Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The reality or should I say the fact is, oxytocin,
Dude, you're killing me with the armchair neurobiology. Please stop. It's laughable at best. No matter how many times you type the word "oxytocin," it's still going to be true that men sometimes have emotional attachment with sex and women sometimes don't. This well-known and not up for debate.
Nope "everyone" doesn't. Like anyone could make anyone else "accept" something that they don't like anyway. For my part, I am getting old. My game is pretty much played. But I would like to see a large scale attitude shift in society. I'd like my daughter to experience a measure of freedom from the gatekeeper, sex as love value thing that you see in society. I would love to see both my son and daughter have a fun and healthy sex life without all this gamesmanship that is the measuring of people's goodness over a fun act.
This attitude would require that you:
1. alter various laws, most notably the laws that won't treat one parent as "default parent" and other as optional at the default parent's whim
2. when you get to have obligatory paternity testing on birth
Until then, you can bet that the attitude will never change. Think again what would you advise to your son, to marry a prostitute and bring her home and then make a housewife out of her? That's not an impossibility, I'm sure plenty have managed to do it.
I'm sure plenty have married former felons, former drug addicts, recovering alcoholics, etc. Question is - is it worth it to risk getting your life destroyed over something that you don't really have control over and is generally completely dependable on other person? Is it ireally worth it to be smoeone's "savior" due to the fact that others don't want them for a serious flaw that they have, if you aren't seriously flawed as well and thus forced to pick them?
I think it's not worth it for any average guy to go with a pick with such a liability. Some people will disregard this and actually succeed to live a life with a person who spent some time in a mental institution as well. But I'm sure nobody will truly argue that it doesn't matter.
This has been said a million times. Monogamy isn't inherited via genes. It's just a random stupidity of a research funded by taxpayers' money. Monogamy is a social construct and person's behavior is a good mirror on how well did this social construct ingrain into that person. Sometimes people follow the concept until the point when they decide to "take a break", not to miss out on something. This is often followed after they failed in life in something, not necessarily a relationship, but it often is. It's a sign of a weak character and a sign that they will very potentially be a liability.
Some people simply never were anything else than a liability, since they bought into a social construct that says "you only live once". This concept is rather dubious and inherently stupid because they tend to think they are doing something for themselves when in fact that are doing things simply not to miss out on things they perceive as fun. This means they'll try out or keep smoking weed because it's so great and hey, you only live once. This means that they'll be causing trouble for the sake of the same reason, or that they'll easily be influenced by someone's behavior just to stay in trends. When it comes to having sex around, they bought into it just because someone (either media, porn, their "best friends") sold them a story that it's great. That's also a proof of a weak character and is very similar to previously mentioned group.
By the way, I'm one of the people who doesn't believe that it's much harder for a guy to find a sex partner than it is for a woman. My belief is that it's only that concepts are different. Since women are usually the ones who don't make an approach, they simply need to be a little flirty at best to attract the people seeking for sex. On the other hand, to achieve the same level of success, the equivalent for the guy would be to hit on any woman that he meets, in an attempt to get a pass with someone.
Most men and women won't give them a pass and that's what this whole theory of "any guy would be willing to have sex if woman approaches him" is wrong about. I guess those guys actually never got approached by a woman.
I see nothing wrong with jumping someone's bones because I feel like it
I do. But there's no need to turn this into a discussion of personal beliefs, we can save that for the Religion section. We are a product of our choices. So we'll see where those choices lead both our individual lives and our society.
My individual life is fine!! And I don't believe in religion so we can skip all that. Just because I've slept with a lot of guys doesn't make me a bad person. I was safe. I'm monogamous when in a relationship. In fact I just made sugar cookies with vanilla frosting for my co-worker boys at work. I mean what true W does that??
Basically you just refuted your own assertion by showing that the common denominator for cheaters is a lack of character and integrity, not wealth.
I never claimed so. I don't even claim that any group would be without people who'd be promiscuous, but there's some general propensity for people with "social occupations" or occupations that somehow are related to being center of everyone's attention, i.e. contacting with others in a "communicative way", not in a "business way" - to be promiscuous more often or to be more promiscuous in general. It's generally associated with how the social construct is ingrained in each person. As a "rule of the right thumb", guys who were acting promiscuous in age when they probably couldn't get laid (i.e. teenage years) will turn out to be promiscuous, because they were raised to be such way.(Exception doesn't alter the general rule for majority of people). They will probably get initiated into sexual activities very early as well and will learn how to manipulate later on to bed as many women - because "their life depends on it". I don't think they'll be having the most sex as a necessity because they'll probably be someone who can't keep women for too long with them, but they'll bed the most women and that'll make them happy and proud. Trashy behavior generally stems from trashy people, only question is what is a trashy behavior for whom.
No, he told me he wanted a relationship and I proceeded with him because I wanted the same thing. Sex is part of being in a relationship, but he lied to me just to get laid. He was never into being with me but didn't want to tell me because that would mean he wouldn't get laid.
See the difference? I didn't use sex to get a relationship from him at all. I think it's fine that some people just want sex...just make sure your partner knows that and don't pretend you want something more just so you can get laid.
I guess it depends on what extent. I am probably 70-80% in a relationship for the sex, I also like doing other things with the person so its not because I "just want sex" but your right sex is a big part. I also think part of this dynamic is born in life experiences, when someone plays the "lets wait game" only to be disappointed 3, 4, 5, 6 months later pretty soon your going to stop doing that, after waiting 6 months with several women your now several years in of being involuntarily celibate which is not really a good time which is why guys cut out if she is not going to put out.
Maybe guys should open up an escrow for women that want to wait and say for every month the woman makes him wait she has to put $2,000 in a month (or some non trivial amount that makes her have some skin in the game). Once regular daily or near daily sex starts then the money can start coming back out a month at a time. That way the woman would have something invested instead of just wasting a guys time if she finds someone better without ever having given him sex. You can put a cap on it like say 4 months where if regular sex has not started occurring he gets to withdraw the money and she can start again if she wants to keep stringing him along. Of course no woman would agree to this so guys just leave after a few weeks if sex is not in the picture if they have experienced being played in the past.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
