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.
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.
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.
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.
Only reason I cited the study was to prove to you that some circumstances contradict your thesis about status playing a large role.
Gee, I really love when men try to explain female psychology. Females can't even explain the psychology of their own gender.
I have no objection to male contraception. Have at it.
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.
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us