Ross MwcFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 And I believe (know) you are wrong. Fair enough. Maybe I am, but I doubt it.
silvermercy Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Well what I mean is, is that I believe most men who have a partner would really like the idea of sleeping with a different woman everyday if they didn't have a partner. Thank goodness you are wrong.
Ross MwcFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Because I explained on the bottom that you actually minimize your pleasure by having sex exclusively with strangers. I wouldn't know.
silvermercy Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Fair enough. Maybe I am, but I doubt it. You ARE wrong and I don't doubt it. Most men would be sleeping on sofas around the world otherwise.
Ross MwcFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I think it's because you are sexually inexperienced and insecure. Also, too young. Not sure why you feel the need to be rude to me. Yes, I'm sexually inexperienced, I've never even had a sexual experience with a woman before. No, I'm not young, I'm 35. Insecure? Insecure about what? I've got no idea why insecurity would have anything to do with my belief.
Ross MwcFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Sounds awful to me, but I'm a woman. Quantity is better than quality? I wonder if a man who has had truly mindblowing sex with a particular woman once, as compared to more pedestrian sex with other partners, would share this opinion. Have you had that experience? Nope. I'm not sure why you guys are now feeling the need to attack me and are getting bent out of shape. I'm sorry for believing what I believe, I wish I hadn't said anything now.
Metis Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Not sure why you feel the need to be rude to me.Wasn't trying to be rude. Just drew certain conclusions from the things you've said. Yes, I'm sexually inexperienced, I've never even had a sexual experience with a woman before. No, I'm not young, I'm 35. Well, I got two out of three right, I see. You've never had sex, so the ideas you have about what makes a sex life good are those of a adolescent boy. I'm sorry you haven't had much luck, but your inexperience shows quite clearly. So take it from people who actually have experience. First of all, certain men WILDLY exaggerate their number of sexual partners. If you want to be on par with them, go ahead -- tell everybody how you sleep with a different girl every night. Why do they do this? To make people like you feel inferior and to assert themselves over you. Second, for reasons that I've already explained that you are welcome to reread: quantity is not quality in sex, and that goes even for people who are not monogamous. Even people who like to have sex with multiple partners, but who have healthy sexualities, generally want regular partners. Wanting to have sex with a different woman every night -- that's a fantasy of someone who does not know the difference between intercourse and masturbation. And you don't, right? Insecure? Insecure about what? I've got no idea why insecurity would have anything to do with my belief.For reasons that I stated: the only reason to have sex with a different person every night is to prove to third parties what a stud you are, rather than to experience the maximum pleasure you can.
xxoo Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Nope. I'm not sure why you guys are now feeling the need to attack me and are getting bent out of shape. I'm sorry for believing what I believe, I wish I hadn't said anything now. Sorry you feel attacked.....didn't mean to do that Your position makes more sense now, in context of your experience. Most people want to sow some wild oats before settling down. That's a normal feeling. But part of the process of sowing oats is experiencing what is ok sex, and what is great sex---and then entering a relationship with consistently great sex. The attitude that a different woman every day is every man's dream is offputting to some women because we far prefer our partner over a different man every day--and we hope that our partners appreciate us as much as we appreciate them.
Ross MwcFan Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Sorry that I took things the wrong way and thought you were both attacking, I guess I'm just more sensitive these days.
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 My husband would curl up and DIE before he slept with a different woman every day. He could barely bring himself to sleep with more than a very very few women in his lifetime. He takes sexual intimacy WAY seriously and is not comfortable AT ALL with the idea of getting to that naked, vulnerable place with people who are strangers to him. When he was single, I mean. I don't know about his secret fantasy life - he might well have flashes of "what would it be like to …" but if he had the chance, he would NEVER. And he's always been very attractive to women. Of course, he was successfully conditioned by his religious upbringing, but even putting that aside, I think his true nature informs him that having sexual contact really, actually is INTIMATE. For him. OP - in any case, promiscuous sex as seen on TV is not really something you need to be concerned with. That behavior doesn't work for a huge portion of the population.
Mrlonelyone Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 The reason this fascinates men and sickens women goes back to our evolution. Our sex drives evolved to optimize the chance of passing on beneficial genes which for males and females means different mating strategies. Go back on the tree of life some 300-400 million years ago. The only ancestors of us were creatures called synapsids...a type of "reptile". These were called mammal like reptiles because they were reptiles on their way to becoming mammals. These synapsids were the first creatures on our tree who could only lay a few eggs. So the females had to be careful who they let fertilize them. Only the best males could get a go. Before this our ancestors were these amphibians who just squirted egg and sperm into the water, not unlike modern frogs. Males on the other hand still had the primitive drive to spurt spurt spurt their sperm as far and wide as they can. Since most females will not let them do it....they have to be persistent and keep trying with as men women as will let them. For hundreds of millions of years, long before our ancestors had hair let alone were monkey's, this was the way it was. Not unlike modern Norway rats. Deep in our brain there is a part sometimes called the reptillian brain.... structures we have in common with the lowliest salamander. That part drives much of human sexual and reproductive behaviour. Slightly above that we have structures that are just the same as what we see in a rat. Fast forward to today's people. We have layerd on much more brain, the neocortex. Where we think and reason and process. That said many men who are not mature enough still think with their reptillian brain when it comes to sex. Emotional maturity can be thought of as learning to know when your base instincts aren't right and when they are (How to think with that prefrontal cortex). The men you see on TRW lack that level of maturity. That's not an attack on anyone. This kind of maturity of which I speak comes from experience. It must be disconcerting for many, especially for women who are more socially aware than men (in general), to think that we huamns are driven by so much instinct. It's not their fault. They are young and have the power due to fame to make horrible decisions.
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 The reason this fascinates men and sickens women goes back to our evolution. Our sex drives evolved to optimize the chance of passing on beneficial genes which for males and females means different mating strategies. ??? I just posted about my own husband, who is not a woman. Also, just for the record, though I acknowledge freely the existence of "reptilian brain" in all of us, I strongly reject the oft repeated assertion here on LS that "reptilian brain," "biological imperative," or whatever you prefer to call it is actually driving, explaining or excusing much of the behavior we see in the world today - sexual, or otherwise. Unless we are studying serial killers or other people who are functioning more as animals than humans in aspects of life, we've been evolving in a different direction for millennia. The majority of us have not been left completely behind. I don't think the sexcapades of boys on The Real World really fall into this category. I think those guys are reacting to social pressures, lessons and cues. For the record, I also don't think that it's "in my DNA" to like a tall rich guy.
Metis Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I love it when evolution is brought up as an excuse for piggish behavior. "But it's natural!" the argument goes. Okay, let's look at this from an evolutionary standpoint. The evolutionary imperative isn't merely to quirt one's sperm -- it's to pass on one's genes. Those are two different things. And thus, it's an important part of the reproductive process to ensure, beyond the sex act, that the fertilized cells will actually develop into individuals who will then survive long enough to reproduce themselves. Humans by far are not the only animals where it actually serves the long-term reproductive interests of males to stick with regular partners and avoid casual encounters. Can men who sleep with lots of different women be said to have reproductive success? Remember, it's not a "success" until you become a grandfather. Women who sleep with those kinds of men are exceedingly likely to use some kind of birth control. In deep antiquity, when birth control was unreliable, children conceived outside of stable, community-sanctioned relationships ran a very high chance of being aborted, killed at birth, or enslaved and abused so badly from the earliest childhood that they would have very little chance of reproducing themselves. So no, between a stable, long-term relationship with one or even several partners on the one hand, and a string of one-night stands on the other, the former is a far superior reproductive strategy from an evolutionary standpoint.
jobaba Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 In my life experience (in my 30s already), a man is doing pretty well if he has slept with 20 women by the time he is 30. Something like 50 is stud status. And something like 150 is like ridiculous to the point where your life has to be focused on THAT (PUA, getting women into bed). Over the course of 10 years that's like 15 women a year. Women can get laid WAY more if they so wish. Maybe once a week for an above average looking woman. Also, those guys on Jersey Shore are famous. If they were no name shmuck guidos, they'd fare way worse.
Woggle Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Jersey Shore is not real even if it is called a reality show so stop living your life based on it. This is just as dumb as a woman wanting to drink as much as Snookie. I have seen them doing multiple takes of the show with my own eyes so stop believing it.
Anela Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 This new sexual "liberation" sucks for men, we've got to work our asses off to get with some goober's tuesday night leftovers. Ew. I'm sure being described as such, doesn't do much for girls/women either.
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted by Wolf18 This new sexual "liberation" sucks for men, we've got to work our asses off to get with some goober's tuesday night leftovers. And it must suck EXTRA when no amount of "work" can get you even "some goober's tuesday night leftovers." I mean … what does that say about you?
Mrlonelyone Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 @Metis An explaination is not an excuse. Did you se the part at the end where I said that emotionally mature people know how to control themselves? @mme Chaucer I thought I should just let you know don't bother responding to me as I have you on ignore.
grkBoy Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 I always ask the same question when someone claims how monogamy goes against nature. "So you have no issue then if a guy/girl you're sleeping with decided to just start sleeping with someone else?" Usually I get evasive answers...but the vibe from them says they want a world where they can cheat on others, but others can't cheat on them. Even animals get possessive of mates. That's nature.
dasein Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 And it must suck EXTRA when no amount of "work" can get you even "some goober's tuesday night leftovers." I mean … what does that say about you? Who knows? it's much more obvious, though, what the above statment says about you.
Anela Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 @mme Chaucer I thought I should just let you know don't bother responding to me as I have you on ignore. She was responding to Wolf18.
Metis Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 @Metis An explaination is not an excuse. And moreover, your explanation is wrong.
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted by Mme. Chaucer And it must suck EXTRA when no amount of "work" can get you even "some goober's tuesday night leftovers." I mean … what does that say about you? Who knows? it's much more obvious, though, what the above statment says about you. What DOES it say about me? Other than I think it must really suck to be coming from the place where the person who posted that comes from? I don't get it.
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted by Mrlonelyone @mme Chaucer I thought I should just let you know don't bother responding to me as I have you on ignore. I think it's funny when LS members announce, "I have you on ignore." Is this supposed to be some kind of a punishment? Do I care who is ignoring me, unless I am trying to have a personal conversation with them? Nope! Also, just for the record, if a member's post inspires me to contribute to a thread, as Mrlonelyone's misfired attempt to "teach us a lesson" just did, I am not actually responding to that poster personally.
dasein Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 What DOES it say about me? The intent of your post is to insult, ridicule and berate a specific poster, personally and directly, not merely disagree with the words they post or their POV, regardless of what your "rationalization du jour" is, coming from someone supposedly happily married, yet posting on a dating board. Readers can certainly draw their own conclusions of what that says about you. I won't stoop more than I already have.
Recommended Posts