Disillusioned Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I'm one in a million, a man who doesn't really want sex because I don't have the least possible use for sex (and I am hetero). BTW Beethoven never got any. Sir Isaac Newton never got any. Queen Elizabeth I never got any. As far as anyone knows, none of them WANTED any.
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 YES!!! NOW You Can STOP Your Relationship From Falling Apart . . . EVEN If It Seems Everything Is Too Late. What's the main idea of this book?
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I'm one in a million, a man who doesn't really want sex because I don't have the least possible use for sex (and I am hetero). BTW Beethoven never got any. Sir Isaac Newton never got any. Queen Elizabeth I never got any. As far as anyone knows, none of them WANTED any. Too many days in the saddle?
ADF Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 But you agree with me otherwise, right? I'm not saying feminists are evil although many of them are soft in the head communists (all animals are equal). I actually blame the pill and condom for the age of no string relationships. But popular culture Spice Girls...is not very "Hey girls let's stop parting and have relationship" and I don't see feminists to negate that as it serves their agenda of eroding society...they are commies after all. No, I don't agree with the rest of what you said. And I think you throw the word "commie" around like rice at a wedding, having no idea what you're talking about. As I said earlier, you are clearly a man with some big chips on your shoulder, and I think you are here to vent and try to pick fights with people.
mem11363 Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 Ask him what his longest relationship was and what he liked/disliked about his GF/wife. See how much effort he puts into getting to know you - BEFORE he tries to get in your pants. Ask him how many sexual partners he has had. You hear it everywhere.. "Men only want one thing" , "All men want is sex" I even read it in this stupid book written so that women can understand men. Well I would have to say that if it's true, there's not much point in trying to relate to men. We might as well just ask ourselves if we want to start prioritizing our sexual satisfaction over trying to start a partnership. There are guys who ONLY want to use women for pleasure.. and I've been meeting some like that. I walk the other way and would like to think that's just them, and that there surely are other men out there who could think more of me than something to be used for sex. I believe that men want sex.. sure.. so do women. I have strong desires too.. but I won't have sex unless I'm in something serious and the time is right. I would like to think that some men want more than ONLY sex as well. Anyone out there with any words of encouragement - and - More importantly: Anyone who can give me tips about what to look for to identify a man who really wants something meaningful with a woman in addition to his sexual desire for her? tnx
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 (edited) No, I don't agree with the rest of what you said. And I think you throw the word "commie" around like rice at a wedding, having no idea what you're talking about. As I said earlier, you are clearly a man with some big chips on your shoulder, and I think you are here to vent and try to pick fights with people. As a former Sov-bloc citizen I know pretty damn well what I'm talking about. And believe me every time I think I'm just too sensitive to commie smell...I get proven right. They are extremists and they are dangerous, mainly thanks to the army of useful fools-feminists one of them. They do erode the western society and long time ago diverted from their rightful agenda-women rights. I give pep talks and some guys get agitated and call names....I don't encourage them further by fighting back. They don't want my advice...their loss. So I don't think I pick fights. If you tell me what big chips it might be I can give it a thought. It seems the "discussion" with you is over. Have a good night. Edited June 6, 2010 by DanielMadr
SarahRose Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 Dear OP, What makes you different from his male best friends? If there is no sex (and I mean deep intimacy here) I think you can't be much of a competition for his male friends. That's why sex is important for guys. You smell nice, you are clumsy and you need our protection...and we are wired to respond to that. The same way you respond to masculine features or crying babies. Guys who do you for the sex only....don't actually like you that much if they would they would stick around. They are either ego driven (bed notches) or they are "killing time" until they find someone worthy their full attention. That is the problem...it is hard to tell. Because even the biggest player will stick around if he finds you attractive. How to weed out the bed notchers...Make it obvious you are not looking for fwb or ONS...the honest ones will eject. The bad ones who gonna pretend...well, you just don't put out that easily. But even when a guy wants a relationship with you from the start, he can change his mind after you make him jump through hoops or if he finds something that kills the chemistry. Bottom line...you never know. Be the best you can be and hope for the best. Trust your gut and don't let your fears complicate things too much. Good advice. I think women should trust their guts and if they find themselves making excuses for a guy, then it is all over. I think not letting yourself get swept off your feet in hormones is key. Keep dating and that doesn't mean sleeping with them. Stay out of the bed for as long as possible and go out with lots of different guys. Go to the movies, mini golf, jet skiing, hiking, etc. I think that would keep a girl from being locked down to one guy who may not be all that interested. Keep dating until one stands out from the rest and he is so eager it is very obvious I hate reading the same stories from young girls on here. The meet a guy and they hit it off and they go like gangbusters for a few weeks and then he doesn't call as much or return her texts or whatever and she's already had sex with him and agreed to be exclusive. Then she'll spend months trying to figure out why he wants to hang out with his friends on the weekend instead of her. Then finally they break up.
SarahRose Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I think the situation is mainly girls fault. 90% of males are not serial daters and would be more than happy for one willing partner-regular sex. Girls in their 20s are in demand, they know it and are enjoying life, d!ck hopping like crazy probably thanks to Girl Power and Sex(Slvvts) in the City etc. Lots of guys just try to keep up...not to get hurt by being dumped. Afterall males are supposed to be more promiscuous. Reality-in average girls have probably 3times more sexual partners than guys. I think both sexes are promiscuous but we like to pretend that women aren't.
SarahRose Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 A man's biological imperative is to spread his seed as widely as possible. A woman's is to nest and raise offspring. It's as simple as that. Understanding that is the key to understanding human relationships. A woman want's a man who will invest some time to nesting, a man want's a woman who will help him satisfy his imperative. This dynamic is what makes relationships possible. A woman can't overplay her hand, and a man can only bluff so far, or the relationship is doomed. Only when both parties surrender their imperative can a relationship last for more than a few years. We call this success? I don't know why men tend to believe this rubbish? It is utter bunk. If you look at most mammals, a female in heat will boink any male that can get to her. If men are supposed to be sowing their seed for survival of the species wouldn't it make sense for the female to take on as many males as possible to ensure survival of the species? Look at cats, dogs, monkeys
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I think both sexes are promiscuous but we like to pretend that women aren't. I think it is actually the first time in history of human kind when girls freed of any responsibility thanks to contraception are showing the true face. I think men are still more promiscuous but they did not adapt to the new situation quite as well. Just because pvssy is in demand and to get one is more complicated than to just be pretty(which is everything what a girl must do to get laid). Guys are allowing girls to be promiscuous by not shaming them. I believe thanks to liberal propaganda and their own agenda (hoping they will profit from that as they do...a little). If guys used higher standards - avoiding party girls, it might help the situation. I actually think it is better this way than some rigid religious dating. But it could be better if girls put out to more spectrum of guys. It would result in less of bitter guys. My only hope is finding a girl who isn't a sperm deposit. Or at least her lovers were not sleazy ones. For my selfish sake and hers as she will have better memories.
somedude81 Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I don't know why men tend to believe this rubbish? It is utter bunk. If you look at most mammals, a female in heat will boink any male that can get to her. If men are supposed to be sowing their seed for survival of the species wouldn't it make sense for the female to take on as many males as possible to ensure survival of the species? Look at cats, dogs, monkeys The only real reason why females don't take on as many males as possible is that human children are pretty much dependent on their parents for 12 or so years. BTW I'm about pre-modern society. Very few other mammals need to take care of their young for more than a year. So yes, human females need to nest and raise offspring, until the kids can take care of themselves. Though with the advent of birth control women don't have to worry about getting pregnant and some do go wild. That doesn't change the fact that men have the desire to sow their seeds.
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I don't know why men tend to believe this rubbish? It is utter bunk. If you look at most mammals, a female in heat will boink any male that can get to her. If men are supposed to be sowing their seed for survival of the species wouldn't it make sense for the female to take on as many males as possible to ensure survival of the species? Look at cats, dogs, monkeys Men are more promiscuous or at least tend to be.(As discussed earlier...they have the potential but nowadays just can't keep up with girls who are in demand) Cats, dogs and monkey...maybe their mating habits are the reason they don't have a microwave Human mating habits are more effective. Basically we choose the best we can find in terms of survival capability (health and nurturing qualities in women; health and providing/protecting qualities in men) Some call it society bias and they would like All animals equal. But I call it genetically encoded. And wouldn't change it. And any attempt to behave contra this nature results in pain and confusion.
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 The only real reason why females don't take on as many males as possible is that human children are pretty much dependent on their parents for 12 or so years. BTW I'm about pre-modern society. Very few other mammals need to take care of their young for more than a year. So yes, human females need to nest and raise offspring, until the kids can take care of themselves. Though with the advent of birth control women don't have to worry about getting pregnant and some do go wild. That doesn't change the fact that men have the desire to sow their seeds. Just a remark> sowing a seed is not exactly correct. Human kind evolved to a stadium where males have to stick around for the reasons you wrote (child takes longer to grow) and mother and child need providing and protection. I believe humans also concluded that it is more effective to seed and nurture a few seeds than just sow and abandon. But in gneral men are more likely to sow the seed as they don't have to worry about labor. But I also think in history any man who sowed and ejected was pursued by other tribe members and made to pay or stoned to death by the relatives. Because it is actually immature/irresponsible behavior. Why would other males pay(assuming they haven't killed her for being a slvvt) for his 10 minutes of pleasure? Hence no sex before marriage in most societies. You did made her pragnant you were given a choice: marriage or stoning.
Jersey Shortie Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 OP, too many men measure their own worthy by the amount of women that will sleep with them. This is hugely based out of personal male insecurity. They need a new women to accept them to assert how they define their masculinty. Translated, men desperately want women's approvel to feel good about themselves as men. If we had more strong male role models, we would have less men that jusified crappy behavior based on "hormones" and felt they needed to seek out approvel from any willing female. Because we would have more men that would want to do right by the women in their lives and by themselves and families over banging anything that spread their legs. Controlling female sexuality and promoting ideas about how men need x amount of women to fullfill some self inflated prophecey is based both out of control and insecurity by men for ions and ions. I do not deny that men have strong urges sexually. But if men felt truly secure in themselves as men, they would have a stronger desire to not treat women as objects just there for sex to validate their own masculintiy as much as they do in present culture.
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 OP, too many men measure their own worthy by the amount of women that will sleep with them. This is hugely based out of personal male insecurity. They need a new women to accept them to assert how they define their masculinty. Translated, men desperately want women's approvel to feel good about themselves as men. If we had more strong male role models, we would have less men that jusified crappy behavior based on "hormones" and felt they needed to seek out approvel from any willing female. Because we would have more men that would want to do right by the women in their lives and by themselves and families over banging anything that spread their legs. Controlling female sexuality and promoting ideas about how men need x amount of women to fullfill some self inflated prophecey is based both out of control and insecurity by men for ions and ions. I do not deny that men have strong urges sexually. But if men felt truly secure in themselves as men, they would have a stronger desire to not treat women as objects just there for sex to validate their own masculintiy as much as they do in present culture. As much as I disrespect you for the posts in other threads I find this post very much true. But let me warn you...when men(boys) start to behave like mature secure adults(men)....women will have to step up significantly, because men will start to demand more quality traits in woman than they do now. And quite honestly the same way guys today behave like boys...women behave like girls/boys mix. And I think it will be 'back to children and kitchen time' and less gossiping in cubicles. But that is only hypothetical utopia. So not let us worry.
Jersey Shortie Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 As much as I disrespect you for the posts in other threads I find this post very much true. Then follow your own advice and act like a grown man who doesn't feels the need to disrespect women online just because he doesn't agree with them.
DanielMadr Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 Then follow your own advice and act like a grown man who doesn't feels the need to disrespect women online just because he doesn't agree with them. Here we go again... Come on. Sometimes there is nothing to agree or disagree with in your posts....you just do counterproductive rant or at least it seems like it
SarahRose Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 The only real reason why females don't take on as many males as possible is that human children are pretty much dependent on their parents for 12 or so years. BTW I'm about pre-modern society. Very few other mammals need to take care of their young for more than a year. So yes, human females need to nest and raise offspring, until the kids can take care of themselves. Though with the advent of birth control women don't have to worry about getting pregnant and some do go wild. That doesn't change the fact that men have the desire to sow their seeds. I was talking about in order to get pregnant in the first place. It would be in the females best interest to take on as many males as possible during ovulation in order to ensure a pregnancy. If women need to nest and raise offspring until kids can take care of themselves, then why can women get pregnant so soon after giving birth? You would think biology would do something to naturally prevent that. I don't your biology theory holds up at all.
SarahRose Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 OP, too many men measure their own worthy by the amount of women that will sleep with them. This is hugely based out of personal male insecurity. They need a new women to accept them to assert how they define their masculinty. Translated, men desperately want women's approvel to feel good about themselves as men. If we had more strong male role models, we would have less men that jusified crappy behavior based on "hormones" and felt they needed to seek out approvel from any willing female. Because we would have more men that would want to do right by the women in their lives and by themselves and families over banging anything that spread their legs. Controlling female sexuality and promoting ideas about how men need x amount of women to fullfill some self inflated prophecey is based both out of control and insecurity by men for ions and ions. I do not deny that men have strong urges sexually. But if men felt truly secure in themselves as men, they would have a stronger desire to not treat women as objects just there for sex to validate their own masculintiy as much as they do in present culture. Of course it about insecurity. You read it all the time on here how a guy will show off his number 10 girlfriend to his friends or brag about how many women he has slept with. He is looking for acceptance and approval to inflate his poor self esteem.
hats Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 Most men don't just want sex. Men, like women, want human connection too. Otherwise they could just hire a prostitute. The thing is... a lot of times men don't want to do the things that women think should be in a "real" relationship. Sometimes some men don't want to call everyday, or treat a girl out on dates, or talk about his emotions, or make plans for the future together, or make a long term commitment. That doesn't mean that he actually thinks of women as sexual objects and nothing else. I'd go so far as to say most men don't.
Author TooAccepting32 Posted June 6, 2010 Author Posted June 6, 2010 Thanks to everyone who has tried to help. Kang- aww... I'm glad to hear you have standards. I hope it means you'll get a quality woman out of the deal because you aren't distracted by someone else ADF.. at what approximate age do you think they become ready for something more meaningful? I'm dealing with guys in their late 20s and 30s lol If I go into 40s a lot of them have already had their kids and stuff so they've already done the family thing. Also, guys, I understand that you can get some mixed messages from women when you're a "nice guy". There are some girls who like jerks.. don't date those ones There are also women who want attention and don't want you.. Healthy women know what they want and it's neither jerks, nor attention from guys they don't like. They just might not be super common. When it comes to wanting the guy to make the moves yea women want that.. 1. a lot of women aren't comfortable with their sexuality and have been conditioned to feel guilty about it. If she initiates she might feel like a ho, if he initiates she can feel like it "just happened". She won't admit that. I don't think it has to do with not wanting to be blamed for things happening because of the sex like pregnancy. It's more to do with not wanting to be responsible for having sexual desires and choosing to act on them in the first place. A woman who has become comfortable with her sexuality will be comfortable initiating during the relationship (provided there aren't other things wrong) 2. Otherwise, when it comes to first contact, a lot of women just want you to work for it. There are a lot of good reasons for this, but that's for another thread. I will give you a little advice about the first kiss. If you're nervous that she won't reciprocate, there are a few mini steps you can take to test the waters and check her reaction: -touch her somewhere if you don't usually touch her like her arm or shoulder, -stand, sit, lean in closer to her.. to show her something, or to look at something together - kiss her hand, or cheek.. or nose, - invite her to cuddle up to you - If she doesn't react well to the above, then she probably isn't kiss ready, or she's not into you.. either way no kissie! Thanks again responders, there's some great advice in here
Jersey Shortie Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 Here we go again... Come on. Sometimes there is nothing to agree or disagree with in your posts....you just do counterproductive rant or at least it seems like it A) Don't play innocent. You purposely made that comment to be ridiculous. B) Try not to be any more silly then you have to. If you felt that my commentary was that counterproductive , you would never respond to it. But you do. I think the truth is you feel threatened by my commentary. And because of that, instead of mearly just disagreeing with me which is totally fine, you take special care to try and degrade my opinion. That's not normal behavior. That is actually very insecure behavior on your part. And a common on by certain LS men. We see it time and time again. It's one thing to disagree with what I say. No problem. But you go beyond that. You're quite odious.
somedude81 Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 I was talking about in order to get pregnant in the first place. It would be in the females best interest to take on as many males as possible during ovulation in order to ensure a pregnancy. Thanks for bringing that up, I was looking for a way to mention my next point. Women actually do want to take on as many males as possible to ensure a pregnancy and get the "best" genes. We've all heard stories of how girls in LTR's or marriages ended up sleeping with some other dude and gets pregnant. There are also girls who have posted on this very forum, that once they started having sex, they ended up sleeping with 30 guys in one year. Getting back to the pregnant thing, the size and shape of the human penis actually gives some hints on how promiscuous humans are. I'm only going by secondary research, buy science has shown that the more promiscious animals have larger penis's in comparison to their body size. The human penis is nearly triple the size of a gorilla and from what I've read, humans are much more promiscuous than gorillas. Chimps are known to be promiscuous and they are also better equipped than gorillas. The next theory I read, is that the coronal ridge of the human penis is actually designed to scoop out the sperm of a previous male. It's basically an anti sloppy seconds (thirds or fourth's etc) tool. If women need to nest and raise offspring until kids can take care of themselves, then why can women get pregnant so soon after giving birth? You would think biology would do something to naturally prevent that. I don't your biology theory holds up at all. Nature does have an natural birth control. Though it's not 100 successful, breastfeeding has been shown to prevent women from getting pregnant.
nolagurl07 Posted June 6, 2010 Posted June 6, 2010 So I met this guy we went on one date to go have a drink. The conversation was good it went pretty well. We talked on the phone for about a week after and decided to go on another date. We picked a time and a place to eat. I talked to this guy briefly friday night just verifying the plans. We were going to meet on sat at 730 for dinner. I show up at 730 and I dont see his car. I decide to call him and find out where hes at. No answer I then decide to go inside the place to see if he was there but he wasnt. I waited about 30 min. b/c it was raining so i didnt know if he was running late. I tried calling again no answer. I then figured he just stood me up. After that i decided to go out with some friends instead and one of my friends suggested i call him from an unknown number to see if he picks up. So i did and this girl answered. Im like is so and so there. Shes like no hes in the shower whos this. Im like well whos this shes like Liz his fiance..im like oh really well u can just tell him his date called when he gets out just wanted to make sure he was ok cuz he didnt show up..i asked her if she knew he had a date and she said no of course and i told her well goodluck dealing with that have a goodnight. I guess i dont really need advice b/c i know it wasnt my fault but im just mad that i didnt see something might of been wrong. Do guys really do this...thats crazy..Atleast i didnt invest alot of time into him but still..
Recommended Posts