Sphinxter said: Ryuk9428 said: Okay, let us assume that it was. Then their "gay" had nothing to do then with whether or not one be attracted to males and we are right back where we started: that your lack of attraction to males is naught but your mental weakness of being incapable of thinking for yourself and internalizing the expectations of your culture.@Sphinxter Being considered effeminate or lacking masculinity was essentially their "gay I'm really not that susceptible to societal norms. Given how often I have opinions that go against the mainstream norm, I think that much is obvious. Your opinions are extremely mainstream; you advocate what you self-nominate as "traditional" ideas.Those ideas are no longer mainstream but rather quite controversial. I'm a college student, most of your opinions are significantly more mainstream among the student body at my college than mine are. Your opinion on suicide, very much not so, but lots of people here would agree with your opinions on nudity, gender, and sexual orientation. Even the mainstream opinions I have, the reasons I have them are very strange. People in Medieval Times and the 18th century also did not have a concept of alcoholism. They didn't realize it was a thing, they just thought alcoholics were indulgent and lacked self-discipline. Just because they didn't realize it was a thing doesn't mean they were right. I'm sure lots of Roman men still had no interest in fucking other guys whether it would've been acceptable or not. They just didn't think about it long enough to define it as an orientation. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: The analogy would be that you claim that whether one be an alcoholic or not is genetic and/or fixed at birth and I point out a mediæval society where no man ever consumes alcohol.People in Medieval Times and the 18th century also did not have a concept of alcoholism. They didn't realize it was a thing, they just thought alcoholics were indulgent and lacked self-discipline. Just because they didn't realize it was a thing doesn't mean they were right. I'm sure lots of Roman men still had no interest in fucking other guys whether it would've been acceptable or not. They just didn't think about it long enough to define it as an orientation. Your claim is that these so-called "sexual orientations" are not the product of culture: to disprove that claim I need only point out one culture that exists or has existed where it worked completely differently. |
 It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
| @Maneki-Mew Well asexuality is a completely different thing because that's probably the result of a certain gene or DNA being turned off. It is relatively natural. Its unusual in the sense of it not being common but that doesn't mean its unnatural. For someone who does experience sexual attraction and does have a libido though, having a high sex drive usually does correlate with having a healthy body. One of the most noticeable symptoms of unhealthy lifestyles like smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, stress, obesity, malnutrition and eating too much junk food is that it reduces your libido. Meanwhile, healthy habits and behaviors like exercise, and getting nutritious food raise your sex drive. Olympic athletes for example, are notorious for having crazy amounts of sex in the villages they stay in. They literally supply them with like 3 condoms a day and the athletes still manage to run out every year. I agree that a lot of the people into one night stands seem distant from the act itself. For me, I love sex, every bit of it, I love cuddling, I love making out, I love caressing a girl's thighs, and running my hands through a girl's hair. It all feels like heaven to me. The slightest touches can send a strong rush of euphoria, hours can fly by during sex as if it was 30 minutes. I know that a lot of people who are into one night stands and claim to be horny people aren't really that horny because of the way they describe it. They describe it as "tryna busta nut," or "sex isn't special or a big deal." The way they go about it, it also seems to me like they're just having sex to tell people they're doing it or to brag about how many people they fuck. Its like the only reason they have sex is because it makes them feel socially successful. I love the sensation itself, I don't care about fucking a lot of different people, being able to brag about it, or about whether its sign of my social status. I will gladly sacrifice social status for sex because I just love the sensual appeal and blissful state of mind that accompanies sex. I get confused at the borderline hostility a lot of those people have towards people they slept with too. I've always felt very glad to have meet all the girls who slept with me and grateful for their affections. I think people have become too open towards fetishes these days. People act like vanilla people are boring prudes. A lot of people seem to take it granted that everybody has a fetish and don't even believe me when I say I don't have one. Its disturbing to me that so many people can't seem to comprehend being able to enjoy sex unless they are hurting each other or pretending to rape and all sorts of fucked up shit that I hear people mention as if it was normal. Over-saturation at some point can do that but its more about balance in my opinion than saturation. My formula is flexible, you can masturbate as many times in a day as you need, just make sure to stick to the 1 out of 4 formula. If you have a high enough sex drive, you can masturbate four times a day and you won't get the desensitization effect if you properly mix up intense stimulation with tame stimulation. The reason being that you are always training your neurons to expect the tamer stimulation so that the intense one is properly seen as a different kind of stimulation from what your body is trained to expect. |
Ryuk9428Sep 23, 2019 7:33 PM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Sphinxter said: Ryuk9428 said: The analogy would be that you claim that whether one be an alcoholic or not is genetic and/or fixed at birth and I point out a mediæval society where no man ever consumes alcohol.People in Medieval Times and the 18th century also did not have a concept of alcoholism. They didn't realize it was a thing, they just thought alcoholics were indulgent and lacked self-discipline. Just because they didn't realize it was a thing doesn't mean they were right. I'm sure lots of Roman men still had no interest in fucking other guys whether it would've been acceptable or not. They just didn't think about it long enough to define it as an orientation. Your claim is that these so-called "sexual orientations" are not the product of culture: to disprove that claim I need only point out one culture that exists or has existed where it worked completely differently. Sexual orientation itself is biological but the way people interpret it is cultural. Ancient Rome interpreted it differently which lead to people behaving differently as a result of different interpretations. That doesn't mean that orientation is not biological fixed though. It just means that a heterosexual Roman man would've likely described his preferences as "eh, I have no interest in effeminate men" rather than "I'm heterosexual." While a bisexual Roman man would've said he likes to fuck effeminate men and women or that he likes being the effeminate man. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Nothing like a little Kenny G to get your woman in the mood (I mean his songs, not the guy). |
 |
Ryuk9428 said: That very thing which after 150 years of research into the matter can still only be constituted by self-identification of the subject? — that idea makes me laugh.Sphinxter said: The analogy would be that you claim that whether one be an alcoholic or not is genetic and/or fixed at birth and I point out a mediæval society where no man ever consumes alcohol. Your claim is that these so-called "sexual orientations" are not the product of culture: to disprove that claim I need only point out one culture that exists or has existed where it worked completely differently. Sexual orientation itself is biological Are you aware of how ridiculous and unlikely it is that it is "biological" if after 150 years of extensive search they to this day have no better test for it than "what do you self-identify as?": no brain scan, no genetic markers, no blood test, nothing of the sort. It is exactly what it is and how it is treated in all research: a "self-identifier", nothing more: on the hierarchy of classifications that makes it absolutely the lowest and least meaningful. but the way people interpret it is cultural. Ancient Rome interpreted it differently which lead to people behaving differently as a result of different interpretations. There is absolutely nothing left any more if apparently "sexual orientations" can be "interpreted" as not "being attracted to one specific sex only".The point stands that if this can happen then your lack of attraction to males still remains a function of your culture, not your genes. That doesn't mean that orientation is not biological fixed though. It just means that a heterosexual Roman man would've likely described his preferences as "eh, I have no interest in effeminate men" rather than "I'm heterosexual." While a bisexual Roman man would've said he likes to fuck effeminate men and women or that he likes being the effeminate man. And then "heterosexual male" has nothing to do with "not being attracted to males" and we are right back where we started that your lack of attraction to males is the function of your culture and lack of ability to form your own judgements. |
It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
Sphinxter said: That very thing which after 150 years of research into the matter can still only be constituted by self-identification of the subject? — that idea makes me laugh. Are you aware of how ridiculous and unlikely it is that it is "biological" if after 150 years of extensive search they to this day have no better test for it than "what do you self-identify as?": no brain scan, no genetic markers, no blood test, nothing of the sort. It is exactly what it is and how it is treated in all research: a "self-identifier", nothing more: on the hierarchy of classifications that makes it absolutely the lowest and least meaningful. but the way people interpret it is cultural. Ancient Rome interpreted it differently which lead to people behaving differently as a result of different interpretations. There is absolutely nothing left any more if apparently "sexual orientations" can be "interpreted" as not "being attracted to one specific sex only".The point stands that if this can happen then your lack of attraction to males still remains a function of your culture, not your genes. That doesn't mean that orientation is not biological fixed though. It just means that a heterosexual Roman man would've likely described his preferences as "eh, I have no interest in effeminate men" rather than "I'm heterosexual." While a bisexual Roman man would've said he likes to fuck effeminate men and women or that he likes being the effeminate man. And then "heterosexual male" has nothing to do with "not being attracted to males" and we are right back where we started that your lack of attraction to males is the function of your culture and lack of ability to form your own judgements.Actually there are reliable tests. You literally hook up sensors to people and brain waves that are consistent with sexual attraction light up when people see the gender they are attracted to and don't light up when they see the gender they are not attracted to. Here's the biggest problem with your theory. If sexual orientation is actually culturally constructed, then why the hell would anybody be gay in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? Why would anybody be gay in Medieval Times? Why do gay people in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan exist in the same numbers that they do in progressive Western countries? It simply doesn't make sense for people to be putting their lives on the line in cultures like that just for the fuck of it because heterosexuality is like, so bourgeois. Why do gay people who are ashamed of themselves for years until they finally accept themselves exist? They clearly did not choose to be that way, even under circumstances when they believed nobody would accept them, or that their family might hate them, or even that their country might kill them, people have still been gay. The idea that sexual orientation is a choice does not make any sense whatsoever. At most, bisexuals may have a stronger biological preference for one gender but choose to fuck the other gender more for social reasons but that's as far as it goes. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| You shouldn't be prevented from being able to release yourself every now and then just because you're not currently in a committed relationship (or in a position of being able to currently have one). That beings said, obviously hookup culture has been massively detrimental to society. Strong relationships are built on companionship, not sex. Chemistry between the minds, not between the bodies. Unhappy marriages, divorces, and unwanted pregnancies are only going to continue to skyrocket until people learn this (and frankly I don't think they ever will, I think we're stuck on this shitty path). |
-michael said: Hias said: This thread is just incels whining about women sleeping with other people and not them this describes it pretty well imo. that being said i’m angry at females for not sleeping with me :rage: so you're saying you are one of those raging teenage boys. I see I see |
-michael said: Aivee_esra said: so you're saying you are one of those raging teenage boys. I see I see guess my ironic intend didn’t come through as much as i would hoped for And well I was just joking too about the raging teenage boys |
| I don't particularly care as it doesn't affect me. I personally can't see the appeal but whatever. |
 |
Scud said: I don't particularly care as it doesn't affect me. I personally can't see the appeal but whatever. but have you actually ever tried to hook up? |
Aivee_esra said: Well I don't see the appeal, so no. Same reason I haven't tried eating insects.Scud said: I don't particularly care as it doesn't affect me. I personally can't see the appeal but whatever. but have you actually ever tried to hook up? |
|
| Why every topic has to be so polarized? It's beyond me honestly. Obviously if you could have the perfect relationship most people would probably choose that over meaningless one night stands but this is rarely the case and there are a lot more options you can choose from. I prefer if people did not care that much to be honest. I don't like the misconception that you need to be in a relationship with the person in order to have sex with them. I don't like one night stands either since I don't care about the person and probably won't meet them ever again. If it's purely to satisfy your physical needs you might as well just masturbate, won't be that much different anyway, especially considering the wide variety of online material and sex toys to choose from. |
| Not a fan of hookup culture myself, but I'm not one to stop people from engaging in it if they're so inclined. Even though I lack any and all sexual/romantic experience, one thing I know about myself is that I could not do casual sex for the life of me. And if/when I fall in love with someone and they reciprocate the feeling, I'll do my best to keep that relationship afloat. Ideally till death do us part. |
| @Maneki-Mew Genetics from what I've seen determines your ceiling but there are quite a few ways that lifestyle can impact your sex drive. As I mentioned with many unhealthy habits lowering it. As far as the Olympic athletes go... It's definitely not a rumor. Entire cities have to order large shipments of condoms specifically for the Olympics and every year they run out. I think Brazil provided some 300,000 and still ran out. This indicates that they are having sex, on average, at least 3 times a day but there's no way of knowing how much oral sex is going on in addition and most people don't use condoms during oral sex. So that means the average Olympic athlete is having sex 3-4 times a day in the village. If that is the average then it means a pretty large number of people are above average at which point we are talking about 4+ or 5+ times a day. This would be fine for me but in my discussions with most people. Such a rate of sex would be physically difficult for them. A lot of guys I know, including macho guys who like to brag, still talk about 3 rounds of sex as if it's simply too much for them. I've found that people who have sex to feel socially successful don't actually have much sex. A lot of those guys have sex one time and are done. They have sex with a lot of different people but that doesn't translate to a high amount of sex itself. I've been roommates with several stereotypical frat guys and although they had a really easy time getting sex, they really only did it once or twice a week on average. The athletes in the village however seem to be going at it near constantly. It seems like a lot of effort to go to just to feel successful which tells me that isn't the reason why. Olympic athletes just seem to have much higher sex drives than average. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: Okay then, find me a single example of this actually being used in experimental conditions.Sphinxter said: That very thing which after 150 years of research into the matter can still only be constituted by self-identification of the subject? — that idea makes me laugh. Are you aware of how ridiculous and unlikely it is that it is "biological" if after 150 years of extensive search they to this day have no better test for it than "what do you self-identify as?": no brain scan, no genetic markers, no blood test, nothing of the sort. It is exactly what it is and how it is treated in all research: a "self-identifier", nothing more: on the hierarchy of classifications that makes it absolutely the lowest and least meaningful. There is absolutely nothing left any more if apparently "sexual orientations" can be "interpreted" as not "being attracted to one specific sex only". The point stands that if this can happen then your lack of attraction to males still remains a function of your culture, not your genes. And then "heterosexual male" has nothing to do with "not being attracted to males" and we are right back where we started that your lack of attraction to males is the function of your culture and lack of ability to form your own judgements. Actually there are reliable tests. You literally hook up sensors to people and brain waves that are consistent with sexual attraction light up when people see the gender they are attracted to and don't light up when they see the gender they are not attracted to. Here's the biggest problem with your theory. If sexual orientation is actually culturally constructed, then why the hell would anybody be gay in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? You're asking why criminals exist?"Why would anyone be a thief in a country where this is illegal? I guess that thiefs exist in countries where this is illegal thus proofs that one is biologically born a thief." — your logic. Why would anybody be gay in Medieval Times? Why do gay people in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan exist in the same numbers that they do in progressive Western countries? Again "gay" didn't exist in mediæval times; "gay" only started to surface since about 150 years back when western psychiatrists first constructed it.In mediæval European times it was the prævalent that all men had the potential to "succumb" to homoerotic desires; just as they currently have in Saudi-Arabia. It simply doesn't make sense for people to be putting their lives on the line in cultures like that just for the fuck of it because heterosexuality is like, so bourgeois. Why do gay people who are ashamed of themselves for years until they finally accept themselves exist? Men put their lives on the line to challenge the existence of religious dogma, both in mediæval Europe and in certain highly religious countries to this day: are you saying that this implies that one is biologically born to belief in religious dogma or not?The idea that sexual orientation is a choice does not make any sense whatsoever. At most, bisexuals may have a stronger biological preference for one gender but choose to fuck the other gender more for social reasons but that's as far as it goes. Where did I ever use the word "use"? Why do genderfags so often insert the word "choice" out of nowhere in discussions?The point of the man so easily brainwashed by his culture is that he has no choice: he is weak and a slave to his culture. He bows down to social influence, for he has no choice and no volition of his own. "choice" is something experienced by the strong, not the weak; their fault is that their culture makes their choices for them. |
It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
Sphinxter said: Ryuk9428 said: Okay then, find me a single example of this actually being used in experimental conditions.Actually there are reliable tests. You literally hook up sensors to people and brain waves that are consistent with sexual attraction light up when people see the gender they are attracted to and don't light up when they see the gender they are not attracted to. Here's the biggest problem with your theory. If sexual orientation is actually culturally constructed, then why the hell would anybody be gay in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? You're asking why criminals exist?"Why would anyone be a thief in a country where this is illegal? I guess that thiefs exist in countries where this is illegal thus proofs that one is biologically born a thief." — your logic. Why would anybody be gay in Medieval Times? Why do gay people in countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan exist in the same numbers that they do in progressive Western countries? Again "gay" didn't exist in mediæval times; "gay" only started to surface since about 150 years back when western psychiatrists first constructed it.In mediæval European times it was the prævalent that all men had the potential to "succumb" to homoerotic desires; just as they currently have in Saudi-Arabia. It simply doesn't make sense for people to be putting their lives on the line in cultures like that just for the fuck of it because heterosexuality is like, so bourgeois. Why do gay people who are ashamed of themselves for years until they finally accept themselves exist? Men put their lives on the line to challenge the existence of religious dogma, both in mediæval Europe and in certain highly religious countries to this day: are you saying that this implies that one is biologically born to belief in religious dogma or not?The idea that sexual orientation is a choice does not make any sense whatsoever. At most, bisexuals may have a stronger biological preference for one gender but choose to fuck the other gender more for social reasons but that's as far as it goes. Where did I ever use the word "use"? Why do genderfags so often insert the word "choice" out of nowhere in discussions?The point of the man so easily brainwashed by his culture is that he has no choice: he is weak and a slave to his culture. He bows down to social influence, for he has no choice and no volition of his own. "choice" is something experienced by the strong, not the weak; their fault is that their culture makes their choices for them. http://indiana.edu/~sexlab/files/pubs/Chivers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf Take it or leave it. Criminals have a clear motive. I want money, I fucking hate that guy I'm gonna stab him, that bitch disrespected me so I'm gonna burn his house down. Where's the motive for somebody to be gay in a culture that is extremely hostile to it when you can just fuck women? Even if someone theoretically had a slight curiosity to fuck other men most would not risk their life to satisfy that curiosity. Wouldn't rates of homosexual behavior be similar to modern drug use? In the United States, drug use is highly prevalent with approximately 50% of college students smoking marijuana in the past month. In China, the percentage of pot smokers is so minuscule that they cannot be accurately measured. I'm sure plenty might harbor a curiosity about it but they don't want to be sent to a concentration camp so they don't do it. So why then, are roughly the same numbers of people gay no matter what country it is? If it was actually entirely a social construct, then shouldn't the percentage of people who are gay vary widely? Gay did exist in Medieval Times. It was considered very sinful. And yes they believed it was a choice because otherwise the bible and the church would appear to be full of shit. Hardly anyone was "trying to challenge religious dogma" in Medieval Times. Whether you were Christian or Muslim, pretty much everyone took religion's accuracy for granted. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Maneki-Mew said: Ryuk9428 said: @Maneki-Mew Genetics from what I've seen determines your ceiling but there are quite a few ways that lifestyle can impact your sex drive. As I mentioned with many unhealthy habits lowering it. As far as the Olympic athletes go... It's definitely not a rumor. Entire cities have to order large shipments of condoms specifically for the Olympics and every year they run out. I think Brazil provided some 300,000 and still ran out. This indicates that they are having sex, on average, at least 3 times a day but there's no way of knowing how much oral sex is going on in addition and most people don't use condoms during oral sex. So that means the average Olympic athlete is having sex 3-4 times a day in the village. If that is the average then it means a pretty large number of people are above average at which point we are talking about 4+ or 5+ times a day. This would be fine for me but in my discussions with most people. Such a rate of sex would be physically difficult for them. A lot of guys I know, including macho guys who like to brag, still talk about 3 rounds of sex as if it's simply too much for them. I've found that people who have sex to feel socially successful don't actually have much sex. A lot of those guys have sex one time and are done. They have sex with a lot of different people but that doesn't translate to a high amount of sex itself. I've been roommates with several stereotypical frat guys and although they had a really easy time getting sex, they really only did it once or twice a week on average. The athletes in the village however seem to be going at it near constantly. It seems like a lot of effort to go to just to feel successful which tells me that isn't the reason why. Olympic athletes just seem to have much higher sex drives than average. Uhm okay... but I don't know, if that's the reason and by athletes I guess you mean the typical sports for guys? I wonder if it's the same for guys, who aren't typical masculine sports but are still athletic ofc. That would mean then that the guys playing footvall and co learned to behave like that. Anyway, I can't imagine getting more interested, if I get more athletic lol I'm doing like twice or four times a little bit jogging and so, that's it okay, but I can't imagine that this mindset would change. Or maybe people, who are a lot into sports, have a different approach to their bodies in general as well. Depends on what you understand by "high". lol I had in my whole almost 27 yo life like four people I had been a little bit more intimate, and from them two I had slept with. Defining low or high is very individual and where sex begins in your opinion. I don't see why someone should make sports out of it either. Bding done after the first "round", I mean everything above is exhausting and I don't see a reason for that lol. If its already very low to begin with it probably won't have much of a noticeable difference. My guess is that the people who would be impacted most are people with average or high sex drives. I notice that when I start working out again after I take long breaks from it that I seem to masturbate 33%-60% more than usual. Its usually like 60% in the first couple weeks that I start and then drops down to 33% more than average after a month. I'm not sure why it works that way. Then again, I really don't like working out so I tend to develop muscle memory after a few weeks and don't try to make it harder on myself. I think the number of sexual partners is mostly irrelevant. At best it is a clue to someone's sex drive but it is by no means an indication of it.. My mom claims my dad's sex drive is ridiculously high but my mom is the only sexual partner he has ever had. Its more about how often you masturbate, how often it enters your daily conversations with people, how often you think about it, or how often you want to have sex. Same reason why one would play video games for 4 hours instead of 1. You want the fun to continue. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: A study whose data concludes that the average "self-identified heterosexual male" has a penile response to a naked male exercising, masturbating, and two naked males having sex and similar results for the average "self-identified heterosexual female" in vaginal lubrication is your proof that sensors can measure sexual orientation?Sphinxter said: Okay then, find me a single example of this actually being used in experimental conditions. You're asking why criminals exist? "Why would anyone be a thief in a country where this is illegal? I guess that thiefs exist in countries where this is illegal thus proofs that one is biologically born a thief." — your logic. Again "gay" didn't exist in mediæval times; "gay" only started to surface since about 150 years back when western psychiatrists first constructed it. In mediæval European times it was the prævalent that all men had the potential to "succumb" to homoerotic desires; just as they currently have in Saudi-Arabia. Men put their lives on the line to challenge the existence of religious dogma, both in mediæval Europe and in certain highly religious countries to this day: are you saying that this implies that one is biologically born to belief in religious dogma or not? Where did I ever use the word "use"? Why do genderfags so often insert the word "choice" out of nowhere in discussions? The point of the man so easily brainwashed by his culture is that he has no choice: he is weak and a slave to his culture. He bows down to social influence, for he has no choice and no volition of his own. "choice" is something experienced by the strong, not the weak; their fault is that their culture makes their choices for them. http://indiana.edu/~sexlab/files/pubs/Chivers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf Take it or leave it. Especially this one is hilarious:  There's almost no difference in vaginal lubrication measured to the stimuli depending on whether a female "self-identifies" as "heterosexual" or "homosexual". the average "self-identified heterosexual" female is more aroused by females than males, be I to believe this. Regardless of this; it obviously means very little without having seen the actual videos used because the rest-results are so-female slanted that it's entirely possible that they just used for more attractive females than they used males. [quote]Criminals have a clear motive. I want money, I fucking hate that guy I'm gonna stab him, that bitch disrespected me so I'm gonna burn his house down. Where's the motive for somebody to be gay in a culture that is extremely hostile to it when you can just fuck women? Even if someone theoretically had a slight curiosity to fuck other men most would not risk their life to satisfy that curiosity. Wouldn't rates of homosexual behavior be similar to modern drug use? In the United States, drug use is highly prevalent with approximately 50% of college students smoking marijuana in the past month. In China, the percentage of pot smokers is so minuscule that they cannot be accurately measured. "According to a Washington Post report on September 2, research fellows from the University of Michigan have seen a rapid rise in marijuana use among US college students. In 2014, 5.9 percent of college students were smoking marijuana daily or near-daily, compared with 3.5 percent in 2007." So why then, are roughly the same numbers of people gay no matter what country it is? Where do you even get this bullshit from? Again, same sex sexual intercourse was super common in various cultures:"Writings from the Liu Song Dynasty claimed that homosexuality was as common as heterosexuality in the late 3rd century: All the gentlemen and officials esteemed it. All men in the realm followed this fashion to the extent that husbands and wives were estranged. Resentful unmarried women became jealous." "[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation#Change_over_time]For example, the Hamburg Institute for Sexual Research conducted a survey over the sexual behavior of young people in 1970 and repeated it in 1990. Whereas in 1970 18% of the boys ages 16 and 17 reported to have had at least one same-sex sexual experience, the number had dropped to 2% by 1990.[url] [emphasis mine] — being cut down to 10% in the span of a mere 20 years... Apart from that the number of self-identified bisexuals has doubled in the last ten years in various countries — shit me not; these are all purely meaningless self-identified labels. If it was actually entirely a social construct, then shouldn't the percentage of people who are gay vary widely? Which it does as I've shown — both in self-identification and actual sexual behavior. You have already conceded that in Ancient Greece male same-sex sexual intercourse was extremely common. Gay did exist in Medieval Times. It was considered very sinful. No, having sex with persons of the same sex existed; that's different from sexual orientations which are made up labels.And yes they believed it was a choice because otherwise the bible and the church would appear to be full of shit. They believed that whether or not one have sex with someone is a choice which it obviously is. No one believed in "sexual orientations" ere the 1870s. |
It is obvious that "obscenity" is not a term capable of exact legal definition; in the practice of the courts, it means "anything that shocks the magistrate". — Bertrand Russell |
| uh woah people are really getting into this one :o personally, i no longer see a point in "hooking up" since i'd rather work towards having meaningful relationships at this point in my life rather than a bunch of like numbers in my phone, whose faces i can't link up to. |
| [quote=Sphinxter message=58414083] Ryuk9428 said: A study whose data concludes that the average "self-identified heterosexual male" has a penile response to a naked male exercising, masturbating, and two naked males having sex and similar results for the average "self-identified heterosexual female" in vaginal lubrication is your proof that sensors can measure sexual orientation?Sphinxter said: Okay then, find me a single example of this actually being used in experimental conditions. You're asking why criminals exist? "Why would anyone be a thief in a country where this is illegal? I guess that thiefs exist in countries where this is illegal thus proofs that one is biologically born a thief." — your logic. Again "gay" didn't exist in mediæval times; "gay" only started to surface since about 150 years back when western psychiatrists first constructed it. In mediæval European times it was the prævalent that all men had the potential to "succumb" to homoerotic desires; just as they currently have in Saudi-Arabia. Men put their lives on the line to challenge the existence of religious dogma, both in mediæval Europe and in certain highly religious countries to this day: are you saying that this implies that one is biologically born to belief in religious dogma or not? Where did I ever use the word "use"? Why do genderfags so often insert the word "choice" out of nowhere in discussions? The point of the man so easily brainwashed by his culture is that he has no choice: he is weak and a slave to his culture. He bows down to social influence, for he has no choice and no volition of his own. "choice" is something experienced by the strong, not the weak; their fault is that their culture makes their choices for them. http://indiana.edu/~sexlab/files/pubs/Chivers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf Take it or leave it. Especially this one is hilarious: There's almost no difference in vaginal lubrication measured to the stimuli depending on whether a female "self-identifies" as "heterosexual" or "homosexual". the average "self-identified heterosexual" female is more aroused by females than males, be I to believe this. Regardless of this; it obviously means very little without having seen the actual videos used because the rest-results are so-female slanted that it's entirely possible that they just used for more attractive females than they used males. Criminals have a clear motive. I want money, I fucking hate that guy I'm gonna stab him, that bitch disrespected me so I'm gonna burn his house down. Where's the motive for somebody to be gay in a culture that is extremely hostile to it when you can just fuck women? Even if someone theoretically had a slight curiosity to fuck other men most would not risk their life to satisfy that curiosity. Wouldn't rates of homosexual behavior be similar to modern drug use? In the United States, drug use is highly prevalent with approximately 50% of college students smoking marijuana in the past month. In China, the percentage of pot smokers is so minuscule that they cannot be accurately measured. "According to a Washington Post report on September 2, research fellows from the University of Michigan have seen a rapid rise in marijuana use among US college students. In 2014, 5.9 percent of college students were smoking marijuana daily or near-daily, compared with 3.5 percent in 2007." So why then, are roughly the same numbers of people gay no matter what country it is? Where do you even get this bullshit from? Again, same sex sexual intercourse was super common in various cultures:"Writings from the Liu Song Dynasty claimed that homosexuality was as common as heterosexuality in the late 3rd century: All the gentlemen and officials esteemed it. All men in the realm followed this fashion to the extent that husbands and wives were estranged. Resentful unmarried women became jealous." "[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation#Change_over_time]For example, the Hamburg Institute for Sexual Research conducted a survey over the sexual behavior of young people in 1970 and repeated it in 1990. Whereas in 1970 18% of the boys ages 16 and 17 reported to have had at least one same-sex sexual experience, the number had dropped to 2% by 1990.[url] [emphasis mine] — being cut down to 10% in the span of a mere 20 years... Apart from that the number of self-identified bisexuals has doubled in the last ten years in various countries — shit me not; these are all purely meaningless self-identified labels. If it was actually entirely a social construct, then shouldn't the percentage of people who are gay vary widely? Which it does as I've shown — both in self-identification and actual sexual behavior. You have already conceded that in Ancient Greece male same-sex sexual intercourse was extremely common. Gay did exist in Medieval Times. It was considered very sinful. No, having sex with persons of the same sex existed; that's different from sexual orientations which are made up labels.And yes they believed it was a choice because otherwise the bible and the church would appear to be full of shit. They believed that whether or not one have sex with someone is a choice which it obviously is. No one believed in "sexual orientations" ere the 1870s.Female sexuality is significantly more fluid than men's. That's what it shows... Bisexuals can much more easily hide their orientations by the nature of their orientation. And yes, I do think there's a lot of bisexual people out there. That quote simply says that there were some men who were homosexual or bisexual and that they weren't uncommon. Same sex experience is not the same as being gay. Gay refers to exclusive attraction to the same sex. I didn't say it was extremely common in Greece just that fucking other men was more accepted so some people might've been more likely to go for that. It doesn't change the number of gay people, it changes how often bisexuals go for both men and women. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Maneki-Mew said: Ryuk9428 said: If its already very low to begin with it probably won't have much of a noticeable difference. My guess is that the people who would be impacted most are people with average or high sex drives. I notice that when I start working out again after I take long breaks from it that I seem to masturbate 33%-60% more than usual. Its usually like 60% in the first couple weeks that I start and then drops down to 33% more than average after a month. I'm not sure why it works that way. Then again, I really don't like working out so I tend to develop muscle memory after a few weeks and don't try to make it harder on myself. I think the number of sexual partners is mostly irrelevant. At best it is a clue to someone's sex drive but it is by no means an indication of it.. My mom claims my dad's sex drive is ridiculously high but my mom is the only sexual partner he has ever had. Its more about how often you masturbate, how often it enters your daily conversations with people, how often you think about it, or how often you want to have sex. Same reason why one would play video games for 4 hours instead of 1. You want the fun to continue. You're right, but that was the reason for me and why I said people feel pressured into sexual activities. I almost felt pressured too, but then again, I wanted to decide on my own, because I didn't feel like it and by hookups I was and am legit scared and turned off. I had the case quite often, when I was in a bar or club with female friends or collegues and a bunch of them wanted to get me an one-night-stand to "make me happy" and become more "relaxed". And then they introduced me to guys. Although the guys didn't do anything wrong to me and all, I had the problem to get rid off them in polite ways and therefore I was so pissed at this. Then there were guys, who flirted with me on their own. Same, but since it's not their fault, I had the problem to get rid off them politely. My collegues thought I'm just shy and would want to have one hookup too. My friends started to respected this, others not... and they kept doing this here and there. But my closer circle wasn't and isn't so "sex obsessed" either and all. I just can't deal with this sort of people, if they are also trying to push me or behave like ... what I described above. And I imagine that many other teenagers and young adults made similar experiences and their annoying peers try to pressure them and many might giving in, when they originally didn't want to. Well okay, one or two hours of video games are definitely enough for me. And most other stuff. :') Interesting, do you consider yourself asexual? If not, or perhaps just for the fuck of it cause its fun to try stuff, you might be interested in something called PT-141 since you mention having a boyfriend. Its supposed to be a scientifically proven aphrodisiac. I saw this one guy, I think he was somewhere between 30-45 years old, took it and made a video to "review" and he was laughing his ass off during the whole review describing how horny it made him. Said he felt like a 13 year old again. It works on men and women. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: I think a lot of guys losing sensitivity to sexual stimuli as a result of too much exposure to extreme fetish porn is going to have or already has major consequences for their sex life. I'm heard numerous guys tell me they can't masturbate without porn, which I think is definitely a problem. Yes, it is. Many people, or well guys in particular, make themselves numb without noticing as they constantly surround themselves with porn, lewd images, hentai games etc etc, and all this material being some sort of really kinky/hardcore porn makes it harder to get off to anything "normal/tame" anymore. They're losing their appetite to have actual sex with their girlfriends and no longer know how to stimulate their minds with just their imagination. In time, nothing feels "enough" anymore and yet they constantly want sex/to jerk off because they've become porn addicts by the constant exposure to lewd things in some form. If I know I'm not getting sex I pretty much won't go out of my way to stare at lewd things all day long, there's just no point, why make yourself frustrated by exposing yourself to constant stimulation. I feel like guys just cause problems for themselves and then go ahead and complain about it. Like, if you're hungry, staring at food will make you feel worse lol. Then again I'm female and don't really have issues with my sex drive and I dunno how much sex enters the mind of a male even when they're not trying to. But I do believe the less you think and look at it the less frustrated you'll be. Focusing on other things in life helps. Also I agree with something Maneki-Mew mentioned earlier, that young ppl nowadays are almost expected to be horny/lewd all the time, as if it makes you more of a "real man" or cool. There's no need to oversexualize yourself just to fit in. I'm fine with my lowish sex drive and feel no need to pretend. I believe it could be higher too, but because of my circumstances I've just adjusted. It is what it is. |
viktySep 24, 2019 11:17 PM
 |
vikty said: Ryuk9428 said: I think a lot of guys losing sensitivity to sexual stimuli as a result of too much exposure to extreme fetish porn is going to have or already has major consequences for their sex life. I'm heard numerous guys tell me they can't masturbate without porn, which I think is definitely a problem. Yes, it is. Many people, or well guys in particular, make themselves numb without noticing as they constantly surround themselves with porn, lewd images, hentai games etc etc, and all this material being some sort of really kinky/hardcore porn makes it harder to get off to anything "normal/tame" anymore. They're losing their appetite to have actual sex with their girlfriends and no longer know how to stimulate their minds with just their imagination. In time, nothing feels "enough" anymore and yet they constantly want sex/to jerk off because they've become porn addicts by the constant exposure to lewd things in some form. If I know I'm not getting sex I pretty much won't go out of my way to stare at lewd things all day long, there's just no point, why make yourself frustrated by exposing yourself to constant stimulation. I feel like guys just cause problems for themselves and then go ahead and complain about it. Like, if you're hungry, staring at food will make you feel worse lol. Then again I'm female and don't really have issues with my sex drive and I dunno how much sex enters the mind of a male even when they're not trying to. But I do believe the less you think and look at it the less frustrated you'll be. Focusing on other things in life helps. Also I agree with something Maneki-Mew mentioned earlier, that young ppl nowadays are almost expected to be horny/lewd all the time, as if it makes you more of a "real man" or cool. There's no need to oversexualize yourself just to fit in. I'm fine with my lowish sex drive and feel no need to pretend. I believe it could be higher too, but because of my circumstances I've just adjusted. It is what it is. "If you're hungry, staring at food will make you feel worse." That was very profound. Probably a lot more than you realized saying it. I know we've steered very far off topic but bringing it back to the original. Low libido people often present their complaints about hookup culture as "all everybody cares about is sex," and I do think people with higher sex drives usually feel that as a result of being a horny person, they should support hookup culture because it supposedly caters to their interests. A subculture based around sex seems like it should be in their best interests. However, I've told a lot of people before that I believe hookup culture is deceptive and has made sexual frustration a much worse problem for men. The reason you are supposed to support it if you do is that you are supposedly promised a kind of sexual utopia where anyone can have sex with anybody, whenever they like and nobody's feelings get hurt. But as we know in reality, this isn't how things actually work. In order for hookup culture to work, men and women's sexuality has to work exactly the same way. Hookup culture is based on the assumption that girl's traditional preference for emotional relationships is socially constructed instead of a part of being female. I think what happened is that a lot of guys noticed that girls in relationships can act just as horny or sex crazed as guys stereotypically are if not more so, so they started believing that female sexuality was simply getting repressed. That if girls were no longer slut-shamed, they would have sex like men do. However, slut-shaming for the most part has been significantly reduced in society. A lot of girls proudly proclaim to be sluts that sleep around a lot. "The shackles" have been thrown off so to speak. But the result isn't what people thought it would be. The heterosexual hookup scene does not function even remotely similar to the way gay men hookup. And quite frankly, its a good thing that it doesn't because STDs spread like wildfire among promiscuous gay social circles. Studies on gay hookup culture around the late 70s and early 80s found that astonishingly high percentages of gay men had fucked hundreds and sometimes even thousands of other men over the course of a life time. These kind of numbers are very rare among straight men. Which means that the vast majority of girls simply don't have enough interest in participating in hookup culture the way it was intended to be in order for it to work. This is resulting in women being frustrated as they have no means of getting sexual satisfaction but its in a strange way that is difficult to explain because not many people are willing to tell women that the reason one night stands don't satisfy them is probably because the only sex that will satisfy them is in relationships. Meanwhile, men are frustrated because the only way we know how to get sex is by trying to hookup with girls, but most girls aren't interested in that so most of the time we spend trying to find hookups is wasted and leads nowhere. Hookup culture is also presenting an obstacle because whenever a guy approaches a girl, the girl is likely to assume he is just another PUA type guy looking to smash and dash. Girls are, reasonably, unlikely to assume a random guy is approaching them with intent to date or form a long term relationship. This is making a lot of girls completely closed off to male advances. Once again perpetuating sexual frustration as men now have no idea how to get their needs met. This is why I say my opposition to hookup culture isn't a moral one, but simply feeling that hookup culture has fundamentally failed at achieving the goal it set out to accomplish. From what I see though, is that our culture is desperately trying to make hookup culture work because we're still clinging to this 1960s dream of a free love society. The fact is though, hookup culture had a chance to produce this free love society and it simply did not work. Gender relations have been seriously strained and both men and women are frustrated. If more emphasis was put on long term relationships though, I think gender relations can be repaired. Long term relationships are much more conductive to regular sex than hookup culture is because you can live together and have sex any time you want rather than trying to find a different woman every time you want sex. So that will be good for men. For women, it will provide the emotional connection that many need in order to have satisfying sex. If gender relations are going to be repaired, I see that both genders are going to have to make a major sacrifice. Among men, we're going to have to sacrifice our desire for a variety of sexual partners and place more importance on the girls who already are our partners. We also will have to sacrifice some of the guarantee of immediate sex that hookup culture provides. For the latter, I'm not entirely sure about because a lot of girls still like having sex on the first date, but overall, we are gonna have to sacrifice the idea that its relatively normal to be able to walk into a club and bring a girl back to your home or hotel room that same night and have sex. Meet a girl at a club so you can hang out at another time that could lead to sex? Sure, but it may happen a lot less frequently the night itself. For girls, I think that girls are gonna have to sacrifice a lot of the independence values that have become popular. Its not very encouraging from men's perspective to see so many girls saying "they don't need a man," and trying to devalue the importance that close relationships to men and procreation serves for women's happiness. Not entirely related, but I also think something needs to be done to make sure guys stop being dependent on extreme porn in order to be sexually stimulated. I see lots of guys act as if naked girls aren't enough to excite them anymore. This is unnatural, a naked girl should be enough to excite you. If a naked girl doesn't do that, then its probably because of some kind of porn dependency. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Maneki-Mew said: But then again, I love well-written or well-drawn sex (and more realistic bodies lol), but I don't need it every day or even every week. Same. I'm not against hentai or erotic literature, it can be very well drawn/written and I can enjoy it alot in the right mindset! It's like any quality thing for me, a good cup of coffee, a good game, a refreshing walk in the nature. I can enjoy lewd things just like I enjoy any fine thing in life but it's not an obsession nor do I need it daily. I also happen to like fetish/very kinky things in art or literature, they can really turn me on way more than normal vanilla stuff, but I dunno if in real life I'd be even willing to try them lol. As long as sex is more than sex, with real love behind the act, that's my number one thing. Kinks are just a bonus. And yeah just like @Ryuk9428 said, the straight hook up culture just doesn't work for most males' favor even now in a society where bitches go "LOOK IM SEXUAL IM A REAL SLUT" because while those girls exist, females and males are still almost like different species in some ways and yes, 90% of the time the chick will want emotions and bonding and relationships. Not to jump from bed to bed every weekend. In general, guys do obsess over sex more. No matter how much it feels like girls are more open and sexual, our brains are still wired abit differently. |
viktySep 25, 2019 6:27 AM
|
Maneki-Mew said: Ryuk9428 said: Interesting, do you consider yourself asexual? If not, or perhaps just for the fuck of it cause its fun to try stuff, you might be interested in something called PT-141 since you mention having a boyfriend. Its supposed to be a scientifically proven aphrodisiac. I saw this one guy, I think he was somewhere between 30-45 years old, took it and made a video to "review" and he was laughing his ass off during the whole review describing how horny it made him. Said he felt like a 13 year old again. It works on men and women. Not exactly, more... demi? But that's not wrong. I feel nothing more than "yes, you're looking cute" for people that aren't really close to me. I liked it, but I don't need it and was completely fine when I had like three years without someone I knew well and wanted to actual sleep with and getting in a relationship with and vice versa, because they weren't just into me or in a monogamous relationship etc. Had, I'm more into women, having a girlfriend now, but still and we are on the same level, you know. Still, with women I don't think like "we'd could do it every day or week". My exes would have needed to frequently and I thought then that it's unfair and cruel to some point to refuse sex often to a heterosexual guy, who needs it more often than me. I'd have no problem (anymore) with having sex, when I don't need to, but too often is eeh. He felt that I would play along and lost his desire at that moment as well. When I said that in a discussions with these female collegues their opinions went from "you are shy and a prude" to "omg, you're actually a slut" to "omg, it's humiliating for a woman that she would sleep with a guy although she doesn't feel like to." That was new then, never heard THAT about me. Good to know lol They talked about him like he would be some kind of a raping asshole then, if he would agree, which actually wasn't fun anymore. <.< Still, I always have / had quite close body contact in other ways and tbh that's far more fulfilling and sexier imo than the full programme, uhm well. I won't stopping cuddling with others etc. when I'm in a relationship, also she's doing the same. Back then I would have been jealous, but I guess, I understand that. Ah... what? I think, I refuse this stuff haha. vikty said: Yes, it is. Many people, or well guys in particular, make themselves numb without noticing as they constantly surround themselves with porn, lewd images, hentai games etc etc, and all this material being some sort of really kinky/hardcore porn makes it harder to get off to anything "normal/tame" anymore. They're losing their appetite to have actual sex with their girlfriends and no longer know how to stimulate their minds with just their imagination. In time, nothing feels "enough" anymore and yet they constantly want sex/to jerk off because they've become porn addicts by the constant exposure to lewd things in some form. If I know I'm not getting sex I pretty much won't go out of my way to stare at lewd things all day long, there's just no point, why make yourself frustrated by exposing yourself to constant stimulation. I feel like guys just cause problems for themselves and then go ahead and complain about it. Like, if you're hungry, staring at food will make you feel worse lol. Then again I'm female and don't really have issues with my sex drive and I dunno how much sex enters the mind of a male even when they're not trying to. But I do believe the less you think and look at it the less frustrated you'll be. Focusing on other things in life helps. Also I agree with something Maneki-Mew mentioned earlier, that young ppl nowadays are almost expected to be horny/lewd all the time, as if it makes you more of a "real man" or cool. There's no need to oversexualize yourself just to fit in. I'm fine with my lowish sex drive and feel no need to pretend. I believe it could be higher too, but because of my circumstances I've just adjusted. It is what it is. Yes, same. And tried a few times watching porn or hentai, but also most of it is sexy like watching an animal documentary about reproduction. The focus on genitals and everything from the angle to other stuff is disgustingly exploitive and many hentais on the other hand make me seriously laugh. I mean because of the bad visuals and voice acting quality, but also because it's ... just dumb. People, who wrote many of the hentai, oh boi... please never have sex *cough* I guess some of them never had, I can't explain some hentai otherwise. haha And on cons there are always some people with these ahegao shirts and I know they are memes, but good god, they are cringey and that's a mirror of every shitty hentai I came across. But then again, I love well-written or well-drawn sex (and more realistic bodies lol), but I don't need it every day or even every week. Depends if I come across. But well, I love some real top-notch erotic. :D But nothing of it is kinky, actually lewd or anything. On the other hand, I think I developed a quite healthy opinion about sexuality and most non-fetish things aren't lewd in my eyes, or fetishes that don't go extremely far aren't as well. Ryuk9428 said: However, slut-shaming for the most part has been significantly reduced in society. A lot of girls proudly proclaim to be sluts that sleep around a lot. "The shackles" have been thrown off so to speak. But the result isn't what people thought it would be. The heterosexual hookup scene does not function even remotely similar to the way gay men hookup. And quite frankly, its a good thing that it doesn't because STDs spread like wildfire among promiscuous gay social circles. Studies on gay hookup culture around the late 70s and early 80s found that astonishingly high percentages of gay men had fucked hundreds and sometimes even thousands of other men over the course of a life time. These kind of numbers are very rare among straight men. Okay, I have to say something about this too: They developed an extremely self-destroying behavior, because society shunned them and make them creating some sort of own "subculture". Many of them had and have so bad experiences in their families and environments that they developed serious mental issues from it and took them out on each other. Also many gay men thought that in the 70s and 80s that leading a loving relationship isn't possible in this society and that they have to have hookups for their lifetime. Sexual aspects aside, the idea that you will only have sex, or be good for sex, but not have any meaningful relationship, is very soul-crushing for many. So I guess, in these times, many just didn't care of their lives anymore and didn't care, if they get STDs or not and adapted very unhealthy behaviors and mindsets from each other. For heterosexual people, it's normal to find their partners in daily life and since I live in a quite modern city and district and had an open-minded environment, there was no difference between monogamous and long and promiscuous behavior of straight, bi or homosexual people. In my school(s) and university it's quite normal that two male classmates got into a relationship with each other. Real gay subculture is something that mainly do older men so 35+ I guess. Guys my age and teenagers today are rarely into that, from what I know from friends, collegues and so, because they are seen as quite normal by a bigger part of the society now and could meet their boyfriend in their normal environment, if it's a good one. Heterosexual young couples also have a lot of role models how to possible lead a relationship in their own life and media. Also the stereotype that gay men are extremely sex-obsessed is poison for the self-esteem and self-image of young boys, who explored that they are gay or bi. That comes in addition to the general stereotype that men are always sex-obsessed and that male sexuality is "dirty and aggresssive" per se. I know, that's why I specified the years when the studies were conducted. Wasn't trying to make a point on why so much that it's possible for men to develop a hookup scene unimaginable to straight people if male sexuality bounces off male sexuality. Levels of extreme promiscuity in the gay community are a good bit lower than they once were but there are still extreme outliers that would probably have not been able to do that had they been straight. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| @vikty and @maneki-mew I don't know if girls have a lower libido overall or if it's more situational and acts differently. One girl I knew had a pretty high libido for example but still thought dick pics were weird and I can't imagine any guy getting bothered by pictures of tits no matter how low his libido is. Men's sexuality is directed very randomly and is very consistent. We are not picky about context or about who the girl is. Most guys if they walked into their room one day and saw a random girl they've never met before on their bed seducing them. Most men would be fine with that whereas most girls would be freaked out by such a situation. But I've heard of girls who, during ovulation specifically, can get extremely horny and then suddenly once it's over not have much interest in sex anymore. A lot of serially monogamous girls who are rarely single seem to be pretty sex obsessed. You don't have to separate sex and love to be sex obsessed. Quite a few people are obsessed with sex but in a romantic context. A lot of those girls still masturbate a lot and are probably more open to having a hookup even if they don't necessarily pursue them the way that openly slutty girls claim to. |
Ryuk9428Sep 25, 2019 1:42 PM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| @Ryuk9428 Yes, girls rarely get off to random pics bc we aren't as strictly visual as men. For men, a random pic of a pair of tits or any sexual part of female body is pretty much always enough sexual stimulation to make them have thoughts or desires whereas for girls a well written erotic text/ literature would work better. I mean guys have all these "you fap you lose" challenges with pics and I just cannot imagine a group of women doing that LOL If I see a random naked man or a dick pic I don't get aroused at all. I don't necessarily feel eww, I just feel... nothing. I have to have feelings for that man to get anything sexual out of it. Like you said, for men it's more consistent and less picky. And I can definitely agree on the ovulation thing, those couple days a month are the ONLY time I get random urges during the day, sometimes multiple times. The body is way more sensitive to touch and everything just feels better and interests me more. When that time's up, I pretty much lose any urges. Sure I can stimulate myself if I "need" to and want to but during ovulation it's way better and more satisfying. I think it's important for men to understand that girls can get very, very willing and horny too but it needs the right situation and mindset, it's not just about sticking your thing in straight up like that. Once a month we can go crazy too lol The hormonal cycle is a weird thing. During pms we get overall cranky and irritated and alot of women tend to have pretty much disgust towards sex during that time. It's something I can def relate to, and not to be taken personally bc I wouldn't want even my dearest loved one to touch me during that time lol. Girls go from "omg yes sex" to "ewww yuck keep it away from me" to neutral and back monthly while guys are just more consistent lol |
viktySep 26, 2019 1:20 AM
|
| I'm the type of guy who really adores and treasures meaningful and deep relationships.... Sex is definitely something I want down the line, but only with the person I really love and will be spending the rest of my life with. I just think that sex is much more better if you do it with the one you truly love :) So, no.... I don't like the Hookup culture at all. |
| Not really. I would never hookup for the sake of it or have a one night stand. It doesn't match up with my core beliefs or values, and it's something I don't want. I want every relationship I have in my life to have be meaningful, and have more meaning to it than just sex and pleasure. |
| You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become irrelevant. |
| You know, I had initially said I was actually going to get involved with hook ups at bars. Looking at myself though as the person I am, I have more respect for myself than to be simply used as masturbation aid for a stranger. So hook up culture isn't something I think I'll be considering, if ever. I'm too much of a romantic person anyways. |
| didn't someone make this thread already? but yeah I have no problem with it. I have one night stands occasionally |
| Not really into one night stands, not really my thing. I don't see the point of temporary pleasures when the consequences outweigh the pros. Would like to sit down one day and actually have a family tho. -J |
| Hey OP wanna hook up? I've been really horny lately but I'm too scared to leave my room. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| My experiences with it has been awkward or humiliating but I don't see anything wrong with it. We live in a time of infinite possibilities and consequences. If people be too dumb to handle the consequences of their actions then that's on them. |
  ♡ Harder Daddy ♡ |
| the same people who like hook up culture are the same people who despise rape culture the most lmao ironic |
 hiSets Last FM Anime List Manga List Clue no. 2: Somewhere in one of the pictures in my forum signature. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Bluey is the most watched anime in the world nowtsukareru - Yesterday |
27 |
by Dracowyn
»»
13 minutes ago |
|
» Dracula, Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde or Frankenstein(books)?Absurdo_N - Apr 23 |
11 |
by xthewarwithinx
»»
29 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are you mentally ill?Ejrodiew - Yesterday |
23 |
by Ejrodiew
»»
35 minutes ago |
|
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
676 |
by Hitagi__Furude
»»
55 minutes ago |
|
» Are you a slow or fast typier on a computer???DesuMaiden - Apr 19 |
43 |
by LordSozin
»»
2 hours ago |