How would you define your attitude toward women?

FakePie

When I was a kid like, too young to basically know any different - I genuinely believe sex was something women gave to men, out of pure necessity - just to shut them up basically.

They in no way enjoyed it, in fact found it repulsive in many respects - but endured it, cause that's the cost of doing business.

I perhaps formed this opinion, not from information directed at me, in the verbal or written sense, but more so just attitudes gleaned from perhaps my living environment - an intuitive deduction.

It was - I absolutely kid you not - a life changing revelation to learn that, sex is something women can potentially find enjoyable.

It was an even greater life altering awareness to understand that - sex I had previously seen as leverage, exerted exclusively by females; but in actual fact, in exceptional circumstances, can also be applied by men.


Now - looking back, examining where I started and where I am now - I'm beginning to think that, that home environment, perhaps that was in actual fact the case.
Beyond the home environment, somewhat the same.
The nature of the individuals my parents kept company with - of a similar disposition.

I mean - my old man - don't get me wrong, dude has a good heart, but he ain't no Juan.
His attitude is not conducive to turning women on; he takes zero care with his appearance.
In actual fact - he seems to take care in ensuring he appears, basically unkempt.

Perhaps that was the norm in terms of his own background; unkempt meant, I dunno - tough, rugged? Perhaps there was some kind of social kudos associated with that.

But in purely sexually attractive terms, if we're excluding societal perceptions, and catering exclusively to what happens behind the bedroom door - he presents largely as being, oppositional to it.

What I will say he excels at, is his understanding that, intellectual development is a key part of flourishing as a human.
I'm happy for that - but there's other areas, I would say, just as important.

Without rambling - point I'm making is, largely, I suspect - my mother probably allowed him pork her from time to time, relative to exactly what I mentioned in the opening: just to shut him up, keep him happy - and almost certainly took sparse enjoyment from it.
That's my current opinion.

(Just FYI - it goes beyond his appearance also. Just attitude, behavior etc - like I said - he's no Juan)


Where that left me was - a quite bizarre and undeveloped understanding of women and relationships, going into my more defining years.

Which is why I believe - as a man, our attitude to women, and ultimately, our attitude to sex, can be so tremendously defining for us as individuals, in thee most profound way.

For women - I also believe it largely works in reverse.
Their attitude and understanding of men, their approach, and themselves - can be intrinsically defining in terms of their character formation and development etc.


So - it begs the question.

You!

Yes - you!

What's your attitude toward, understanding of, and approach toward - the opposing gender, and to sex?

**Awaits, "I respect women as I was taught to" reply**.

Don't make it that easy hmm?
Let's hear what you got.

MilesMorales1

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

eviltwin

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

28 posts. Don't waste your time.

milehip

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

#metoo -please.

FakePie

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

I guess why they refer to subjects such as this, "inflammatory".

And I acknowledge - they can be difficult to broach, no doubt.

But, I am of the opinion at least - they are so central, so intrinsic - I guess would make sense that of course it could touch on the figurative "nerve" for some folk.

That being said, it's 2018 people - we're meant to be able to deal with this in adult fashion.

Nollog

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

Op thinking too much about his father's sex life.

FakePie

//ollog wrote: »

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

Op thinking too much about his father's sex life.

lol.

I mean - LOL - that's a great summation.

I'm rolling here.

Wibbs

And his Ma™ and her frequency of orgasms. Now there's a sentence I did not expect to be typing when I woke up today. I fcuking love life that way. Never ceases to surprise.

When I was a kid like, too young to basically know any different - I genuinely believe sex was something women gave to men, out of pure necessity - just to shut them up basically.

They in no way enjoyed it, in fact found it repulsive in many respects - but endured it, cause that's the cost of doing business.

Aye, a common, if not universal belief among young guys. Understandable to some degree, as many's the young woman out there who seems to back that up with an element of bargaining for commitment and engagement. They're not, but generally speaking sex for women is a more risky, physically and socially and practically and because of that more complex.

When that actually hit me was with an ex where we had a "scare" as far as a possible pregnancy goes came up. I sh1t myself. No really. I never suffered from constipation, but if that condition ever befalls me all I would have to do is recall those days where she was "late". A hundredweight of senna wouldn't have the same effect. But after the all clear was sounded I mused on it and considered that if we had been "with child", the "we" part would be massively tilted to her. I might have whined like the spineless sap I can be, but she'd be the one going through the whole pregnancy and birth etc.

As for sex and pleasure? I would reckon that in general and within the bounds of relationships, men need and want sex as an expression of how they feel, whereas women need to feel to want sex. In general. There's also a physical aspect to it. Men in general(last time I use that as a get out clause, I swear) are near guaranteed sexual pleasure, an orgasm, by purely physical stimulation. Women, much less so. I've had a couple of women mates of mine tell me that at times the basic physical act of willy in hoohaa has little enough effect with some men, but with others it was eye crossing. I've never heard that from men I know.

jaxxx

I don't have an attitude towards women, neither do I have one towards men, nor have I one towards people of different colour/beliefs/etc-etc-etc. I judge people individually not as part of a group. The 'attitudes' OP mentions seems to me to be a load of old b****cks, it's certainly up there in the "never heard such horse**** in my life" category. Christ...

dd972

They're fellow human beings.

greencap

dd972 wrote: »

They're fellow human beings.

With a circuit in their brain that says 'high status males yes, low status males no'.

And yes men have something like that too.

I see it like fashion mannequins coming out of a factory.

Somewhere along the assembly line the mannequins get designated male or female.

If its a male mannequin you slap on a penis from the penis box*, and some male instinct software in the noggin.

If its a female mannequin you bang on some tits and some female instinct software in the noggin.

Sometimes you get custom models with a cock and balls, and female instinct software.

Or models with tits and male instinct software.

Women are just men with tits and no weiner or balls who like to have babies with guys called Chad or Brad, cause their software says to do that.


*gloves are provided.

Tom Mann Centuria

It's all a chore.

jaxxx

dd972 wrote: »

They're fellow human beings.

What? Nonsense. Next you'll be saying that people from America/UK/Africa/Asia/Europe/anywhere-else-in-the-world or Christians/Jews/Muslims/any-other-religion or farmers/politicians/prostitutes/any-other-paid-work-in-the-world or anything-else-related-in-the-world-that-describes-different-people are human beings!! Goddamn man/woman STOP SPEAKING SENSE!

[Do I need to mention that I'm largely being sarcastic in the above? Because in this day and age people are so sensitive and stuff. I'll say it anyway to be safe]

Wibbs

jaxxx wrote: »

I don't have an attitude towards women, neither do I have one towards men, nor have I one towards people of different colour/beliefs/etc-etc-etc. I judge people individually not as part of a group. The 'attitudes' OP mentions seems to me to be a load of old b****cks, it's certainly up there in the "never heard such horse**** in my life" category. Christ...

Sounds great in theory and lovely to say and believe, but the reality is that you micro judge people(and yourself) all the time. It's what people, everyone does. As a social animal it's a given. If you think you regard a politician and prostitute in the same way, the only person you're convincing is yourself.

jaxxx

Wibbs wrote: »

Sounds great in theory and lovely to say and believe, but the reality is that you micro judge people(and yourself) all the time. It's what people, everyone does. As a social animal it's a given. If you think you regard a politician and prostitute in the same way, the only person you're convincing is yourself.

You may not, but I can quite confidently sit here and say that I do. I'm not kidding myself. They're human beings, I'm a human being. There's no difference between us. Doesn't matter what job they have, what colour their skin is, what god they do/don't believe in. The only thing that differentiates us at the end of the day is what we say and what we do. I don't judge people until I've heard them talk or seen their actions. That is my belief and that is what I do, whether you choose to believe I do or not.

FakePie

lol - basically, "I have no idea what my attitude/approach to women/sex is".

I guess when you're brought up in an environment - it tends to be a less conscious process.

But I suspect each individuals attitude and approach would be a product of the Irish culture in a broad sense, and then more specific to their own place within that culture; be a middle class background, slightly more upper or lower class - reflective also of their primary care givers ideals.


I like the, "they're all people - sure we're all the one anyways", response.

I like it cause, I remember when I used to think that also.
"Believe" that, if you will.

Our mentality is almost certainly reflective of our social "clique".

Or perhaps out mentality, dictates our social "clique".


I'm surprised no one has said, "men are from mars, and women are from - jupiter?".

LadyMacBeth_

I like boobies and women have boobies therefore I like them.

gifted

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

I like boobies and women have boobies therefore I like them.

I ****ing love boobies....lol lol

dd972

jaxxx wrote: »

What? Nonsense. Next you'll be saying that people from America/UK/Africa/Asia/Europe/anywhere-else-in-the-world or Christians/Jews/Muslims/any-other-religion or farmers/politicians/prostitutes/any-other-paid-work-in-the-world or anything-else-related-in-the-world-that-describes-different-people are human beings!! Goddamn man/woman STOP SPEAKING SENSE!

[Do I need to mention that I'm largely being sarcastic in the above? Because in this day and age people are so sensitive and stuff. I'll say it anyway to be safe]

How did you know I was transgender? :eek:

Malayalam

I didn't read it as the OP trolling...could be wrong.

It's not always about 'feelings' for women. Sometimes - hormonally, I guess - it's just pure sex desire, like what guys experience more regularly, maybe. And that's a different, much more compulsive, instinctive sensation than the lovey-dovey, bonding stuff. The female equivalent of walking round with a raging hard-on - makes me sympathise with the male instinct, yiz poor rogues.

About your rugged Da, maybe their love life might surprise you! Some women - me included - don't like groomed, fussy, neat, fastidious men. I like an amount of dishevelment and recklessness, and never considered relationship to be about money or trade/barter/exchange.

But I do suspect that the religious upbringing of our parents generation might have seriously inhibited sexual expression. Plus - and maybe more so - an absence of birth control.

Malayalam

Sorry, above post was more observations on some of the observations in the thread.
My attitude towards women? As a woman, I have some very close women in my family, one daughter, 2 sisters, 3 sister in laws. I adore them. Besides family I have a couple - yes, only two - of very close female friends without whom life would be barren. Apart from them, and in general, I can take or leave women on the whole - female company is not my comfort zone, it is a world I do not choose to inhabit. In matters of philosophy, entertainment, skills, interests, information, opinion, etc I far prefer the male mind. There, I've said it. :eek:

tedpan

dd972 wrote:

How did you know I was transgender?

Like Austin Powers, you just told him baby

professore

jaxxx wrote: »

I don't have an attitude towards women, neither do I have one towards men, nor have I one towards people of different colour/beliefs/etc-etc-etc. I judge people individually not as part of a group. The 'attitudes' OP mentions seems to me to be a load of old b****cks, it's certainly up there in the "never heard such horse**** in my life" category. Christ...

It's his experience and how he was raised. Are you somehow morally superior because you were raised in a liberal environment and slavishly follow all those beliefs?

professore

I actually know what he's talking about. The bizarre Irish Catholic upbringing idea that women aren't in the least bit interested in sex, or if they are, they are dirty and disgusting. I got that from both parents growing up. I had no sisters and went to a boys only secondary school.

I read all this romantic poetry in English class about amazing unattainable women.

Then I read those articles about how to please a woman in bed and how much they liked sex and all that stuff and got confused.

Then I met a few women who claimed they needed a man like a fish needs a bicycle and got even more confused.

So yeah ... hard to know. Definitely think many women change their attitude about sex depending on what they think you want to hear. And men do on average have a much higher sex drive than women do. If an average man could get sex as easily as an average woman he would rack up thousands of partners.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

As for sex and pleasure? I would reckon that in general and within the bounds of relationships, men need and want sex as an expression of how they feel, whereas women need to feel to want sex. In general. There's also a physical aspect to it. Men in general(last time I use that as a get out clause, I swear) are near guaranteed sexual pleasure, an orgasm, by purely physical stimulation. Women, much less so. I've had a couple of women mates of mine tell me that at times the basic physical act of willy in hoohaa has little enough effect with some men, but with others it was eye crossing. I've never heard that from men I know.

Wonder if that's a generational thing. Most guys I know have had issues along the way with finishing. I had it really bad a few times. And AFAIK blue balling is a purely male phenomenon. :P

What do I think of women though? Similar to men, most are out for themselves.

PucaMama

greencap wrote: »

dd972 wrote: »

They're fellow human beings.

With a circuit in their brain that says 'high status males yes, low status males no'.

And yes men have something like that too.

I see it like fashion mannequins coming out of a factory.

Somewhere along the assembly line the mannequins get designated male or female.

If its a male mannequin you slap on a penis from the penis box*, and some male instinct software in the noggin.

If its a female mannequin you bang on some tits and some female instinct software in the noggin.

Sometimes you get custom models with a cock and balls, and female instinct software.

Or models with tits and male instinct software.

Women are just men with tits and no weiner or balls who like to have babies with guys called Chad or Brad, cause their software says to do that.


*gloves are provided.

Nothing like a bit of incel logic to explain those women’s *sorry* females behaviour. Chad or brad. L O L.

Hector Bellend

I love women.

Irish girls are the best.

Your Face

My attitude towards women is horny.

mfceiling

FakePie wrote: »

Without rambling - point I'm making is, largely, I suspect - my mother probably allowed him pork her from time to time

You old romantic...

ThinkProgress

"How would you define your attitude toward women?"

I like them personally... they're soft and fun to hug...

But those bitches do be crazy sometimes. You gots to be wise to their ways... their clever feminine manipulations of the mind.

MilesMorales1

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I know this is a troll, but can someone TL:DR this for me, it seems to be a load of drivel.

feeeeeeeeemales

Women are great, especially the great ones.

Men are great too, especially the great ones.

That sums it up.

Fanny Wank

I love women

They've tits and fannies & the odd one lets you stick your willy inside her. What's not to like?

FakePie

professore wrote: »

I actually know what he's talking about. The bizarre Irish Catholic upbringing idea that women aren't in the least bit interested in sex, or if they are, they are dirty and disgusting. I got that from both parents growing up.  I had no sisters and went to a boys only secondary school.

I read all this romantic poetry in English class about amazing unattainable women.

Then I read those articles about how to please a woman in bed and how much they liked sex and all that stuff and got confused.

Then I met a few women who claimed they needed a man like a fish needs a bicycle and got even more confused.

So yeah ... hard to know. Definitely think many women change their attitude about sex depending on what they think you want to hear. And men do on average have a much higher sex drive than women do.  If an average man could get sex as easily as an average woman he would rack up thousands of partners.

Studies.

There's, "studies" - out there - that claim that women tend to orgasm with their husbands, almost exclusively after seeing or meeting an ex or, male business partner or something.

That would infer to us that, sexual attraction has little basis in husband choice for women.
I think that's fairly spot on.


But I digress.

If I may, I'm going to offer up a metaphor.

Consider men, more, strong, assertive, whatever.
Women - less so.

Let's equate this to a visual.
The man is higher say, on a plateau of some kind.
The women is beneath him.
We're talking, ability, strength - hormones - testosterone is the "work, aggressive" hormone.
Dudes inject testosterone so they can workout harder.
You get the idea.

Like this:

Man
.      \
.             \
.                  \
.                         \
.                                \
.                                          \
.                                                   \
.                                                           \
....................................................................Woman

Excuse the crudeness of that diagram.

But basically - for "liaison" to occur, the man must, what.... I don't know.

Degrade himself?

Do a monkey dance and hope for the best? lol


Where am I going with this?

Well - I guess we'll see.

But let me say - someone thinks outside box. "Must be a troll".

Come now people.
Let's be a little open minded here, hmm?

JohnnyFlash

Love the more dangerous sex. They have a different perspective on the world. Some of them are completely irrational, but love able anyway. A good few of them have let me bang them over the years as well.

Ipso

FakePie wrote: »

Studies.

There's, "studies" - out there - that claim that women tend to orgasm with their husbands, almost exclusively after seeing or meeting an ex or, male business partner or something.

That would infer to us that, sexual attraction has little basis in husband choice for women.
I think that's fairly spot on.


But I digress.

If I may, I'm going to offer up a metaphor.

Consider men, more, strong, assertive, whatever.
Women - less so.

Let's equate this to a visual.
The man is higher say, on a plateau of some kind.
The women is beneath him.
We're talking, ability, strength - hormones - testosterone is the "work, aggressive" hormone.
Dudes inject testosterone so they can workout harder.
You get the idea.

Like this:

Man
. \
. \
. \
. \
. \
. \
. \
. \
....................................................................Woman

Excuse the crudeness of that diagram.

But basically - for "liaison" to occur, the man must, what.... I don't know.

Degrade himself?

Do a monkey dance and hope for the best? lol


Where am I going with this?

Well - I guess we'll see.

But let me say - someone thinks outside box. "Must be a troll".

Come now people.
Let's be a little open minded here, hmm?

No. Usually is someone who doesn't think outside "d'box".

FakePie

...

FakePie

The point I'm making before JohnnyFlash post there is that - that's a naturally occurring discrepancy between men and women.

Men are from mars - women, jupitar.

Mind = blown, right?

For this reason, a naturally occurring discord or disconnect.


Consider that diagram.

The monkey dance - degradation of men - your local on a Saturday night, and watch it in full flight.

But - what if - there were a means to, as oppose to debase or lower the man - to elevate the woman?


In theory, if we consider the position - fact of the matter is, that debasement, will not mean, good sex.

The opposite.

What does a man do when he proposes?
He gets on one knee.
He lowers himself.

Hey - I don't like the analogy any more than you do but - like I said - we're just jiving here.
Let's be open minded.

Really - for good sex - on that "height" spectrum - the woman must be elevated.

Obviously - I mean - emotionally elevated.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

What a drunkship*


* collective term for a load of cobblers.

FakePie

I'm talking about - our approach toward women.

How does one - emotionally elevate them?
(actual question).

what if - like - fire -except; too much ?

aaronjumper

FakePie wrote: »

The worlds longest novel.

PucaMama

FakePie wrote: »

The point I'm making before JohnnyFlash post there is that - that's a naturally occurring discrepancy between men and women.

Men are from mars - women, jupitar.

Mind = blown, right?

For this reason, a naturally occurring discord or disconnect.


Consider that diagram.

The monkey dance - degradation of men - your local on a Saturday night, and watch it in full flight.

But - what if - there were a means to, as oppose to debase or lower the man - to elevate the woman?


In theory, if we consider the position - fact of the matter is, that debasement, will not mean, good sex.

The opposite.

What does a man do when he proposes?
He gets on one knee.
He lowers himself.

Hey - I don't like the analogy any more than you do but - like I said - we're just jiving here.
Let's be open minded.

Really - for good sex - on that "height" spectrum - the woman must be elevated.

Obviously - I mean - emotionally elevated.

What are you on.

professore

FakePie wrote: »

The point I'm making before JohnnyFlash post there is that - that's a naturally occurring discrepancy between men and women.

Men are from mars - women, jupitar.

Mind = blown, right?

For this reason, a naturally occurring discord or disconnect.


Consider that diagram.

The monkey dance - degradation of men - your local on a Saturday night, and watch it in full flight.

But - what if - there were a means to, as oppose to debase or lower the man - to elevate the woman?


In theory, if we consider the position - fact of the matter is, that debasement, will not mean, good sex.

The opposite.

What does a man do when he proposes?
He gets on one knee.
He lowers himself.

Hey - I don't like the analogy any more than you do but - like I said - we're just jiving here.
Let's be open minded.

Really - for good sex - on that "height" spectrum - the woman must be elevated.

Obviously - I mean - emotionally elevated.

Sorry, you've lost me.

FakePie

PucaMama wrote: »

FakePie wrote: »

The point I'm making before JohnnyFlash post there is that - that's a naturally occurring discrepancy between men and women.

Men are from mars - women, jupitar.

Mind = blown, right?

For this reason, a naturally occurring discord or disconnect.


Consider that diagram.

The monkey dance - degradation of men - your local on a Saturday night, and watch it in full flight.

But - what if - there were a means to, as oppose to debase or lower the man - to elevate the woman?


In theory, if we consider the position - fact of the matter is, that debasement, will not mean, good sex.

The opposite.

What does a man do when he proposes?
He gets on one knee.
He lowers himself.

Hey - I don't like the analogy any more than you do but - like I said - we're just jiving here.
Let's be open minded.

Really - for good sex - on that "height" spectrum - the woman must be elevated.

Obviously - I mean - emotionally elevated.

What are you on.

Pfff.

Can you perform basic arithmetic?

The ol' 2 and 2 is 4, type of deal?

Man - high up - due to naturally occuring disposition, aggression etc.
Sexual gratification - occurs.

Woman - low down - below the man.
Supposedly, sexual gratification via intercourse exclusively - something of a myth.

Difference in heights - natural discord.

How does the man, administer gratification - if gratification can not be administered at that lower level?

He elevates - the woman.

How to you elevate the woman?

Emotionally.

How do you elevate a woman emotionally?

......

Well??

How?

ThinkProgress

FakePie wrote: »

How do you elevate a woman emotionally?

......

Well??

How?

Make her cry a lot...?

...with laughter

......because you're a giant mangina!? :P

Wibbs

PucaMama wrote: »

What are you on.

Normally my goto response is I'll have a go of whatever it is that's going. Not this time.

professore

This could have been an interesting thread. No longer. I'm out.

FakePie

Married woman orgasm with their partner - almost exclusively when they've just seen or met an ex or a male work colleague.

You mean to tell me none of you are perturbed by that statistic?

It begs the question - why do women get married if they're entering in a contract upon which, the basis of - it is effectively certain to be a non-orgasmic time?


Married women get turned on - seeing an ex, or a male work colleague they might think is hot....

I feel like I should know this.

They're married - want something - outside of marriage, but due to contractual issues - they can't have it.

And that - turns them on...

........

Wait - it's on tip of my tongue.

!!

Yes!

They want something - THAT THEY CAN'T HAVE.

They want it more - cause they CAN'T have it.

Huh?

That's a pretty acknowledged phenomenon, right?

When you can't have something - it makes you want it more?

And wanting something they can't have - THAT - turns them on.

Kind of paradoxical though - no?

You could have potentially have life altering, mind bending, out of body experience type of sex with someone - but only when you CAN'T have it.

lol

It's like - nature is playing a cruel prank on us.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Is there an echo in here......????

Avatar MIA

dd972 wrote: »

They're fellow human beings.

Whoa, steady on! I know it's 2018 and all, but... Hrummmmph !