men their own age, leaving younger men to be increasingly single and sexless. Perhaps @huguest was onto something. We came of age in an era where a guy's idea of sending a "love letter" to a young lady involves sending vapid one-word messages followed by the inevitable dick pic.

I don't doubt that male and female relationships were different and arguably better in the 80s and earlier. Unfortunately, I was either a baby or non-existent, and can only go by what I and my other female peers personally witnessed from our male counterparts as we grew. Needless to say, it was mostly unpleasant.

 

[seventiesdemon]

Sometimes my Psyche needs Repsychiling. It goes through changes, modification, learning and yearning. I think with the amount of distraction and confusion we have these days, we are finding ourselves with less time to find a place or space we can be comfortable, at peace with to place everything in perspective.

 

[Adreaux]

I have no insight into my own psyche, but this is the closest (or at least most honest) insight that I know of. I'm Cajun, one of the most famous Cajun "um...romantic" songs we have is "J'suis pas un couillon" ('I'm not an asshole, anymore"). Given the number of guys I know who could, at best, describe their positive attributes regarding their emotional availability or strengths they could bring to a relationship - "I'm not an asshole, anymore" about sums it up. S'il vous plaît, pardonnez-nous-aut, sorry y'all.

 

[seventiesdemon]

I have no insight into my own psyche, but this is the closest (or at least most honest) insight that I know of. I'm Cajun, one of the most famous Cajun "um...romantic" songs we have is "J'suis pas un couillon" ('I'm not an asshole, anymore"). Given the number of guys I know who could, at best, describe their positive attributes regarding their emotional availability or strengths they could bring to a relationship - "I'm not an asshole, anymore" about sums it up. S'il vous plaît, pardonnez-nous-aut, sorry y'all.

Honesty. It follows us all. Honesty has a habit of following us fella.

You do not express it........you become heavier. Have you noticed that ?

 

[seventiesdemon]

What?

 

[Adreaux]

What?

What are you confused about?

 

[mPOV2]

yeah but you are only getting a sliver of the psyche. as I chat there are a lot a gay men here and men with huge cocks seem to think differently than those without. as one other male stated- its like talking to a brick wall. the spectrum of men is much wider than what u see here i think

 

[FrankieGuile]

That is why I decided to join this site. It was like diving into a science project. I am quite a curious person and like to "study" human behavior and tend to treat life as if its a live nature show.

However, barely 30 days of heavy forum browsing later...

I don't know what you find bewildering after your heavy forum browsing -- though a myriad of posts here certainly leave me bewildered -- so it is difficult to pinpoint a question from your original post. That said, if you are truly taking a scientific approach to your project, just know the good folks here do not represent an unbiased cross-section of human behavior so you are likely to get skewed results from your "study."

 

[mPOV2]

I don't know what you find bewildering after your heavy forum browsing -- though a myriad of posts here certainly leave me bewildered -- so it is difficult to pinpoint a question from your original post. That said, if you are truly taking a scientific approach to your project, just know the good folks here do not represent an unbiased cross-section of human behavior so you are likely to get skewed results from your "study."

simply put- the study is flawed from selection bias? any statistiicans out there. That said, I like forums like these becuase people will say and do what they will not say and do IRL, yet we all know they want to say and do. the question is -what segment of society is not here. (like most)....

 

[FrankieGuile]

simply put- the study is flawed from selection bias? any statistiicans out there. That said, I like forums like these becuase people will say and do what they will not say and do IRL, yet we all know they want to say and do. the question is -what segment of society is not here. (like most)....

Correct on your first question. Many segments are not represented, or underrepresented, here based on casual observation of many posts. As examples and as a proportion of the general population: straight men, women, conservative thinkers, individualists and people with conventional sexual interests. Now that ought to start a firestorm of reaction because it's true.