How silly are men?

[starlight]

Yeah, yeah. When I was that age, I was dating a millionaire decades older than myself. He drove me around in his fast car and laid me proper. The men my age didn't even know what that was...though they definitely knew what a BJ was. I dumped him just as soon as a younger guy who knew what to do came along. I preferred not to be seen out in public with Daddy Warbucks. It was generally assumed I was his daughter. His buddies were all trying to get into my pants. I felt sorry for them. It was a bit pathetic. My girlfriends and I all giggled about how pathetic they were. "Grandpa" we used to call them.

I suppose if you're an older dude with healthy self-esteem, it doesn't matter if you're being used and laughed at behind your back.

I guess I could add that *I* can land a 23year old without "paying" him or having to be rich. But no. That would be mean. (Though I think he might be 24 by now )

[Jaxom]

...He drove me around in his fast car and laid me proper...

Didn't know there was a statute of limitations on kissing and telling.

[eva duarte]

its bad because sex forms a bond...that bond will take away from a primary relationship and can interfere with the coupledom bond necessary for raising offspring together. the male species by and large will nurture the children of the woman they are fucking oftentimes ignoring their own. this is why NATURE has it set up that we do not like our mates having other mates. it really is not a societal thing in my opinion like many like to suggest.

First, males and females are not separate species.

Second, it IS very much a cultural thing. There are a lot of older cultures (either ones where land ownership follows something other than a male lineage or which don't have land ownership) where men typically nurture their sisters' children, not their own (or their own by proxy in the case where a mate already has kids.) Female sexual exclusivity as male property is a very common thing across different cultures, but it's tied almost very closely with land ownership passing on the male line. Even there, the limitations of sexual exclusivity tended to be one-way, and only applied to women.

Lastly, the notion of nuclear families - just mom and dad - being the ones to raise children in isolation is really modern idea; it was entirely unknown in antiquity, and it wasn't the SEEN as the norm in western culture until the rise of middle class values a century and a half ago (and it wasn't the actual norm here in the US until the post-WW2 economic boom, and even today I bet there are a lot of more people with siblings, grandparents, etc sharing a household and taking an active and essential role in child-rearing than people care to admit. I can think of at least one example from PF.)

i am well aware of men marrying and breeding with many women but all the women belonged to that one man and in theory he provided for all of the women and their offspring. the more resources you had the more women you could afford. women seldom had any choice in the matter and did not necessarily like sharing. now that more women are more educated and can support offspring they can choose not to share their man and most exercise that option.

men have never liked sharing their pussy...even if they have several of them and women throughout the ages have always wanted top billing. even in utah all the wives are fighting for the favored position...why? because favored position means security for off spring.

[RandyN]

i am well aware of men marrying and breeding with many women but all the women belonged to that one man and in theory he provided for all of the women and their offspring.

Not necessarily at all; that's something that's varied quite a bit in different cultures. You're looking at things from a very western, propertarian perspective. It's certainly the dominant paradigm that's come down to us, but there's nothing natural about that except in the sense that capitalism and land ownership is natural.

men have never liked sharing their pussy...even if they have several of them and women throughout the ages have always wanted top billing. even in utah all the wives are fighting for the favored position...why? because favored position means security for off spring.

I think you're basing "Utah" on a work of fiction, *lol* - the whole notion of "favored position" doesn't make sense when you don't have land ownership. Nor does "wives fighting for favored position" when the land ownership passed from uncle to nephew.

[softtouchmale]

You asked:

Why are they constantly taking 22 year old actresses to bed, rather than the 52 year olds?

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 99763.html

My response: I need a work out once in awhile. A guy's got to get worn out sometime.

[eva duarte]

i am well aware of men marrying and breeding with many women but all the women belonged to that one man and in theory he provided for all of the women and their offspring.

Not necessarily at all; that's something that's varied quite a bit in different cultures. You're looking at things from a very western, propertarian perspective. It's certainly the dominant paradigm that's come down to us, but there's nothing natural about that except in the sense that capitalism and land ownership is natural.

men have never liked sharing their pussy...even if they have several of them and women throughout the ages have always wanted top billing. even in utah all the wives are fighting for the favored position...why? because favored position means security for off spring.

I think you're basing "Utah" on a work of fiction, *lol* - the whole notion of "favored position" doesn't make sense when you don't have land ownership. Nor does "wives fighting for favored position" when the land ownership passed from uncle to nephew.

no randy...i am not basing utah on fiction and although i know you are our resident expert on all things the facts can be interpreted either way. the fact of the matter is that most people men and women naturally dont like sharing their mates. i agree that a larger percentage dont mind getting their own little piece of pie on the side but those same people do not want to share their primary mates. it is natural for us as cheaters to want to justify what we do especially if we 'love' our spouse but what we do is a choice and not necessarily the natural order of things. while it may be natural for men to want to spread their seed far and wide its not a good idea in terms of survival and well being of the seed when it turns into a child.

[Mrs Jones]

Why are they constantly taking 22 year old actresses to bed, rather than the 52 year olds?

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 99763.html

because young starving actresses are sometimes willing to prostitute themselves for old balding men...old geezer gets laid and starving actress gets her car note paid. i always crack up when old, fat men get all butt hurt when the 22 finds a new wallet.

Also because many men at 52 are only as mature as the 22 year olds they're pursuing. No mature woman with experience wants a guy like that. And I'm not being snarky--too often I've seen these "lost boys" who won't grow up.

[majia]

I would agree with eva on the mormon polygamist wives vying for first position. According to their beliefs, the first wife, as in first married, is supposed to be "first wife" in power and importance. However, based on everything I've read, (about ten books and a bazillion pieces on the internet) there is often a "most favored" wife at any given time. Since the husband actually has all the power over money, activities, children etc, there is A LOT of infighting and manipulation to be "first wife" or "most favored wife" so the woman can have more power in the family by either delegation or influence.

I don't necessarily think that proves that we are hardwired to want monogamy, but I'm pretty sure most people want to feel safe and have power over decisions which affect their lives.

I think from an evolutionary perspective, Randy is right, the nuclear family is relatively new. I think monogamy developed as male dominated culture evolved and property passed from the father rather than the mother. Men wanted to make sure their property passed to their own offspring not some other guy's. Women have always known their babies were theirs, men had to control women to ensure the woman's child was his child.

I think one thing that has socially condtioned women to want monogamy IS that fear that the man will run off with someone else and leave the woman to fend for herself, but that had to come after years of conditioning women to think they might not survive without a spouse. In some cultures, even today, the husband leaves his family and goes to live with the wife's family upon marriage. How much do you think women in those cultures care about monogamy? They only need a man from a different family to create offspring that will not be genetically challenged. If he leaves, her family is still there to provide support to the woman and the child. I'm trying to remember the name of the tribe I learned about that still does this, but anthropology class was a while ago. As I recall, the man may not even live full time with the wife, but only comes by occasionally. They spend more time with their own family of origin and help raise their sister's children.

[Knot Again]

I have to confess I am puzzled how this turned into a "del hates older women and thinks we should all just go to Nordstrom's and die" thread from his initial post. Maybe I'm naive but I took him at face value as in "why do we go for the uber hotties when clearly that's a retarded decision, as tales such as this imply."

[majia]

well, I honestly think going for the uber hotties when clearly its dumb is all about self esteem on the part of the man.

"Look at me, I'm a stud, check out my arm candy."

[RandyN]

I think you're basing "Utah" on a work of fiction, *lol* - the whole notion of "favored position" doesn't make sense when you don't have land ownership. Nor does "wives fighting for favored position" when the land ownership passed from uncle to nephew.

no randy...i am not basing utah on fiction

How many Mormon polygamists do you know? If you're basing that on personal experience, please do share a bit more detail, but what I've got to go on is the news and public documentation, but as far as I can tell, the real ones are the Warren Jeffs/FLDS crowd of child-abusers, and not genial grown-ups like on HBO.

the fact of the matter is that most people men and women naturally dont like sharing their mates.

"Most people" live in a given cultural context. These days, the vast majority of most people live in one that came out of the middle east 10-12,000 years ago. And even there, cultural norms vary a lot - where the "sharing the mate" does not threaten the social status of the marital union itself, it tends to be a heck of a lot more tolerated: all that within the basic context of property ownership we've inherited.

[delmar]

I have to confess I am puzzled how this turned into a "del hates older women and thinks we should all just go to Nordstrom's and die" thread from his initial post. Maybe I'm naive but I took him at face value as in "why do we go for the uber hotties when clearly that's a retarded decision, as tales such as this imply."

Nobody *ever* pays attention to the post subject line.

[eva duarte]

randy the stuff you read about in the news is news simply because how out of the norm it is...for every study you could possibly show me i bet i could show you a study to the opposite. i dont want monogamy because of some societal conditioning...i want it because i want my mate to want only me. i want it because i want there to be one area that is special and sacred to us. the reason we dont want our 13 year old daughters having sex (aside from the obvious) is because its so highly charged on an emotional level. i dont want my mate having those emotional bonds with another.

frankly i found it quite condescending to assume that you are better read than me and that i get my views off a fucking hbo show.

[RandyN]

randy the stuff you read about in the news is news simply because how out of the norm it is...

Open polygamy in splinter versions of the mormon church are themselves outside the norm, both for Mormons, and for the country as a whole Mormons as a minority religious group are already outside the norm.

i dont want monogamy because of some societal conditioning...i want it because i want my mate to want only me.

Well, you know yourself best.

Although I should point out that /outright/ learning and conditioning is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to culture - most of it occurs below the surface of any kind of conscious act or learning.

i want it because i want there to be one area that is special and sacred to us. the reason we dont want our 13 year old daughters having sex (aside from the obvious) is because its so highly charged on an emotional level. i dont want my mate having those emotional bonds with another.

That's more than fair. What's not ultimately knowable, is whether you'd feel the same way if you'd grown up among, say, the aboriginal people from New Guinea 70+ years go. THAT would be a significant cultural difference at this level[*], whereas the differences between Mormons in Utah and other Americans, or even between Americans and someone who grew up in Red China in the 1960s basically isn't.

Nor, even if we hypothetically COULD send an infant copy of you to that context, and that "you" felt the same way you do now, is it ultimately knowable whether that would be a matter of "human nature" or your individual genetic wiring.

frankly i found it quite condescending to assume that you are better read than me and that i get my views off a fucking hbo show.

Well, I apologize for making the assumption that you were basing the specific data point to support your argument off of the HBO show.

I'd certainly not meant to imply that I was assuming I'm better read than you in general, or that you're forming your views overall off of TV.
There are large branches of several academic disciplines (biology and psychology most notably, but others as well) dedicated to trying to make inferences about human nature on essentially the same basis of ignoring cultural differences; the fact that I disagree quite vehemently with their methodology doesn't make them poorly read or stupid - just wrong.

[majia]

I think you're basing "Utah" on a work of fiction, *lol* - the whole notion of "favored position" doesn't make sense when you don't have land ownership. Nor does "wives fighting for favored position" when the land ownership passed from uncle to nephew.

no randy...i am not basing utah on fiction

How many Mormon polygamists do you know? If you're basing that on personal experience, please do share a bit more detail, but what I've got to go on is the news and public documentation, but as far as I can tell, the real ones are the Warren Jeffs/FLDS crowd of child-abusers, and not genial grown-ups like on HBO.

the fact of the matter is that most people men and women naturally dont like sharing their mates.

"Most people" live in a given cultural context. These days, the vast majority of most people live in one that came out of the middle east 10-12,000 years ago. And even there, cultural norms vary a lot - where the "sharing the mate" does not threaten the social status of the marital union itself, it tends to be a heck of a lot more tolerated: all that within the basic context of property ownership we've inherited.

Randy,
Read "Escape" by Carolyn Jessop, or "Stolen Innocence" by Elissa Wall, or "When Men Become Gods" by Jon Krakauer. After that, let us know what you think about FLDS women and vying for first position. I live with a married mormon guy, this is a subject I have studied and considered deeply for about four years now.
My verdict is "fuck that", but it was after serious study. Also, there are Christian fundie polygamists of various types who actually have their own yahoo groups and message boards some of which I frequented for a while. Also, I know a lot of non religious polyamorus people and in those relationships women vy for number one position. I think its more about power than about sexual hangups around not sharing sexually. Oh yeah, FLDS property is held by the church, so the men don't even control their own property.

[eva duarte]

randy said:

Well, I apologize for making the assumption that you were basing the specific data point to support your argument off of the HBO show.

apology accepted but just wondering why your mind immediately went there in the first place...and sure <shrug> if i were buck nekkid in bum fuck nomad land with my tits swinging in the breeze i might choose to be one of many rather than starve to death or be an outcast from society...doesnt mean those women didnt/dont mutter under the breath 'son of a bitch' when big dick spends the night on another mat.

[Knot Again]

Honestly who cares if it is cultural? Who cares if some poly tribe somewhere gets on just fine? We don't live in that culture. No one here does. We do live in a monogamy promoting culture and whether that's right or wrong or whether it influences us or not doesn't really matter now does it? We feel what we feel for whatever reason we feel it, and college philosophy 101-ing it to death doesn't matter and is quite irrelevant really because no one here is running off to live in some poly tribe anytime soon.

[eva duarte]

Honestly who cares if it is cultural? Who cares if some poly tribe somewhere gets on just fine? We don't live in that culture. No one here does. We do live in a monogamy promoting culture and whether that's right or wrong or whether it influences us or not doesn't really matter now does it? We feel what we feel for whatever reason we feel it, and college philosophy 101-ing it to death doesn't matter and is quite irrelevant really because no one here is running off to live in some poly tribe anytime soon.

in my opinion all these threads do is try to justify not taking responsibility for our choices...its like 'sorry babe monogamy just isnt human nature so yk...its not my fault' hey...you want to fuck around? fine...just dont blame it on the natural order of things because that puts us on the level of animals with no conscience thought. the natural order of things did not include cars, trains, electricity or planes either. surely we are more evolved than that.

[RandyN]

in my opinion all these threads do is try to justify not taking responsibility for our choices...its like 'sorry babe monogamy just isnt human nature so yk...its not my fault' hey...you want to fuck around? fine...just dont blame it on the natural order of things because that puts us on the level of animals with no conscience thought. the natural order of things did not include cars, trains, electricity or planes either. surely we are more evolved than that.

Oddly, those kinds of arguments based on human nature are exactly what I'm arguing against (and indeed, I'd read your argument up-thread as that there WAS a "human nature" component to the "women expect monogamy to protect their kids's status" thing.)

The only problem I've got with the whole "taking responsibility for our choices" is that most of us who are NOT inherently monogamous (*) start out with the assumption that we're "supposed to be," and tend to make life choices on that basis either BEFORE we figure it out fully, or on the basis that we're going to have to conceal that fact from the world.

(* I mean purely on a personal basis, and hang for the moment any question of what balance of personal reflection, life experience, choice, culture, individual genetics or evolution lead to that - all I can tell you is that shit, I'm not wired for monogamy.)

[eva duarte]

and thats fine randy... am guessing this revelation happened after you married but why stay married? there are no children and you could be free to fuck at will without penalty.

[RandyN]

Honestly who cares if it is cultural?

In my case, mostly because "evolutionary psychology" explanations that ignore culture piss me off; they're an intellectual hot button.

Whether they're primarily cultural or primarily biological, sexual inequality and indeed proscriptive sex roles and proscriptive marital patterns are a bad thing. It's something which like, say, sexism in the workplace we can and should say "you know, this is bullshit, and it needs to change."

Who cares if some poly tribe somewhere gets on just fine? We don't live in that culture. No one here does. We do live in a monogamy promoting culture and whether that's right or wrong or whether it influences us or not doesn't really matter now does it?

Of course it does.

We feel what we feel for whatever reason we feel it, and college philosophy 101-ing it to death doesn't matter and is quite irrelevant really because no one here is running off to live in some poly tribe anytime soon.

Some people are able to unconciously defy cultural norms without feeling shitty about it. But in general, understanding that things are a matter of those cultural norms and not inherent "right and wrong" or "human nature" or whatever is a good step in both (A) reconciling yourself to NOT conforming, and (B) being able to demand that other folks respect your right to make that decision.

[RandyN]

and thats fine randy... am guessing this revelation happened after you married but why stay married? there are no children and you could be free to fuck at will without penalty.

Frankly, I knew I wasn't wired for physical monogamy before I got married. "Fucking at will" is not the issue, nor are children the only reason to stay married or that compose a life together.

[eva duarte]

and thats fine randy... am guessing this revelation happened after you married but why stay married? there are no children and you could be free to fuck at will without penalty.

Frankly, I knew I wasn't wired for physical monogamy before I got married. "Fucking at will" is not the issue, nor are children the only reason to stay married or that compose a life together.

agreed...but how fair is to a spouse you want to compose a life together with to deceive her/him. if you know ahead of time you dont want monogamy dont promise it. i have way more empathy for those who discovered it along the way. do you love your wife randy? i mean in that i cant live without you kind of way?

[Liza44]

(* I mean purely on a personal basis, and hang for the moment any question of what balance of personal reflection, life experience, choice, culture, individual genetics or evolution lead to that - all I can tell you is that shit, I'm not wired for monogamy.)

Interesting thread. I have always been and most likely will always be monogamous unless that means one partner for life. I find it easier for myself to end a relationship and move on rather than to maintain simultaneous relationships. I'm getting enough to keep me physically and mentally happy. To each his own I guess.

[RandyN]

Frankly, I knew I wasn't wired for physical monogamy before I got married. "Fucking at will" is not the issue, nor are children the only reason to stay married or that compose a life together.

agreed...but how fair is to a spouse you want to compose a life together with to deceive her/him. if you know ahead of time you dont want monogamy dont promise it. i have way more empathy for those who discovered it along the way. do you love your wife randy? i mean in that i cant live without you kind of way?[/quote]

I never promised to be physically monogamous - although the way it came up would pretty much be splitting hairs, and it's especially irrelevant at this point since I did specifically promise that if I ever did cheat I wouldn't get emotionally involved and that one went out the window.

As for "do I love my wife," I'd say yes, but if you insist on the "in that i cant live without you kind of way," I'd have to say no. I certainly THOUGHT I did at one point, but as a hormonal barely out of my teenage years guy, that hardly counts - everything is life and death at that age (even if slightly less so at 19-20 than at 13-15.) At this point, I'm not sure I really believe in love like that.