Guys, do you respect women who have fbuddy relationships? Is that a "low-grade"chic?

[lamaman3]

In a timely turn of events - I just saw that my friend on FB got engaged. She was in a 2 year LTR. This is a friend I knew from college and I remember how one year during spring break we travelled to South America and she had a fling with one of the guys we met on our trip. Now if you told her fiance who has had a very good relationship with her for the past 2 years that she is not worthy of his love because of her fling in college, or if you told any woman that same thing, frankly they would think of you as the one mentally diseased and not her.

[lamaman3]

Sorry, it's a plain fact. Palin is crucified for things like wardrobe expense and what have you while Clinton had lots of very shady doing back in Arkansas in the Rose Law Firm. BTW, I don't like either political party, so the example doesn't spring from any partisan interest on my part.

 

 

 

Spare the "challenges" please. Where I'm from, men get a bad reputation for flagrantly sleeping around with easy, low quality women. Women in my circle go "Ewww!" at such. The point is that women can have sex casually with no judgment at all provided they are discreet, just like men. A different issue arises when they use euphemisms such as "FWB" or "F-buddys" to euphemize a randomly promiscuous sex life. Stating again, lots of posters in this thread want to couch this as "just something casual between relationships."

 

That's fine, but a straw man. The reality of what the terms usually really signify in practice is quite a different matter. That the terms even exist at all, and that men rarely use them, says fairly plainly that the women using such terms would generally be ashamed of their impulsivity and lack of self-control were it not for the "FWB/F-buddy get out of jail free cards" to "empower" away their compulsive promiscuity.

 

This is exactly it - but you are missing the whole point my friend. There is a secret society of 20% of men and many many more percentage of women (majority) that view sexuality positvely - but they understand how threatened that makes men who get left out of the equation and how they will be jueged for it - which is why we are all discreet. Many women Ive been with are today married, Im sure some of them to insecure judgemental men which is why we are always discrete and Im sure he dosent know all her sexual experiences. Every women who you mentioned that goes "ewww" would JUMP at the chance to sleep with a Bradd Pitt or George Clooney or Derek Jeter. However they go "eww" when a woman isnt discrete about it because then it blows everyone elses cover - after all men like you wouldnt date women who had a ONS with Bradd Pitt - so the women pretend to be judgemental even though every one of them would have done it themselves because then you think highly of them and will pay to take them to dinner and it reinforces to all of them that they must be DISCRETE when dealing with judgemental men.

 

Just because the discretion exists dosent mean its shameful. Your parents dont announce that they just had sex to you or their guests - but if you tried to shame them for having sex it would say more about your mental issues than theirs.

[lamaman3]

Long story short – sex is bad, and it doesn’t matter if you’re religious or not, sex is frowned upon by all and thinking similar to this is ingrained in all of us from a very young age. And who is more inclined to want sex – boys/men of course. So girls are brought up understanding this fact and being wary of it and boys are brought up basically apologizing for their sexual urges.

 

So, fast forwarding a few years to teenage/adult years when a guy comes on too strong or even worse signals that he only wants one thing from a woman – sex, then most women will kick this type to the curb. Some women will simply think that he’s not the type for them. Others will be a lot more colourful in their thinking in regards to his behavior. Either/or, one thing is happening – they have judged his sexuality and have deemed it to be unacceptable to them. Now this is a situation that can start relatively early and have no end date to it. But few, if any women ever care to think that they’ve just judged a man’s sexuality, more often than not in a negative sense at that. Women simply don’t think that way. They just see a guy who’s reverted to type. They’ve dodged a bullet in their eyes, not formed a negative judgment of a person’s sexuality. And as I’ve said before, this behavior starts so early that most women are simply unaware of it. They tend to only become aware of judgmental behavior when they themselves start acting in a manner similar to the known male type.

 

How does this fit in with this thread. Simple, it’s all about judgment. Men judge female sexuality. Absolutely no surprises there. But guess what – guess whose been judging men too, but rarely realizes it!

 

 

 

.

 

This is false - women will respond favorably to a sexual approach from a HIGH VALUE male. Of course they will reject most guys who approach them, sexually OR otherwise. They may be more polite about it if the guy is overtly sexual at first - but really - women understand that any "ROMANTIC" approach is sexual, whether its grabbing her ass at a nightclub or asking her out on a coffee date. And for every guy they either view you as a potential lover or NOT. If you do get slotted into lover territory, she may very well view your initial sexual advance favorably and have a sexual fling. If she is looking for a boyfriend, she will screen for a guy who wants more of a relationship. Both of these they think of as lovers - they are not screening out men for being sexual. On the other hand, if it is a guy they do not like, they will reject his approach whether its sexual or asking out on a coffee date. Because they dont see him as a potential lover. So no, women do not judge men's sexuality - in fact, they respect men alot more for being upfront about their sexuality than trying to hide it by being a "friend" for 6 months all the while you have a massive crush on her they'd rather you just asked her to go out with you and tried to kiss her right away.

[Woggle]

In a timely turn of events - I just saw that my friend on FB got engaged. She was in a 2 year LTR. This is a friend I knew from college and I remember how one year during spring break we travelled to South America and she had a fling with one of the guys we met on our trip. Now if you told her fiance who has had a very good relationship with her for the past 2 years that she is not worthy of his love because of her fling in college, or if you told any woman that same thing, frankly they would think of you as the one mentally diseased and not her.

 

Hopefully it works out for him. If not he will learn the hard way.

[GoodOnPaper]

Goodonpaper - I read some of your previous posts and understand your issue. You seem to think that the attraction for a ONS is much higher than for a an LTR.

 

Yes -- and from my marriage experience, it's tough for me to draw any other conclusion. She pursued me and was the only woman I met that was legitimately interested in an LTR. As dedicated as she is to our marriage outside the bedroom, she is completely reserved in the bedroom, has never orgasmed but at the same time won't let me give her oral. I can't figure out what attraction she does or doesn't have -- I can only conclude that I'm missing something that I would have if I had been the kind of guy that could attract women for casual sex. I'm sure we're wandering beyond the scope of the thread so we don't have to go further, but I appreciate your responses.

[lamaman3]

Well if you're referring to lamaman either he's not a man, he's gay, he's never been in a serious monogamous LTR with a woman, or he's been reading too many PUA books.

 

You do realize he's basically called all women liars when it comes to sex, he's said that all women are ashamed of their sexuality (which is why they supposedly are all liars), and that they all lie because they are afraid of what men will think about their supposed promiscuity?

 

That's about the most anti-feminist series of rants I've seen in a long long time.

 

LOL

FALSE my friend.

 

Definitely not gay - In fact, lets ask all the women here who they think is MOST successful with women - who do you think they would say?

 

Women aren't all liars when it comes to sex. I said they will conceal past sexual experiences if they think a man will judge them for that. Its not exactly a revolutionary or outrageous notion - in fact, it makes perfect sense. They understand that such a line of questioning reflects some insecurity on your part, so they are being nice so you can have a nice relationship with her rather than being sitting awake frantically writing a post on LS titled "My gf told me she had a ONS 3 years ago! I'm afraid shell cheat on me and I cant get the images out of my head !!!"

 

Of course women arent ashamed of their sexuality. They are the ones that understand how powerful it is and what an important part of life it is. Other men are scared/fearful of female sexuality so they strategically hide it from these men so they dont get called "slut trashbag whore Cheater!" for having sex with the cute guy they were flirting with in class all semester who asked her out a month before they graduated.

[Titania22]

A woman can be highly attracted to a man for hours and then he says one thing that will turn her off completely.

 

This is so true.

[lamaman3]

What you are missing in your little anecdote above, perhaps the most important part aspect of it, is not that the girl might have wanted casual sex with the hot guy in the club.

 

It's that her public display for attention at the club (kissing every guy, screaming out she will f*ck the hottest guy and so forth) is characteristic of someone with a personality disorder, such as BPD or NPD. The hypothetical woman you described is emotionally unhealthy as you described her.

 

So no if I'm the boyfriend in the scenario you described, it doesn't bother me at all that my new gf might in the past have had an active sex life. Why should it?

 

It would however bother me to learn she had made a spectacle of herself by publicly kissing every guy in the club and screaming out her desire to f*ck the hottest one of them.

 

Learning about human relations from PUA books may well help you get laid if it gives you insight into the mental workings of NPD/BPD/promiscuous women such as the woman at the nightclub you describe. If simply getting laid by a lot of women is your objective, without much regard for anything else about them, I say "go for it."

 

Good luck with that.

 

Ok - I was a little bit extreme for the sake of contrasts there. Just adjust the scenario to a woman kissing a few guys discretely and then taking one of them home. The point is the same.

 

And yes, "getting laid" is probably the best way to really get to know a woman and start a relationship with her - so having the ability to do this with "lots of women" is definitely a good skill.

[lamaman3]

Hopefully it works out for him. If not he will learn the hard way.

 

LOL - it may work or it may not just like many marriages. However I'm pretty sure whether it does or dosent wont hinge on whether she hooked up with a guy during spring break many years ago in college.

[Woggle]

One hook up in college is nothing. A man should worry more about patterns.

[lamaman3]

What you are missing in your little anecdote above, perhaps the most important part aspect of it, is not that the girl might have wanted casual sex with the hot guy in the club.

 

It's that her public display for attention at the club (kissing every guy, screaming out she will f*ck the hottest guy and so forth) is characteristic of someone with a personality disorder, such as BPD or NPD. The hypothetical woman you described is emotionally unhealthy as you described her.

 

So no if I'm the boyfriend in the scenario you described, it doesn't bother me at all that my new gf might in the past have had an active sex life. Why should it?

 

It would however bother me to learn she had made a spectacle of herself by publicly kissing every guy in the club and screaming out her desire to f*ck the hottest one of them.

 

Learning about human relations from PUA books may well help you get laid if it gives you insight into the mental workings of NPD/BPD/promiscuous women such as the woman at the nightclub you describe. If simply getting laid by a lot of women is your objective, without much regard for anything else about them, I say "go for it."

 

Good luck with that.

 

"PUA websites" teach you how to have a great relationship with your girlfriend and having her treat you well by being the most attractive man possible for her and turning her on and her attraction switches on.

 

Seems like men on LS think the key to having a great relationship with a woman is choosing the one who feels obligated to stay attracted to you because she has good "morals" and isnt a "slutbag" and would be "shamed" to cheat on you.

 

Which do YOU think is the more positive approach?

[Woggle]

Before people start thinking I am sexist I encourage women to apply this same criteria to men. Players and womanizers are not good relationship material either. I have no double standards but it seems that if men take any steps to better their odds of having a successful relationship that lasts we are called controlling and misogynistic.

[Woggle]

You call these kinds of women all summer long at nighclubs on the Jersey Shore. I see it all the time and it is actually sad and pathetic. They get so drunk they can barely stand up straight and make complete fools of themselves. Then they get nasty and want to start fights for no reason. They are anything but empowered and secure.

 

Also the PUA stuff is a bunch of crap. It promotes game playing.

[lamaman3]

The answer to your question is Evolutionary Biology.

 

Nearly every female that has to put large amounts of energy into raising offspring has a biological imperative to be selective when choosing mates. Especially in primates where the child takes years, and teamwork to raise successfully.

 

It makes clear biological sense for a man to see a promiscuous woman as being diseased or not right.

 

According to your logic, homosexuals should be considered diseased or not right.

 

What you are missing is the fact that sexual selectivity dosent always mean what YOU would like it to mean. Many times, evolution would have a woman sleep with the most dominant man and the man capable of giving her the best chances for her son to pass on his offspring - in other words, a dominant man who is capable of attracting many women. Especially if she is ovulating. It dosent necesarilly mean she wants the guy who loves her the most. Shell always have guys who love her - perhaps rarer is a man who can dominate her and lead her.

[lamaman3]

I really shouldn't have said that, it's not fair to gay people to compare you to them. I should have said "little or no experience with healthy heterosexual relationships" which is not necessarily the same thing.

 

LOL

 

 

 

Since I'm not a PUA I don't seek personal validation from asking what all women think before forming my own opinion about it. Also, by "successful," you obviously mean a man who is adept at acquiring multiple sexual partners. It's very obvious that your "rap" comes straight out of PUA materials.

 

LOL - if you are going to criticize me for not being successfull with women, I think asking women themselves their preference for a boyfriend (someone with my attitude or someone with Untouchable Fires attitude) as a criteria to judge your accusation against me.

 

Like I said, if all you want to do is have sex with a lot of women, that's fine, because your approach is designed to cater to the particular subset of women you described in your anecdote--the type of woman who would go to a nighclub, "kiss every guy", then scream out how she wants to take home the hottest and scr*w his brains out (your words).

 

Look, as I've said, I exaggerated the example to make a point (about how such a woman would not be looking for a monogamous relationship if you read it in context). Actually, such a display is rare - I already said, modify it to any type of sex outside of relationship. A fling during spring break vacation, a FWB relationship during freshman yr of college whatever - it dosent matter - my point is the same. All the untouchable fires on this thread have been talking about FWB relationship - dont make it a strawman argument about disturbed women shouting at nightclubs.

 

The type of woman you described is not secure in her own sexuality--she's extremely insecure, which is why she would have to make such an overt public display of it in the first place. You also keep emphasizing how such a woman is then "forced" to be a liar about her display of sexuality to future bfs, because she is ashamed of her sexual past. Again you are not describing a strong, confident, feminist woman, who is happy with her sexuality. You are describing an emotionally damaged woman.

 

Wrong again - women arent liars because they are ashamed - SEX IS DISCRETE. THATS THE WHOLE POINT YOU ARE MISSING. Do your parents tell you when they had sex? Does your friend tell you when he masturbates? Does your coworker tell you when he/she looks at pornography? Its not because they are ashamed, its because sex is a private thing - and frankly many women consider their private sexual past just like your parents think of their sex life or you think of your porn collection - as something private that is none of your business.

 

Lie, conceal, use whatever weasel words or euphemism you want: You're still saying the same thing--the kind of women you are talking about is not proud of her sexuality, she's ashamed of it, because heaven forbid she disclosed it and her behavior displeased her boyfriend!!! Like I said--completely anti-feminist, characteristic of the mentality of PUAs. Again it's not about the sex, I've never met any man who's begrudged a gf prior sexual activity. However I've met plenty who would be very concerned if they found out their new gf did what you described, then lied or "concealed" it.

 

First of all - this entire thread is about prior sexual activity. Go back and read, you might be different than the other men posting. Second, as to the lying - see above. Its not lying, its simply discretion because sex is a private thing that isnt really meant to be talked about unless you are directly involved in the sex being discussed. Also, you are contradicting yourself here - a woman should be shamed for being blatant in expressing her desire to have sex in a nightclub - but then when I mention that she considers it something private not necessarily having to be shared with her boyfriend- now she is not proud and sexually confident?

 

 

 

 

 

You're contradicting yourself of course. The "insecure guy" who would be concerned about the gf's past sexual history (according to you) should be "low value" to the woman; therefore she should not care what he thinks about her; therefore she has no reason to lie to him about her sexual history.

 

Not at all. Its entirely possible for a woman to feel affection for an insecure man or to want to have a relationship with them and therefore cater to his insecurities. Its just a fact that she wont be as highly attracted to such a man sexually as she would be to a completely confident and high value man.

 

What you're missing completely is that you're trying to shoehorn all women as behaving, feeling, and thinking exactly the same as the most likely type of women a PUA would target for casual sex--you know, the nutty girl at the nightclub that very publicly flaunts her availability/sexuality. Of course that's exactly the type of women PUA materials target. That doesn't mean all women are like that.

 

LOL - PUA's (not the lame ones) have fulfilling relationships. And whats with this casual sex? The best way to establish a relationship with a woman is to have sex with her. A man who is able to have sex easily with women will have much easier time establishing relationships with women (for the most part, there are some exceptions). This false dichotomy between "casual sex" and "loving relationship" is just that - false. A man that has sex with a woman over a period of 6 weeks will know her much better and feel more comfortable with her than a man who has dated her for 6 weeks without physically touching her. This is a fact. The first couple will also feel more connected and more invested in their connection.

 

 

 

Wow that's quite a strawman.

 

I don't know any guy who's ever actually called any woman "slut trashbag whore Cheater!" for any reason, I must hang out with a different class of man than you do.

 

Oh yeah--the type of insecure man you describe is exactly the type of guy who needs PUA training to have any chance of female interaction.

 

You know--yourself.

 

LOL are you serious? Then you havent read the thread. I believe "trashbag" was the exact word used by one of the males in the beginning of this thread.

[lamaman3]

Ha ha ha ha I was right. Dude if it's so transparent to me where you are getting your pre-packaged rap from, why do you think it's going to work on anyone of "substance"? Did you memorize "The Game" or something? j/k

 

No seriously--what the PUA community has to offer that is somewhat positive is teaching shy withdrawn men some degree of self-confidence, personal presentation, social interaction skills, and motivating them to "get out there" and start interacting with women.

 

If your objective is to have sex with a lot of women and PUA gets you there, go for it.

 

 

 

I can't generalize what "men" on LS think, however I sincerely believe most men don't believe that an openly promiscuous nightclub chick like you described, who then lies about her past or "conceals" it, is a very good bet for a LTR. Describing the nightclub chick's behavior as the "norm" for a woman's expression of her sexuality is somewhat depressing actually.

 

My question is why? Its just taken for granted but most men rarely think and ask why this is. If a woman is a great girlfriend to you and you have a great time, she is kind, respectful, affectionate, blah blah blah all the things you want in a girl - but she had a ONS and lied to you about it- this is what depresses you? You cant understand why she would do that? This isnt strictly a hypothetical - You can find hundreds of post on the Jealousy board on LS with this exact scenario. "I love my gf, shes perfect for me, but she said she was a virgin and now she says she isnt but didnt want to tell me because she thought i would think shes a slut etc."

 

And please dont tell me its a proxy for meaning she lies about everything else blah blah blah. If that was the case then people would complain about their gf's lying about every little thing. But they dont - they say Ive been having the greatest 8 months of my life being in love with girlfriend but this guy she said she didnt have sex with him before she met me and now i found out she did" and yea, like you - this really depresses them. Why is that? simple - M/W complex.

 

 

I think self-respect, respect for one's partner(s), and honesty is the best foundation upon which to build a meaningful LTR.

 

(Notice I didn't mention sex at all? Why do you think that is?)

 

You should be more open minded. Ask alot of women around here - I think they would rather have a relationship that was filled with PASSIONATE sex and respect where perhaps they didnt need to know every detail of their SO's lives - (IOW 100% complete honesty) - than a relationship with mediocre and lackluster sex where they were confident they knew EVERYTHING 100% honesty about their boyfriend.

 

Actually sex, particularly for many women, is the foundation of a relationship. Without it the whole relationship suffers.

[harmfulsweetz]

Also, the idea that women having sex outside of a relationship means she is disconnecting sex from her emotions is far from the truth. On the contrary, a woman might feel an intense attraction for a man, fantasize about him, feel lustful and even affectionate towards him and act on that - without necessarilly being in a relationship. This is a woman connecting sex with her emotions. A woman who feels all of that but refuses to have sex with a man she feels it towards - because she is holding off to "trade" the sex for something else such as monogamy, the man promising to take her on 2023 dates, promising to meet his parents and making sure the man has stable employment ($$$$) - this to me is a woman who is much more adept at disconnecting sex from her emotions and this to me is the worse candidate for an LTR.

 

Excellent post, and brilliant points. Many women won't have sex with a man for the sake of, she will generally like him even if only on a physical level, there'll be feelings of some sort there. I've been in a similar situation recently, I liked a guy very physically, I felt intense physical attraction towards him, and acted on it. I don't see that as me disconnecting from sex emotionally, maybe there's no 'love' in there, but there's certainly emotions. Can any of these men making the 'claims' say that they have only had sex with people they loved? Even in committed relationships, we don't love every partner we are with.

 

 

This is all really a moot point. Men on this thread judge women but ultimately I can't imagine any really attractive woman being attracted to a man who sits on the internet making post after post judging women's sexuality. So the men here will be arguing with women here about who is right, but ultimately the women here will find companionship and sex partners with a minority of elite attractive and non-judgemental men while the men here will continue to have issues with women.

 

Again, brilliant post. It's really refreshing to read that from a man (I'm assuming you are by your username) and fully agree. A couple of the male posters who so billigerently foster these ideas have been proven to be bitter and rather hateful towards women, their views are widespread across these boards, in general, no real woman wants to deal with that kind of bitterness. It manifests itself in other aspects too. So even if a woman is not promiscuous or in/been in an fwb before, they likely will be put off by the bitterness.

 

I don't judge, I don't necessarily sleep around (I haven't exactly had sex in a year so...) but those that do engage in an f-buddy relationship, that's up to them. I would, with the aforementioned guy And I won't feel down on myself because I know I am only judged by the bitter men and not the men of sound mind, the men of sound mind know such things don't ultimately make or break a person.

 

A O was it? Tiger Woods cheated on his wife, numerous times which is why he got such negative publicity, not because he had sex with a lot of women. Many men, especially men in the UK playing football (soccer) have been in the press lately for doing the same thing. They are treated negatively because they are married, or otherwise unavailable. Whereas, I'm sure it happens alot, other single footballers don't get attention paid to their bedroom antics-because they are single, loaded and some cases, attractive. You just expect that's what they'll be doing, and that's fine, because they are single.

[A O]

AO - I cant understand all this mental masturbation. Women judge male sexuality so now we men are going to judge female sexuality??

It’s this simple. Women are of the view that they and they alone are the only ones whose sexual behavior is judged in a negative manner. They are wrong.

 

When you see a beautiful woman - ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ASIDE, you would not rather be the man sleeping with her than the man judging her as low quality because she is sleeping with another man?

When I see a beautiful woman I appreciate her beauty in the same manner that I appreciate all manner of beautiful things. Now, when I see a sexy woman, that revs my engine and I can entertain sexual thoughts without doubt. If she’s with a man, I may think - damn she’s with him….or I may think – damn you lucky b@astard. That’s as far as it goes. Interesting to know whether men think like me or think like you’re suggesting.

 

Yes culturally male sexuality is bashed, but if this leaves you bitter than you have some work to do in understanding women and how they become attracted

I’m an observer and commentator of human behavior. Sometimes people think that I am what I comment on and make judgments of my character based on that. That’s understandable. My own viewpoint of FWB’s is that they’re low-level relationships that I have no interest in. My own view on female sexuality is that it’s different to male sexuality. Not a lot different, but enough that you and I and many others here are having these discussions. Other than that, nice to know that you believe that the bashing doesn’t just go one way.

 

These men, perhaps 20%, will have an unparalleled sexual access to the vast majority of women because they are confident and attractive - and the rest of the men get frustrated - why? Because men are built to want to spread their seed to just about anything remotely physically attractive - women are much more selective because they need to pic the best man to impregnate them, not just mate with as many as possible which is what men are programmed to do.

Indeed. This resembles the argument I’m used to seeing (and tend to work off myself). It gives understanding as to why women look at high-numbers differently than men. How high numbers is seen as attractive, as an indicator of desirability to some of them. It also highlights the key difference between the sexes – discrimination or lack thereof. It’s the quest to mate with the very best against the quest to mate with anything remotely decent. It’s a mismatch and one that has lead to the situations/consequences we’re all discussing.

 

And when a woman does find that high value attractive male - you can bet that she is going to want sex as much if not more than the man - again, Ill bet that every single woman on this thread is going to vouch for that.

Indeed. Can women be as sexual or even moreso than men, absolutely! Can they do this as readily or easily as men can – no. They need more of a reason than men need. Again, that’s the key difference, put in a slightly different way.

 

So the men that are the most bitter about being judged for wanting sex and judge women in return are the ones on the short end of the stick here - dont be that man - be the George Clooney.

Yep there are a lot of bitter men out there. Have learnt to understand why, henceforth become more accepting of their foibles. Accepting not supportive!

 

 

So the men that are the most bitter about being judged for wanting sex and judge women in return are the ones on the short end of the stick here - dont be that man - be the George Clooney.

George Clooney, wouldn’t mind his money, he can keep everything else. Yes he’s a handsome man, more handsome than me, but hey, I’m not too shabby myself.

 

 

.

[A O]

You have no rational basis for your argument, that is why it is a fallacy. If you'd like to talk about sex within a cultural/historical context, I am game.

Funny thing about fallacies or how some folk choose to use them - they can call into question the methodology but rarely can they refute the result. They look good in a debating context, but they’re more show than go. Good enough to ruffle an inexperienced poster, but not the experienced.

 

2) Again, no rational basis for your claim. Testosterone...so? Have you heard of the clitoris? - women have one for no other reason than sexual pleasure.

The world will agree more, will resonate more with my summation of this situation than yours. This shouldn’t happen if it’s without basis and fallacious. As for the clitoris, oh how I envy that lil fellow. But the barriers to being able to play with that little beauty are far greater, across the spectrum, than the barriers of getting ones hands on a penis. And that is why men are more sexual than women or at the very least - renowned for being so. And that is why, again, we have the situations that I have presented, and why also, we have umpteen threads like this.

 

My views are not reactionary. I don't need to justify them.

Your views are big on theory and small on context. That’s all I’m saying.

 

 

.

[A O]

A O was it? Tiger Woods cheated on his wife, numerous times which is why he got such negative publicity, not because he had sex with a lot of women

Not one of my better examples for sure. Nonetheless, his antics weren’t free of judgment, be it the cheating or the numbers or the sexual activity undertaken.

 

Many men, especially men in the UK playing football (soccer) have been in the press lately for doing the same thing.

Indeed. As a sports fan and an EPL fan, I’m reasonably up to date with these antics. Again, they are judged across the spectrum.

 

 

.

[A O]

EXACTLY. The more territorial you are, the more you are scared of competition. When a woman likes sex and unabashedly expresses her attraction to other men - you are afraid of being "cheated" on because there is another guy out there who is better looking than you, better in bed, etc.

Choice plays a role too. The ability to choose between a promiscuous and non-promiscuous woman looms as large for men as the ability to pick men based on their ability to pay for dates does for women.

 

When a woman likes sex and unabashedly expresses her attraction to other men - you are afraid of being "cheated" on

What is the context surrounding this. Taken at face value, one can understand the feelings.

 

Do you see how incredibly non-sensical this all is? Women have a range of experiences like I mentioned above - but instead of recognizing that alot of men think that there are either madonnas or whores, promiscuous or not instead of just human females having a range of sexual feelings and experiences just like men

Again, sounds like standard human behavior and not gender specific behavior.

 

it comes down to a primitive urge not to raise someone elses child which is what all your jealousy and judgements come down to - a woman who loves sex means she might leave you for another guy whereas a "non-promiscuous" women is going to love you unconditionally forever just like your mommy did (lol)

Even I wouldn’t want to raise another mans child unless I knew beforehand that it isn’t mine, hence I may choose to do so.

 

Every woman on here will back me up on this and its only the men who will disagree. Why do YOU think that is?

Well, it appears to me that most women will never be put into the situation that some men may find themselves in – fathering another mans child, of whom, they more than likely didn’t know it wasn’t theirs beforehand. If this is the great source of male insecurity, no wonder some men feel the way they do.

 

If you read the book Sperm Wars you would understand that evolutionary biology has compelled women to be programmed to have men COMPETE for her - many times by sleeping with multiple men at the same time.

Evolutionary biology can only go so far. We have evolved further from this. Many people competing for her, sure, sleeping with many at the same time, it is not something I have seen a lot of in my experience. And even if it were common place, well then, now I totally get the views of the so-called bitter men. Who in their right mind wouldn’t be a little insecure or upset when their love interest sleeps around?

 

The correlation between men thinking that promiscuous women have a higher likelihood of cheating not only makes sense now, but is validated by your example.

 

That is because the highest value men are the ones who are not as likely to settle down with them, (george cloony and bradd pitt) but they need a provider like you to actually take care of the child and protect her. Get impregnated by a lover and taken care of by a provider. All women understand this dichotomy and for you to think that a woman like this is abnormal and diseased ignores the fact that by the sheer fact of you and every other mans programmed JEALOUSY and FEAR of being cheated on shows that on an instinctual level you understand this dynamic very well and are aware that a very large segment of females are capable of it and understand it as well.

Indeed you’re right. Most men understand these dynamics and in light of this example a lot of male suspicion is clearly justified. Poor sods, not only do some have to put up with something akin to all this, they have to suffer the ignominy of being thought of as being insecure, jealous or fearful to boot. Then on top of all of this, women have an inherent understanding of all this, meaning given the opportunity, they’ll more than justify the fears and insecurities of men. Quite interesting. I'm sure, or hoping that my take on this situation is greatly askew.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[donnamaybe]

Bill Clinton was the first name that popped into my head.

He was vilified, at least by the people I know, because he cheated on his wife. NOT because he loved sex and lots of it.

 

HUGE difference.

[carhill]

Hey, Monica is what, 37 now? I wonder if she ever married. Last I read, she was living in England. An interesting and relevant question would be, presuming she was a long-term sexual not-quite-f-buddy (since apparently they never had intercourse) of the former president, would she garner the respect of men looking for a life partner?

 

he talked about it as though I had laid it all out there for the taking. I was the buffet and he just couldn't resist the dessert. [...] This was a mutual relationship, mutual on all levels, right from the way it started and all the way through

[A O]

Long story short – sex is bad, and it doesn’t matter if you’re religious or not, sex is frowned upon by all and thinking similar to this is ingrained in all of us from a very young age. And who is more inclined to want sex – boys/men of course. So girls are brought up understanding this fact and being wary of it and boys are brought up basically apologizing for their sexual urges.

 

So, fast forwarding a few years to teenage/adult years when a guy comes on too strong or even worse signals that he only wants one thing from a woman – sex, then most women will kick this type to the curb. Some women will simply think that he’s not the type for them. Others will be a lot more colourful in their thinking in regards to his behavior. Either/or, one thing is happening – they have judged his sexuality and have deemed it to be unacceptable to them. Now this is a situation that can start relatively early and have no end date to it. But few, if any women ever care to think that they’ve just judged a man’s sexuality, more often than not in a negative sense at that. Women simply don’t think that way. They just see a guy who’s reverted to type. They’ve dodged a bullet in their eyes, not formed a negative judgment of a person’s sexuality. And as I’ve said before, this behavior starts so early that most women are simply unaware of it. They tend to only become aware of judgmental behavior when they themselves start acting in a manner similar to the known male type.

 

How does this fit in with this thread. Simple, it’s all about judgment. Men judge female sexuality. Absolutely no surprises there. But guess what – guess whose been judging men too, but rarely realizes it!

This is false

Excuse the long quote but I'm interested in knowing what part is false. Some or all

 

This is false - women will respond favorably to a sexual approach from a HIGH VALUE male.

Indeed they do. But most folk, male and female are not high value material.

 

Of course they will reject most guys who approach them, sexually OR otherwise.

Which is my point. Will reject, will judge, will deem to be unworthy.

 

They may be more polite about it if the guy is overtly sexual at first - but really - women understand that any "ROMANTIC" approach is sexual, whether its grabbing her ass at a nightclub or asking her out on a coffee date.

Doesn't stop them from judging. Again, my point.

 

So no, women do not judge men's sexuality - in fact, they respect men alot more for being upfront about their sexuality than trying to hide it by being a "friend" for 6 months all the while you have a massive crush on her they'd rather you just asked her to go out with you and tried to kiss her right away.

Most people respect honesty. The guys who use friendship as a method of trying to get into a woman's pants, they're deceitful and playing a low odds game to boot.

 

Any man, any non high-value man especially, who gives the impression that sex is all he's after, he will lose value in the eyes of many women, possibly kicked to the curb altogether. That reaction is based on his sexual nature. he has been judged and its an all too common occurrence.

 

 

.

[donnamaybe]

Any man, any non high-value man especially, who gives the impression that sex is all he's after, he will lose value in the eyes of many women, possibly kicked to the curb altogether. That reaction is based on his sexual nature. he has been judged and its an all too common occurrence.

Actually, depending on the gal and her situation at the time, he might be a quite welcome and refreshing encounter for her.