Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast
Results 451 to 480 of 489

Thread: Dating coach banned from several countries after internet feminist outrage over misogynist vid

  1. #451
    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    It was merely an example, and an extremely prevalent one at that.
    I'm just curious - what else led you to your sage-like conclusions about what women really want? I mean, I'll admit I was stereotyping about the online dating thing. I'm sure not all of the partakers are awkward. I've never tried it myself; never felt the need to. But I thought about this a little more and I believe the real reasons women, and people in general, make huge-ass lists of what they want online is because an impersonal computer screen *allows* them to type whatever the hell they want by virtue of the medium. In face-to-face conversation, people's streams of consciousness are constantly interrupted because of the need to keep the conversation going. No one likes someone who rambles on forever. When I size up potential dates or partners, it's true that I look for a few things, but if I'm engaged in a conversation with them, I'm making decisions in real time and constantly reassessing my own checklist. Maybe the guy isn't enormously physically attractive and doesn't have other women flocking to him, but he has a cute jawline and he likes economics, so hell yeah. When the only thing I'm interacting with is a computer screen, of course I'm going to write a ton of $#@!. Similarly, if you and I were having this conversation face-to-face right now, I would only be making a fraction of the points I'm making right now. I've had more time to ruminate on what I'm going to say without the conversation lagging. In short, observations made online are probably the *worst* place you could start when trying to assess psychology.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    Why don't men have the same concerns for medical safety? Furthermore, assuming women do have a greater concern for medical safety, wouldn't that be a factor in determining that women are the gatekeepers of sex, since men are oh so cavalier about their medical safety while women are cautious? Do you even understand the concept of gatekeeper? More sex would be had, but for the woman's caution - but they're not gatekeepers?
    Men don't have the same general concerns for medical safety because women contract STDs at twice the rate that men do, and the entire point of my posts thus far has been to show that you have no proof that women are inherently gatekeepers, or naturally oriented towards being pickier than men. Currently we live in a world where female sexuality is highly regulated. Women are constantly being pushed and pulled in all different directions by men who can't make up their mind whether they want women to be sexy or demure. Likewise, certain cultural expectations push and pull men in all directions. As just one example, men who genuinely want to learn how to interact better with women are disdained or mocked in favor of some of the ugliest variants of PUA. Prudes are constantly mocked in our culture, but women can't go too far or else they'll magically become sluts. The only reason this expectation is present in our culture is because certain males want to maintain their stranglehold over dictating sexual relations, but the deepest irony is that they don't recognize the roadblocks this presents for them being able to get laid.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    Regarding the checklist, you're trying to tell me that a man that is unemployed, doesn't own a car, and is living in his parents' basement is going to have the same ease of success at obtaining sex as a woman with similar circumstances? If so, why do you believe that (please don't cite that pissant study again - use your own words and thoughts)?
    I see no reason why a conversation leading to sex has to involve talking about the man's life circumstances. Maybe depending on the setting, but there are plenty of informal settings where sex is the end goal and life circumstances are rarely the topic of conversation; you weren't specific as to which one you are discussing. Personally, I would feel as though I weren't being true to myself if a man assumed I was something I was not because he was just interested in having sex, as you claim is the mindset of many men. Without my fondness for discussing 1) econ 2) 70's films 3) math 4) Seinfeld, I am basically not interesting enough to carry a conversation with anyone (and thus no sex). My nerdiness works pretty well with fellow college students, but I am sure I would have a harder time if I were at a different age. I had a difficult time in high school for these reasons.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    If a woman is a bona fide bisexual, it kind of falls outside the scope of this argument since other psychological factors must be weighed. Please stop obfuscating.
    No, it does not. Your thesis is that women ultimately have more criteria for sleeping with a potential partner than men do. If bisexual women jump into bed with women far more readily than they do with men over and over again, that suggests there are more important factors at play. Of course bisexuality is more nuanced than I have presented it, but I don't like the implication of your "bona fide" remark. No, not all bisexual women are "going through a phase." Please don't stereotype.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    I don't care about this pissant study. Please use your own thoughts and reasoning capability. The study is flawed because the choice is obvious. Obviously men would prefer to be with Angelina Jolie (I hope I don't have to argue this point as well - please spare me). Obviously men would prefer to be with Johnny Depp as he is handsome, rich, and high status; his wealth would be sufficient for any gold-digger, so there would be no need to choose Donald Trump. Furthermore, I never stated that women do not care about physical attractiveness. What I did say is that women have a lot more factors that they weigh. A better study would be Donald Trump vs. a random, unknown man that is handsome like Johnny Depp. I'd bet that Donald Trump would get more hits in that scenario.
    Only reason I cited the study was to prove to you that some circumstances contradict your thesis about status playing a large role.

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    Just because a woman is seeking to get pregnant doesn't mean that she isn't trying to find an acceptable mate on a subconscious level. Technology doesn't really change this.
    Gee, I really love when men try to explain female psychology. Females can't even explain the psychology of their own gender.

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    What would really level the barrier is reliable male contraception, particularly a male equivalent of birth control pills. No more child support for unwanted, baseborn abominations.
    I have no objection to male contraception. Have at it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    Try to stay on point nex time. Cheers!
    You were the one who implied the more sex a woman had, the less valuable it became to her. That's the definition of diminishing marginal utility. But since sex isn't a traditional economic good, it can't be analyzed meaningfully in this way.
    Last edited by Rothbardian Girl; 11-21-2014 at 08:53 PM. Reason: typos!!!
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #452
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    if I'm engaged in a conversation with them, I'm making decisions in real time and constantly reassessing my own checklist.
    I don't mean to nitpick one thing from a long and thoughtful post, but from a male perspective, that's pretty hilarious.

    Here's the male checklist:
    1.) I want her.
    2.) There is no number 2.

  4. #453
    Quote Originally Posted by KingNothing View Post
    I don't mean to nitpick one thing from a long and thoughtful post, but from a male perspective, that's pretty hilarious.

    Here's the male checklist:
    1.) I want her.
    2.) There is no number 2.
    I mean it could be the female one too (it also doesn't have to be the default male frame of mind) - not all women are created equal, nor are women always interested in the same outcome every time. It's likely the world would be a better place if everyone had the courage to say "Hey, wanna have sex with me?" and to dispense with pointless conversation. Even though women may be in that kind of mood a certain percentage of the time, a great number of them have been socially conditioned to deny their urges.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  5. #454
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    I mean it could be the female one too (it also doesn't have to be the default male frame of mind) - not all women are created equal, nor are women always interested in the same outcome every time. It's likely the world would be a better place if everyone had the courage to say "Hey, wanna have sex with me?" and to dispense with pointless conversation. Even though women may be in that kind of mood a certain percentage of the time, a great number of them have been socially conditioned to deny their urges.
    Yes, that would make the world a better place. Once I found that being direct a) got me laid more and b) dispensed with the awkward chit-chat and cock-teasers, a great new world of honesty and happiness opened (for me and my partner). Now, I just straight up ask the old lady, "got time for a quickie?", or "after the kids are asleep, lets grab a bottle of wine and fool around in the hot tub". I don't know about all those lame dudes on TeeVee who complain about never getting laid once they're married, but $#@!, they just aren't doing it right or married the wrong woman for the wrong reasons!

  6. #455
    Quote Originally Posted by ghengis86 View Post
    Yes, that would make the world a better place. Once I found that being direct a) got me laid more and b) dispensed with the awkward chit-chat and cock-teasers, a great new world of honesty and happiness opened (for me and my partner). Now, I just straight up ask the old lady, "got time for a quickie?", or "after the kids are asleep, lets grab a bottle of wine and fool around in the hot tub". I don't know about all those lame dudes on TeeVee who complain about never getting laid once they're married, but $#@!, they just aren't doing it right or married the wrong woman for the wrong reasons!

    Isn't playful banter, physical tension, and flirting part of the whole human mating ritual? How boring would it be to walk up to man/woman in the street and say: "hey, wanna $#@!? "Oh yeah, baby! You lead the way!".

    Even if I had the bravado and confidence to do something like that and the woman accepted- it would still be lame, imo.

  7. #456
    Quote Originally Posted by KingNothing View Post
    I can't really respond in any way but this: men who overcome beta-ness --whatever that is-- by adopting PUA habits are lying to themselves and to women, and will be unhappy in the long-term. What they should do, is work to become better people and then draw confidence from that. Anything else is insincere, lazy, over-thinking, nonsense.
    I have no opinion about what men do regarding "adopting PUA habits".

    These are just guys who are trying to get laid.

    My argument is about Supply and Demand and the sex market and dysfunctions in it.

    I don't think we are really arguing here.
    Last edited by parocks; 11-22-2014 at 03:19 AM.



  8. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  9. #457
    Quote Originally Posted by Antischism View Post
    No, women are perceived to be the "gatekeepers" of sex due to social conditioning.
    You're making a joke, right?

    I mean, making fun of the "gender is socially determined" people by arguing against something that is so clearly true?

  10. #458
    Quote Originally Posted by KingNothing View Post
    I've a theory that men are just as likely to be rejected by a 4 as they are a 10, regardless of their own attractiveness. Due to the bell curve distribution of human attractiveness, they simply come across less 10's than 4's, and therefore experience less successes in total, if they even approach them.

    I'm almost certain that I've thought "wow, why is this hot woman so into me," and "oh boy, this woman just rejected me? Yeesh," an equal percentage of times.
    People also aren't walking around with accurate numbers on their chest. And different classes, different cultures value different things. Some have argued that men only care about looks, whether it's true or not it's more true with men than women.

  11. #459

    This was removed from Youtube, NSFW, you are WARNED

    Banned by Youtube, Not Safe For Work, and won't go over well with a lot of people here:



    I concede that a lot of the references to government authority undermine the message somewhat. Antichism mentioned that earlier but I think he may be 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater', as they say.
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 11-22-2014 at 04:11 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  12. #460
    Quote Originally Posted by pessimist View Post
    Isn't playful banter, physical tension, and flirting part of the whole human mating ritual? How boring would it be to walk up to man/woman in the street and say: "hey, wanna $#@!? "Oh yeah, baby! You lead the way!".

    Even if I had the bravado and confidence to do something like that and the woman accepted- it would still be lame, imo.
    Oh, for sure it is skipping over some of the typical social interactions prior to tge act. You can still do all the flirting, foreplay and back and forth you want. But sometimes, you just need to get laid, and being direct is the best way. What the hell is lame about that?

    That's like saying, "Isn't the back and forth, negotiating, haggling, and time wasting all part of the car buying ritual? How boring would it be to walk into a dealership and say "give me your absolute best price now, and you've got a dae", "ok, I'll get the paperwork started!""

    I mean, if you know what you want - sex, car, bread, whatever - just straight up asking is the most direct route to getting what you want. It sounds like you don't just want to get laid; you want to enjoy some of the fun beforehand. Which is totally normal because it is fun and enjoyable. I'm just saying, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

  13. #461
    Quote Originally Posted by parocks View Post
    You're making a joke, right?

    I mean, making fun of the "gender is socially determined" people by arguing against something that is so clearly true?
    I'm absolutely not joking. If you think it's anything other than social conditioning (entirely or at least significantly), you need to pick up a book and read or show me the biological data detailing what inherently makes women "gatekeepers" of sex. I've noticed a lot of people are stuck on the fallacious commodity model.

  14. #462
    Quote Originally Posted by Antischism View Post
    I'm absolutely not joking. If you think it's anything other than social conditioning (entirely or at least significantly), you need to pick up a book and read or show me the biological data detailing what inherently makes women "gatekeepers" of sex. I've noticed a lot of people are stuck on the fallacious commodity model.
    It's social conditioning based on ancient biological reality. Being pregnant isn't a lot of fun. (At least it doesn't look like it). The throwing up, limited mobility towards the end, pain of childbirth etc. It only makes sense that the female species would want the male that got her pregnant on some sort of lock down (relationship) before giving him any realizing the consequences. Now eons later the consequences are somewhat avoidable (completely avoidable if you're okay with abortion) and easier to mitigate (cars so you don't have to walk 3 miles to the well to get water when pregnant for example). But the social conditioning based on the biological reality that was there until relatively recently remains.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  15. #463
    he should make his own catcalling video
    pcosmar's lie : There are more votes than registered Voters..

  16. #464
    Quote Originally Posted by ghengis86 View Post
    Oh, for sure it is skipping over some of the typical social interactions prior to tge act. You can still do all the flirting, foreplay and back and forth you want. But sometimes, you just need to get laid, and being direct is the best way. What the hell is lame about that?

    That's like saying, "Isn't the back and forth, negotiating, haggling, and time wasting all part of the car buying ritual? How boring would it be to walk into a dealership and say "give me your absolute best price now, and you've got a dae", "ok, I'll get the paperwork started!""

    I mean, if you know what you want - sex, car, bread, whatever - just straight up asking is the most direct route to getting what you want. It sounds like you don't just want to get laid; you want to enjoy some of the fun beforehand. Which is totally normal because it is fun and enjoyable. I'm just saying, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.


    Well, since I'm not a sex crazed maniac, masturbation can alleviate sexual desire. I mean, if I absolutely wanted to have sex with a woman I met on the street- I think going through the whole "ritual" would be a lot more appealing and organic.

    Let's say I would see a woman on the street whom I never met before. I am instantaneously attracted to her, not just physically either- she gives off a certain 'aura' or 'vibe' that draws me in. I have a few options...

    I could be the cocky "bad boy" who swaggers on up to her with a shocking lack of self-awareness and bravado and say: "Hey bitch, you have to be finest piece of ass I've seen in a while, how about you come to my pad and I tap that ass?"

    Or I could proposition her in a "nice guy" way.

    "Hi, my name is Pess; you are the most beautiful woman I have ever seen... I can't take my eyes off of you, would you want to come to my place and have sex with me?"

    Or

    I could strike up a conversation, see how the chemistry is, and let the natural flow of things take over. Seduction, flirting, foreplay, and frolicking are all part of things that enhances a sexual experience. Even in relationships.

    They need to legalize prostitution for the folks (I mean, men. seriously, I do agree with you guys here, if a woman wants sex she WILL have willing men lol) who only want sex.


    EDIT: I meant to say "aura" not "aurora"

    EDIT II: I have now changed "aurora" to "aura"

    EDIT III: I have no idea why I said "aurora".
    Last edited by pessimist; 11-22-2014 at 12:05 PM. Reason: aura > aurora



  17. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  18. #465
    Quote Originally Posted by pessimist View Post
    Well, since I'm not a sex crazed maniac, masturbation can alleviate sexual desire. I mean, if I absolutely wanted to have sex with a woman I met on the street- I think going through the whole "ritual" would be a lot more appealing and organic.

    Let's say I would see a woman on the street whom I never met before. I am instantaneously attracted to her, not just physically either- she gives off certain 'aurora' or 'vibe' that draws me in. I have a few options...

    I could be the cocky "bad boy" who swaggers on up to her with a shocking lack of self-awareness and bravado and say: "Hey bitch, you have to be finest piece of ass I've seen in a while, how about you come to my pad and I tap that ass?"

    Or I could proposition her in a "nice guy" way.

    "Hi, my name is Pess; you are the most beautiful woman I have ever seen... I can't take my eyes off of you, would you want to come to my place and have sex with me?"

    Or

    I could strike up a conversation, see how the chemistry is, and let the natural flow of things take over. Seduction, flirting, foreplay, and frolicking is all part things that enhances a sexual experience. Even in relationships.

    They need to legalize prostitution for the folks (I mean, men. seriously, I do agree with you guys here, if a woman wants sex she WILL have willing men lol) who only want sex.
    Oh, I hear what you're saying. I'm just pointing out that directness has its place when you want something, be it a good price on a used car or getting laid.

    Re: prostitution, agreed. And it will be safer too, for all parties involved. And one way or another, you're 'paying' for sex. Or I should say there is a cost or consequence to every action.

  19. #466
    Quote Originally Posted by ghengis86 View Post
    Oh, I hear what you're saying. I'm just pointing out that directness has its place when you want something, be it a good price on a used car or getting laid.

    From a woman's perspective, I am fairly certain she knows that a guy who approaches her in a bar or club or street or coffee shop is after her body. As what was pointed out in this thread, the "PUA" tactics are mostly transparent.

    So are the "nice romantic guys". Do women really buy into that cheesy romcom stuff? I doubt it. Some probably do though.

    Anyway, what I am trying to say is, (in my opinion) in most cases the guy doesn't even need to be direct because all signs (at least from her POV) is "I wanna have sex with you".

  20. #467
    Most people who go to a car dealership know they're being placated and lied to. Swindled even.

  21. #468
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    The problem is you are basing the rating on looks. Looks have less to do with attraction for women.

    I disagree. I think women can be just as visual as men.

    If they 'try hard enough', or maybe have a couple drinks, get a good buzz on and let loose with some interesting conversations they can temporarily become or at least imitate a 7 or 8 and get lucky.
    Anyone who goes to a bar or club has a chance to "get lucky". That's why they were created.

  22. #469
    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm View Post
    Actually, I agree that the female sexual strategy stems from safety. Biologically, the typical woman will be attracted to men that display dominant traits, confidence being one of the most widely acknowledged of such traits
    Define "dominate" traits?

    I'm a skinny dude who is not "macho" in anyway. I'm not the beer-guzzling sports fan with a beer gut or the axe body spray wearing frat douche with 6-pack abs and a gym membership. However, I'm not effeminate or girly in my appearance or speech patterns.

    In the looks department, I'm not a prime Brad Pitt but I'm not Steve Busesmi either. I'm not ugly, but I wouldn't turn heads in a room full of male models.

    Personality wise- I’m an introvert in real life, but can be quick witted at times. The internet provides me an outlet to express myself without experiencing sensory overload from external stimuli. Suddenly, I become the ENTP rather than the INTP. My extroverted intuition becomes dominate while my introverted thinking goes down a few pegs.

    Around people I don't know and in public, I am externally stoic but internally anxious.

    I'm quiet and observational in social situations but not awkward.

    I can read and understand body language. I can empathize with people. And I have a theoretical understanding of social skills and charisma but do not know how to apply it to the real world.

    Basically, I'm in purgatory. I have a messed up nervous system. I’m insecure, yet arrogant. I’m restrained, but yet have a highly opinionated personality.

    I’m a complicated mess that doesn't fit into any of these boxes you put men in. That is why I have trouble understanding you.
    Last edited by pessimist; 11-22-2014 at 03:23 PM.

  23. #470
    Quote Originally Posted by pessimist View Post
    From a woman's perspective, I am fairly certain she knows that a guy who approaches her in a bar or club or street or coffee shop is after her body. As what was pointed out in this thread, the "PUA" tactics are mostly transparent.

    So are the "nice romantic guys". Do women really buy into that cheesy romcom stuff? I doubt it. Some probably do though.

    Anyway, what I am trying to say is, (in my opinion) in most cases the guy doesn't even need to be direct because all signs (at least from her POV) is "I wanna have sex with you".
    Maybe they don't want to buy into all that "cheesy romantic stuff", but women like that same playfulness, flirting and foreplay too. They like the feeling of being pursued, just as men enjoy the pursuit. Hell, it's fun!

    So, since the PUA tactics are supposedly transparent, and being direct is transparent, I guess you're only going to get what you're going after, or only be satisfied with what the endgame of your personal PU tactics bring i.e. a little playful banter, flirting, pursuit, conversation, laughing, etc., women looking to reciprocate in that communication method will respond likewise.

    Re:your last thought

    Yes, I'm fairly certain women instinctively know that the majority of the time, a random guy walking up to start a conversation has the endgame in mind of hitting the sack. Not that plutonic relationships are impossible, but the sexual aspect is very, very dominant in most cases (and why shouldn't it? Right?)

  24. #471
    Quote Originally Posted by ghengis86 View Post
    Maybe they don't want to buy into all that "cheesy romantic stuff", but women like that same playfulness, flirting and foreplay too. They like the feeling of being pursued, just as men enjoy the pursuit. Hell, it's fun!
    Yeah, I know. My ex gf and I became a couple based on that playfulness. I just meant the "romantic"- the guy that lays it on really thick will be sniffed out in seconds. I mean, if I can spot these guys instantaneously I would have to imagine most women can as well.

    I don't think most women are under the delusion that they'll meet prince charming on the streets of NYC. I would assume flowers, chocolate, poems, and cheap wine would become eye rolling after a while.

    So, since the PUA tactics are supposedly transparent, and being direct is transparent, I guess you're only going to get what you're going after, or only be satisfied with what the endgame of your personal PU tactics bring i.e. a little playful banter, flirting, pursuit, conversation, laughing, etc., women looking to reciprocate in that communication method will respond likewise.
    I am 'playful' by nature around people I KNOW. I like wordplay, verbal sparring, pop culture references, etc. A lot women do as well, that is how I am able to relate them (not in calculated way either, just naturally).

    However, I COULD NOT do this or "be that guy" around total strangers or in any dating environment. My nervous system wouldn't allow it. That is why I suck at dating and COULD NEVER employ "PUA" techniques which seemed to be centered (at least on the youtube vids I seen) on aggression, forced bravado, and juvenile vulgarity.

    I will never understand the "alpha" male; I'm also not threatened by them because I don't want what they do.


    Yes, I'm fairly certain women instinctively know that the majority of the time, a random guy walking up to start a conversation has the endgame in mind of hitting the sack. Not that plutonic relationships are impossible, but the sexual aspect is very, very dominant in most cases (and why shouldn't it? Right?)
    I have female friends I’m not sexually attracted to, but yeah, I do agree with that. If the physical attraction is there and you start to add in the flirty playfulness, then yeah, sex enters the equation pretty quick.

  25. #472
    Quote Originally Posted by Antischism View Post
    I'm absolutely not joking. If you think it's anything other than social conditioning (entirely or at least significantly), you need to pick up a book and read or show me the biological data detailing what inherently makes women "gatekeepers" of sex. I've noticed a lot of people are stuck on the fallacious commodity model.
    I wasn't arguing any sort of commodity model whatever that is.

    Women get pregnant. Men don't.

    This basic fact that can't be wished away or ignored has huge consequences.

    Maybe you don't know what the word "pregnant" means. Or what a "baby" is?

    And that women get "pregnant" and have "babies".

    And that men don't.

    This is the baseline here, everything follows from that.

    And 1000s of people can write 1000s of words, to which you can tack on "because women have babies and men don't"

    The specifics of culture can change, and people can pretend that those specifics really matter, but the bottom line
    is pregnancy and babies - women have that, men no.

    Sex has consequences for women, it does not for men.

    That's where "gatekeeper" comes from.

    "Hey, let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."
    "Yes, it's fun for both of us - but I'm the one who gets pregnant, and you're not. It has consequences for me, and not for you."
    "You're right. Let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."

    This is so extraordinarily simple that it does require more than that.

    Discussions of alphas and betas and PUAs and studies and questionaires - it's all something that might be interesting (yeah it is)
    but it's all overlaid on the basic, impossible to change fact

    Women get pregnant and have babies - a huge burden and responsibility which every woman knows - and men don't.



  26. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  27. #473
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    It's social conditioning based on ancient biological reality. Being pregnant isn't a lot of fun. (At least it doesn't look like it). The throwing up, limited mobility towards the end, pain of childbirth etc. It only makes sense that the female species would want the male that got her pregnant on some sort of lock down (relationship) before giving him any realizing the consequences. Now eons later the consequences are somewhat avoidable (completely avoidable if you're okay with abortion) and easier to mitigate (cars so you don't have to walk 3 miles to the well to get water when pregnant for example). But the social conditioning based on the biological reality that was there until relatively recently remains.
    The biological reality is still there. It's just not an unfixable problem. Women are the only ones who get pregnant. They're the ones who have to deal with that. Men don't. Cost / benefit analysis. Men - cost - nothing / benefit - get laid is fun. Women - cost - might get pregnant / benefit - get laid is fun. His cost/benefit analysis says - Yes! have sex. Her cost/benefit analysis says No! Might get pregnant. And that makes the women the gatekeepers.

    "But the social conditioning based on the biological reality" I don't know what you mean here about "social conditioning based" on ... means. It's something based on the biological reality. But I don't know if "social conditioning" is right. And the biological reality is still there. The biological reality is that women get pregnant and men don't. The biological reality isn't that there is or isn't a high tech way to kill a little baby.
    Last edited by parocks; 11-22-2014 at 06:09 PM.

  28. #474
    Biological this, social conditioning that...blah blah blah



  29. #475
    http://www.omgfacts.com/lists/4981/P...near-genius-IQ


    Pop star Ke$ha has a near genius IQ!


    Ke$ha reportedly scored a 1500 on her SAT’s, a near perfect score, and has an IQ of over 140 which puts her near the genius category. Learn more about Ke$ha and her success by clicking the source.
    (Source)

  30. #476
    Quote Originally Posted by parocks View Post
    I wasn't arguing any sort of commodity model whatever that is.

    Women get pregnant. Men don't.

    This basic fact that can't be wished away or ignored has huge consequences.

    Maybe you don't know what the word "pregnant" means. Or what a "baby" is?

    And that women get "pregnant" and have "babies".

    And that men don't.

    This is the baseline here, everything follows from that.

    And 1000s of people can write 1000s of words, to which you can tack on "because women have babies and men don't"

    The specifics of culture can change, and people can pretend that those specifics really matter, but the bottom line
    is pregnancy and babies - women have that, men no.

    Sex has consequences for women, it does not for men.

    That's where "gatekeeper" comes from.

    "Hey, let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."
    "Yes, it's fun for both of us - but I'm the one who gets pregnant, and you're not. It has consequences for me, and not for you."
    "You're right. Let's have sex. It's fun for both of us."

    This is so extraordinarily simple that it does require more than that.

    Discussions of alphas and betas and PUAs and studies and questionaires - it's all something that might be interesting (yeah it is)
    but it's all overlaid on the basic, impossible to change fact

    Women get pregnant and have babies - a huge burden and responsibility which every woman knows - and men don't.
    Quote Originally Posted by parocks View Post
    The biological reality is still there. It's just not an unfixable problem. Women are the only ones who get pregnant. They're the ones who have to deal with that. Men don't. Cost / benefit analysis. Men - cost - nothing / benefit - get laid is fun. Women - cost - might get pregnant / benefit - get laid is fun. His cost/benefit analysis says - Yes! have sex. Her cost/benefit analysis says No! Might get pregnant. And that makes the women the gatekeepers.

    "But the social conditioning based on the biological reality" I don't know what you mean here about "social conditioning based" on ... means. It's something based on the biological reality. But I don't know if "social conditioning" is right. And the biological reality is still there. The biological reality is that women get pregnant and men don't. The biological reality isn't that there is or isn't a high tech way to kill a little baby.
    While not 100% effective - ask me how I know! - there is a thing called the condom. And the pill. And the unfortunate abortion.

    So not disagreeing with you, just that its not like we're in the 1800's.

    Point taken

  31. #477
    Quote Originally Posted by ghengis86 View Post
    While not 100% effective - ask me how I know! - there is a thing called the condom. And the pill. And the unfortunate abortion.

    So not disagreeing with you, just that its not like we're in the 1800's.

    Point taken
    Not like we're in the 1800's, or 10,000 BC. Absolutely.

    Women still are the ones who get pregnant.

    That makes them the gatekeepers. Men have no costs, women have costs. It doesn't get inverted, it can't get inverted.
    No one (no rational person) thinks that biological facts that give the women the costs and the men not can ever change.

    The costs are lower now than before, but the costs are borne by the woman. That can't change.

  32. #478
    Quote Originally Posted by parocks View Post
    Men have no costs, women have costs.
    I'm quite certain that isn't true.

  33. #479
    Seriously? 12 pages of this $#@!?
    Dishonest money makes for dishonest people.

    Andrew Napolitano, John Stossel. FOX News Liberty Infiltrators.


    Quote Originally Posted by Inkblots View Post
    Dr. Paul is living rent-free in the minds of the neocons, and for a fiscal conservative, free rent is always a good thing
    NOBP ≠ ABO

  34. #480
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    I'm quite certain that isn't true.
    Ok, sure. But women bear more the majority of the costs



  35. Remove this section of ads by registering.
Page 16 of 17 FirstFirst ... 614151617 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-12-2014, 10:03 PM
  2. 10 Foods Banned In Other Countries - Are They Really Unsafe?
    By angelatc in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-29-2013, 07:39 AM
  3. 10 American Foods that are Banned in Other Countries
    By Danke in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-28-2013, 02:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •