Men / Woman Status

[D_Selmus_Swallow]

It's more than just a "social construct" It's imbedded in human dynamics. It's the social dynamics between men and women. Men have to break past a girl's defenses to get in her pussy while a girl can have sex with almost any guy she wants AT ANY TIME she wants. Nothing is stopping her, there are a steady supply of men willing to fuck her.

Those two sentences are the two most ridiculous things I've seen all day.

I suppose the second may be true in some abstract demographic sense, but as far as concrete practical reality goes, outside of a porn shoot, you may be mistaken. And as far as there being "nothing" stopping her from so doing, I'd assume conscious awareness of venereal disease, social stigma and repercussions, etc. might be brakes on this being the case.

As for the first, you're blatantly assuming a passive woman/aggressive man dynamic. All I have to say to that is that there be tigresses out there, matey ( I know :biggrin1. Those roles can be reversed.

On the other hand, men can go through pussy droughts, or be fully fledged virgins, which is extremely common. In my senior graduating class, at least half the girls had sex, while more than 90% of the guys were still virgins. Of course that changes in college when we have more chances to get girls drunk.....

Uh huh. Been there and done that. Well, except the getting girls drunk in college to take advantage of them part. Wasn't much of a socializer I guess.

But just observe the difference in how a male attains sex compared to how a female attains it. A man has to seduce and escalate while the ladies just have to open up their legs to the guy they are interested in.

Brother, I've gotten the most passionate love of my life with no seduction needed (I suppose having a decent personality, common interests, good conversation ability, and a good body and face works sometimes ), and I've had women beg to fuck me and throw themselves at my feet and get nothing. Maybe they should have just spread their legs an inch more apart? I mean, I am pretty girth-y.

Female virginity is a choice, Male virginity is a curse. In our society it compounds on itself increasing male insecurities.

I admit it sucked pretty bad often , but my virginity was not solely a torment laid upon me from without.

Because of that concept, the girl will always be seen as more of a slut when she's having sex with multiple guys.

I don't see how sex with multiple guys automatically brings the derogatory label with it though- that's a value judgment based on a negative interpretation of the actions of said woman.

They say "the devil is in the details", but here the devil for you is laying in your interpretation of the details my boy.

Why? Because people inherently believe that she's overusing her right to fuck whatever human that walks on two legs and has a dick.

See above.

You cannot tear this down. It will NEVER be torn down. If human life started all over again, this would be the same way, yet again. Girls would be seen as sluts if they have sex with alot of guys.

I'm glad there is no room for human agency in your outlook on this. I guess that lack shields you from all the cognitive dissonance you would have to be feeling now, with so many actual humans disagreeing with you and countering your claims.

 

[Wyldgusechaz]

A uterus, a clitorus, ovaries, about the right amount of estrogen and progesterone and a dash of testosterone.

Oh and 6 years of university education in various fields, some scientific, some not, a keen mind, an ability to see view points that differ from my own, an interest in sexual athropology and great set of tits. :smile:



I understand why you have formed the views that you have, but I'm afraid your belief in them doesn't make them real. koval and Drifter have made some good points - I assume you have read them.

Further to that, and from personal experience, I did form emotional attachments with many of the guys I slept with casually when that was my habit. They were my friends in many cases. The sex was generally about mutual pleasure and there was never any pressure from either party to be exclusive - but there was an emotional bond. The guys I slept with with whom I did not have an emotional bond were, to me, more like dildos with a life support system - that may sound callous but I don't think they thought of the interaction in significantly different terms. Why am I telling you this? To illustrate that sex and sexuality are complex and varying. I also found sexual pleasure and bonding with my female friends.

I have a very strong opinion based on experience and observation (and some academic background in the studies of generative v's behaviourist theories) that nature and nurture are extremely hard to separate definitively as you are attempting to do. This is my opinion - it is open to discussion, as all opinions should be.



I believe you would get a lot further on this board if you weren't so condescending. Be a bit more open to dialogue and a bit less authoritarian.

I don't think anyone's sexuality should be reconditioned in to anything. We are all vunerable to social reconditioning - we are made feel lesser or greater by what the 'group mind' appears to value. Do I think female sexuality is conditioned by social and cultural influence, yes. Do I think male sexuality is conditioned by social and cultural influences, yes. Do I think that differing levels of homosexuality and hetrosexuality are a part of that, yes. Do I state anywhere that I believe sexuality has no genetic influence, no. Do I express a pereference for any one type of behaviour, no.

What is more sexuality (what we enjoy, find pleasureable) and how we interact with our sexual partners are not the same thing.

You know its kinda weird but I know I get really preachy here. I do not know why. In real life I think I might be THE most fun person here. I have the most fun life you can imagine. I could use more sex but who couldn't? LOL. I am just bewildered at how close minded everyone here is to other opinions.

What you might not see in my post is that I am cutting the *group mind* slack. I understand *why* they might not like a sexually liberated or *promiscuous* woman. I also understand that there are a decent number of women who do not need any emotional attachment to enjoy recreational sex and thats OK too.

Can I make the assumption that if you were in a committed relationship, you would not be jealous at all of your partner fucking other women either with or without your knowledge? Why would jealousy even exist in humanity? It is a very deep seated emotion and what benefit does it impart to society as a whole. There must be some benefit.

 

[Drifterwood]

WGC - you keep telling us how wonderful you are and how educated.

Don't you see the ridiculousness of your comments. On the one hand you tell us that we are close minded, yet in the same breath it is you who is espousing that the issue is black and white. Please refer to Not Punny's concise comments above.

Your arguments regarding relationships are not pertinent to the discussion. If someone has chosen to be in a monogamous relationship and those are their agreed boundaries, then yes of course people are going to get fucked off if someone breaks that agreement. But equally people live in different types of relationship. I watched that great series Tribal Wives again last night. The five wives of the village chief were talking about sex with their boyfriends . The English woman asked if their husband got anooyed. Only if he catches them in our hut was the answer. He wouldn't think we were worth much if other men didn't want us. Interesting?

And what of people who don't want a relationship, or any mix of sex, intimacy and relationship? That is the thing that irks predominantly right wing traditionalists, they just don't like freedom from moral restraint and group mentality. These morals are being broken down and replaced by a new morality. Hip Hip Hooray.

Now, did you want to discuss the difference between physiological evolution and evolutinary adaptation?

 

[Drifterwood]

Oh well, I'm not sure any of that made any sense, and I'm sure it sounded like I was agreeing with him, but honestly, I'm no expert in the past, I have basic genetic knowledge, and honestly don't care enough about any of it. I know myself, I know what I want, and I know others want the same. Why we are labelled is not a concern of mine, that we are in the first place, is.

I'm fairly sure that WGC will tell us what he thinks. But I don't believe that virgin, monogamous marriage, kids, death is the norm anymore. Average sexual partners for women in the UK prior to marriage is eight, and 50% of marriages fail. So, there are very few virgins and a minority of succeesful lifetime partnerships.

I don't believe that the monogamous marriage style of life proves anything other than that it was the morality imposed on us for many reasons and that we have adapted emotionally to expect it and/or try to live with it.

I think that physiologically we may well be/are the same as 200,000 years ago, but that there are many genetic survival strategies that we are free to adapt to as our environment and circumstances dictates. There are scenarios where Alpha Male fucks everyone, Alpha Female decides which males and females fuck, and even systems in which the females fuck all the males to confuse the genetic provenance as it were. Don't forget that >10% of kids don't have the Daddy that Mummy says :smile:.

I don't believe that jealousy proves anything other than that we get pissed off when we feel we might lose something we want for ourselves.

I think we are seeing the break down of the last survival strategy that came from the growth of what we call "civilisation". The reason is simply that women are free to choose now. When women have economic independence and their independent rights are protected, they can choose to live and fuck as they choose. This won't happen overnight. Conservatives will try to say that the old way is the right and only way. But clearly it isn't for everyone when they have the freedom to choose.

 

[Wyldgusechaz]

I'm fairly sure that WGC will tell us what he thinks. But I don't believe that virgin, monogamous marriage, kids, death is the norm anymore. Average sexual partners for women in the UK prior to marriage is eight, and 50% of marriages fail. So, there are very few virgins and a minority of succeesful lifetime partnerships.

I don't believe that the monogamous marriage style of life proves anything other than that it was the morality imposed on us for many reasons and that we have adapted emotionally to expect it and/or try to live with it.

I think that physiologically we may well be/are the same as 200,000 years ago, but that there are many genetic survival strategies that we are free to adapt to as our environment and circumstances dictates. There are scenarios where Alpha Male fucks everyone, Alpha Female decides which males and females fuck, and even systems in which the females fuck all the males to confuse the genetic provenance as it were. Don't forget that >10% of kids don't have the Daddy that Mummy says :smile:.

I don't believe that jealousy proves anything other than that we get pissed off when we feel we might lose something we want for ourselves.

I think we are seeing the break down of the last survival strategy that came from the growth of what we call "civilisation". The reason is simply that women are free to choose now. When women have economic independence and their independent rights are protected, they can choose to live and fuck as they choose. This won't happen overnight. Conservatives will try to say that the old way is the right and only way. But clearly it isn't for everyone when they have the freedom to choose.

It has nothing to do with morality being forced on us. Its a lifestyle that best insures the survival of the species. If we are supposed to be entirely sexually free and highly polygamous, the emotion of jealousy would not exist. Jealousy appears to me to be a very dangerous emotion but its there and we can't hide it. Jealousy can cause murderous rages and that wipes our genes from the earth. If we are supposed to share and share allike, if that made our species stronger it would not exist. Why does love exist? I think love exists because it binds a couple together during the early child bearing years which is best for the survival of their offspring.

I feel sorry for you. You see everything as a conservative right wing conspiracy. How desultory. I look at it from an objective more scientific perspective. There are no bogeymen who puppet our strings other than the genes inside us. Sure starting some 2000 years ago religion reared its head but these things have taken place well b/4 religion. In fact the gods of rome and greece which pre date Christianity were polygamous lustful hedonists yet there was still marriage. there is marriage ceremony in China/ Japan, which aren't Judeo Christian at all. Same with India. Very similar regard for the bonding world wide in vastly differing cultures w/o a shred of christian conservatism. WHY?

There is certainly more sexual freedom now but many women still need that emotional connect to bed down with a guy. And thats in THEIR PRIMITIVE GENETIC PAST and it drives them today.

BTW your def of jealousy is really ugly and distasteful inasmuch as it denotes your need to own another person.

And comically what I see on this site from men always is the idea that once women throw off the shackles of their morallity, they will be major fuck stars craving giant dicks and hundreds of partners. *Look at my cock. Is it big, do you like it? How am I doing? Any girlies want to hook up with this big slab?* And the women here, on a very liberated site say no, what we really want is a nice guy who treats us well and supports us emotionally. If he has a nice big cock, all the better but there are lots of other things that come first.

 

[Drifterwood]

It has nothing to do with morality being forced on us. Its a lifestyle that best insures the survival of the species.

Prove it - there are plenty of alternative sexual survival systems.

If we are supposed to be entirely sexually free and highly polygamous, the emotion of jealousy would not exist.

Jealousy does not exist where polygamy and polyandry are the norm with respect to sex. You don't understand how emotions reflect responses in different cultures.

Jealousy appears to me to be a very dangerous emotion but its there and we can't hide it. Jealousy can cause murderous rages and that wipes our genes from the earth. If we are supposed to share and share allike, if that made our species stronger it would not exist.

Jaloousy does help us survive. It makes us value what we have. All five wives might get jealous if the man fucks someone else.

Why does love exist? I think love exists because it binds a couple together during the early child bearing years which is best for the survival of their offspring.

Love is an abstract - write a poem. Most people in the world do not marry for romantic love.

I feel sorry for you.

Thanks.

You see everything as a conservative right wing conspiracy. How desultory. I look at it from an objective more scientific perspective. There are no bogeymen who puppet our strings other than the genes inside us.

Hormones drive our sexual urges, not our genes.

Sure starting some 2000 years ago religion reared its head but these things have taken place well b/4 religion. In fact the gods of rome and greece which pre date Christianity were polygamous lustful hedonists yet there was still marriage. there is marriage ceremony in China/ Japan, which aren't Judeo Christian at all. Same with India. Very similar regard for the bonding world wide in vastly differing cultures w/o a shred of christian conservatism. WHY?

Property and controling it.

All historically recorded civilisations had religion, it didn't start 2000 years ago.

There is certainly more sexual freedom now but many women still need that emotional connect to bed down with a guy. And thats in THEIR PRIMITIVE GENETIC PAST and it drives them today.

Some do, some think they do, some know they don't. Genes also drive polyamorous behaviour.

BTW your def of jealousy is really ugly and distasteful inasmuch as it denotes your need to own another person.

You'll have to explain that one further.

And comically what I see on this site from men always is the idea that once women throw off the shackles of their morality, they will be major fuck stars craving giant dicks and hundreds of partners. *Look at my cock. Is it big, do you like it? How am I doing? Any girlies want to hook up with this big slab?*

I don't see that.

And the women here, on a very liberated site say no, what we really want is a nice guy who treats us well and supports us emotionally. If he has a nice big cock, all the better but there are lots of other things that come first.

Actually, I have two sex partners who have made it very clear that they just want me for my cock and how I use it. They are both married. I have two other partners with whom I do share a more emotional contact which is my preference.

It's not a conspiracy, it's fact. Conservatives and religious devotees do believe that there is a right and wrong based upon their sacred teachings or received morality. You are doing it here, just you are trying to justify it with some bogus science and poor history.

 

[LACJohn]

Brother, I've gotten the most passionate love of my life with no seduction needed (I suppose having a decent personality, common interests, good conversation ability, and a good body and face works sometimes ), and I've had women beg to fuck me and throw themselves at my feet and get nothing. Maybe they should have just spread their legs an inch more apart? I mean, I am pretty girth-y.

Thats because you display Value.

Seduction is just one single way to display value.

I don't mean "value" as in "a great guy" either, I mean it in the ways you described.

But understand that most (99% of guys) don't have women begging them to fuck. I get complimented on my looks all the time by women, it doesn't mean they want to open up their legs for me by a longshot.

 

[B_excalibur_07]

Who cares!!!!! Lets just enjoy life. Relax