You mean a marriage partner, sickness and Health…? My main Point was that I Think men tend not to notice how they are affected by sex as much as women are. They don’t notice what they take into themselves from sex with someone they actually do not like.
Then you probably do not need a live in sex partner. Or you don’t want to notice that you do.
Hey, you might be married to a jerk, I don’t know. But Before I took it as generalizing about women. Perhaps there is a real give and take in different ways, where you each actually acknowledge the other person as someone with feelings and some actions that indicate this also. And she is just a bitch. Or perhaps there is a way in which you see her as a hole and she sees you as a dick and a person. And so the dishes reminds her that she is more just a hole even though she sees you both as dick and person, and she gets pissed off. From this side of the planet I cannot judge. And I certainly do not Think that it must be the case that the dishes must be a shared chore.
Then womanize. Leave the monogamous relationship, do your own dishes in your own apartment or pay someone to do it or eat out and fuck women without all the (what you feel is) bullshit. If you do this and it works for you, fine. If it doesn’t that means you’ve got your own bullshit and she was probably taking care of that and you miss it or miss someone taking care of your bullshit - whatever your equivalent need to be validated that you doing the dishes was for her.
But if you Think it is merely BS AND YET put up with it, the odds are she is doing your emotional dishes in some way you are not acknowledging. And you expect it and need it and she senses this and simply does it, because you are not just a cock to her.
Otherwise you should get out of the marriage, and possibly marriage to anyone, and live the Life that fits your needs.
This doesn’t show a concern for all men, but rather, the men who are typically found the most sexually attractive. Makes me question your motives. “Why am I attracted to cheaters?” From a man’s perspective, hopefully that’s not what you’re really asking (but its a fucking-real-fucking-question). Maybe you want the question to be “How can I convince a cheater to stop cheating?”. Good luck with that. But $10 says the answer includes frequent sex
Question yourself for a second. You’re asking a philosophy forum [see: needy and desperate] about men who are (based on the assumptions of the OP) not necessarily needy and desperate.
Men who are in this position don’t question themselves, they don’t fucking care, they’re getting what they want. See: They don’t fucking care. Take your pick, the man who cares or the man who doesn’t.
For what it’s worth, every seriously committed relationship I’ve been in → not frequent enough sex. (i’m also a single man in his mid 20’s, take everything i say with a billion grains of salt)
Perhaps this is a question that SHOULD be asked to both the man and the woman.
This is a fair question, a man should be prepared to deal with this scenario, because women just don’t need as much sex… but it doesn’t justify not fucking your boyfriend/husband, if it contributed it any way to this scenario. Perhaps this question highlights how much men fucking want and need sex. Its biological. Give it to him.
He needs sex more than he needs you. Even the ones who aren’t ‘needy and desperate’.
I respond with a question: Why would you fuck this man in the first place? There’s no answer you can give me that doesn’t place [at least some of] the blame on you. Sorry. You ‘selected’ the cheater
Maybe the answer is really simple. Men view sex the same way women view everything but sex, and vice versa. It’s the best i’ve got so far lol
Maybe one day i’ll stop attempting to understand women
Sexual lust is not an inherent part of homosapian (male or female) but rather merely an aberrant result of sex’s ability to cause a cathartic relief at which point it becomes much like an addiction. The cure is simply to create other means to cathartically relieve the anxiety and stop creating more.
There was a study done about women on average wanting (ideally) 4-5 partners in a lifetime and men wanting on average (ideally) 18 partners in a lifetime, studies I’ve seen on the horniness of the respective genders is actually VERY slim however, with men coming out slightly ahead. I think this is most attributed to the sexual neglect rather than men having a stronger sex-drive because the male side has such heavy stratification compared to the female side. The irony is, the average (perhaps some type of median is a better term) man probably has the females 4-5 partners and the average female probably has the males 18. Of course it’s not some magic number, everyone is different… but it might help inform you more on this.
I think this is going a bit too far. My point is that sex is being distributed, and if so, it should be distributed by women in a very similar manner to how men distribute sex to women.
I don’t mean to sound like a feminist here but when it comes to controlling human sexuality for the purposes of establishing a social structure, the male needs have historically been given a priority over female’s. If male sexuality is naturally more noncommittal (promiscuous) then it would be more detrimental to the establishment of a stable family unit then the female’s. Right? However, despite that, higher moral standards have been assigned to female sexuality, while the man’s sexual moral standard has been more lenient and more accommodating to their natural inclinations. The system is self–serving, and self-defeating also. Think about anti-cuckoldry morals. A man expects a woman to be faithful (to make sure the child is his) while he is freer to fuck around with other women (who incidentally may also be in relationships and are expected to remain faithful to their own man). He tries to preserve the system and at the same time helps destroy it.
Yes, it’s hard for me to see it. I don’t think women can love more than one man at the same time, but maybe it’s just me. Don’t men feel like they are betraying one woman while they are with another? It’s like taking something from one to give it to another. There is only so much time and resources available. If you spread it thin and wide, the quality (of relationship) has got to suffer.
The harem system comes to mind, in which male natural sexuality and the need for structure are most accommodating - to male’s needs + social structure. I don’t see it working for a woman though who is now continually forced to share and compete for ‘her’ man.
Since women are less promiscuous, they are less likely to cheat while in a committed relationship. Women are also more likely to want a monogamous relationship to begin with, even young women, and that is because they have more to gain from a stable relationship.
Are you saying 16yr old males are the most sexually desirable? I don’t think so.
Another untruth. It is possible and likely that women become more promiscuous as they gain more sexual experience and confidence. Female sexuality peaks much later than male’s.
For women that may be so, but for men, there is always Viagra. There are a plenty middle aged horny Sugar Daddies going after young girls these days. Which actually brings me to another point: If you are obviously past your sexual prime and need to take medications to have sex, then maybe your need is not so much physical as psychological, and sex is the chosen way to satiate it.
You keep talking about suicide in men due to lack of sex, but men can always pay for sex and have their needs met. Because men’s needs are so simple and straightforward they are more easily dealt with.
This sounds more like a self-esteem issue. One may think it’s a man vs. man issue, but I think it’s actually individual mind thing. Maybe comparing one’s self to assholes is what brings one down.
But there is emotional neglect/abuse, which is more important to women then sex. Emotional infidelity is more serious to women.
You want men and women to be equally promiscuous? I couldn’t see why women would even want to settle down and raise men’s children under these circumstances. Maybe in some primitive tribal societies that is the norm, where all resources are shared and everybody raises everybody else’s children, and everybody is related to everybody and all are one big happy family.
I want to reply to this first since it is the most important, and I’ll look closer at your other points. Being promiscuous does not make anyone, man or woman, non-committal. There are plenty of women who don’t want anything to do with their children and so men raise them, men have just as much investment for raising offspring as any woman does. This stuff about ‘commitment’ which is propaganda for ‘monoamory’ and stable families is a lie! There are plenty of stable families where people are polyamorous. The reason men are more controlling of their women and they feel it’s their inclination to not follow the same moral imposition is because women SEEK out jealous men, I have discussed this in other areas of this forum. They feel like the man doesn’t “love” them if they aren’t possessive of her sex… it’s a real psychopathy that most women have. Regardless, I have stated multiple times, this point and others which you have not even approached addressing, that because men are more promiscuous, the female suicide rate is lower than the male rate.
I don’t know enough about history to comment on this. My feeling is that whatever system was in place, it was more lenient towards men and their transgressions no matter what particular moral standard or law we’re talking about.
Yes, of course, but this has more to do with their moral sensibility than it does their sex drive. I mean, it just seems to me (and I could be wrong) than women’s libido is a lot more affected by their morals and values, or what they think is appropriate or not, than men’s. So if the idea of cheating on their partner seems offensive to the average woman, that sentiment is more likely to turn her off than it would for the average man–even though the average man may still find it morally offensive. IOW, the guy’s just got to take a cold shower more readily than the girl.
Oh, and by the way, don’t ever let a guy tell you he can’t help it, that it’s just part of male nature. Committing one’s self to one woman ain’t that hard.
I suppose, but the same could be said about friends. Neither men nor women typically say that if they’re going to be friends with someone, it has to be exclusive. We can easily conceive of having whole groups of friends that share bonds with each other. But of course, male/female relationships based on love and sex are about a lot more than just the two people involved–it is (or can become after a while) about a family–that is, producing and raising the next generation. I think women tend to be more focused/concerned about this aspect of the male/female relationship, whereas men tend to remain back it the “friendship” style of relationship–just with sex and romance being involved when it’s a female friend.
And don’t imagine you’re too familiar, and I don’t see you any more! I could not leave you in times of trouble, I’ll take you just the way you are: don’t go trying some new fashion, don’t change the colour of your hair; I don’t want clever conversation, I never want to work that hard…?
What is this? I thought we were all done calling women who have sex with many different men ‘sluts’ and ‘whores’. Shouldn’t we also be done calling men who have sex with lots of different women ‘womanizers’? Are we calling sluts and whores ‘mananizers’ now?
This is of course right, but I do want to Point out that whore and womanizer just don’t seem to carry the same degree of moral slap.
Promiscuous, while still a pejorative, at least focuses on frequency and scope. That would seem a fair gender neutral term.
And there's the answer to the thread. If you take away the confusing moral part, and just ask "Why do some men like to have sex with a lot of women?" the answer becomes so obvious that "Why in the world would you need to ask that?" immediately becomes a much more interesting question.
Womanizers don’t love women, they are addicted to control. Men who really love and appreciate women are equally willing to sleep with as many women as possible, but they can’t because in truly loving women you must also fear them. Their implicit power in sexual politics, their fierce empathic qualities, their finely tuned emotional microphones.
So keep in mind, is it not lack of respect for women that makes men womanizers, it rather allows men to be womanizers. Men who respect women would sleep with as many women as womanizers do, but they can’t because they fear/respect women too much to ever be able to project the kind of confidence womanizing requires.
Also, ironically, womanizers, in respecting women the least, come to know women better, not thwarted by the thick lenses of fear and respect. The knowledge doesn’t lead to deeper appreciation. It leads to better ability to manipulate.
Women should ask, rather, what they want: a guy who can treat them like an object or a guy who respects you so much that he can’t possibly treat you like an object. The truth is in the middle, since all women are soul & object both, and both sides have needs. If your object side feels neglected you will long for the charm and confidence only a womanizer can provide. They are also usually handsome by process of elimination.
You might want to not be an object but might be in conflict here…you might want to be an object and not know it.
Men womanize because they don’t fear you. Do you want a man to fear you as he loves you? If no, if you are nothing worth fearing, you are nothing worth loving, or you don’t wish to be loved.
Or an excess of love so the guy needs two or three lovers at a time to have his space where he isn’t a child.
three pairs of breast at a time will make you concentrate on the here and now.
But other yes, it fulfills the ego and it is really a compliment to your fair gender.
