HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » Male Sexual Response

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:26 AM

Male Sexual Response

http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/male-sexual-response/


As I stated in Women & Sex, until a woman lives in 12.5 to 17 times her present testosterone levels 24/7 she cannot ever understand male sexuality. And since she lives in a fem-centric reality (both personally and socially) her awareness and expectations of male sexuality is defined by the only terms she has a frame of reference for – female sexuality.

So it should come as no shock that women are bewildered (and disgusted) by a male sexual response that is incongruent with their own. They want to force fit it. In the Feminine Reality I stated:

For one gender to realize their sexual imperative the other must sacrifice their own. This is the root source of power the feminine imperative uses to establish its own reality as the normative one.


One of the reasons I repeatedly assert that women lack a fundamental appreciation for the sacrifices men make to facilitate their reality finds its roots in women’s lacking a male frame of reference. In general, Men are far more self-controlled than any woman can realistically understand. When we analyze the realities of the male sex response and the underlying biology that contributes to it, the control men exert over it is actually a triumph of evolved psychology and social directive.

Women are shocked that men are literally, neurologically wired to see them as sex objects. The parts of our brains that are attuned to using tools is stimulated when we see scantily dressed women. Women may be horrified by this, but one thing you will never hear them utter is a word of how astounding it is that men (largely) have such psychological self-control over it.

31 replies, 3928 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 31 replies Author Time Post
Reply Male Sexual Response (Original post)
Bonobo Feb 2013 OP
MrSlayer Feb 2013 #1
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #2
Dash87 Feb 2013 #13
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #17
Dash87 Feb 2013 #19
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #20
Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #3
Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #4
Bonobo Feb 2013 #5
leftyohiolib Feb 2013 #6
leftyohiolib Feb 2013 #7
Bonobo Feb 2013 #8
leftyohiolib Feb 2013 #9
Denninmi Feb 2013 #11
leftyohiolib Feb 2013 #31
Dash87 Feb 2013 #10
Bonobo Feb 2013 #12
Dash87 Feb 2013 #14
Bonobo Feb 2013 #15
Dash87 Feb 2013 #16
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #18
Dash87 Feb 2013 #21
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #22
lumberjack_jeff Feb 2013 #23
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Feb 2013 #24
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #25
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #26
Bonobo Feb 2013 #27
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #30
Behind the Aegis Feb 2013 #28
Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #29

Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 01:21 AM

1. Well said.

 

I have nothing to add.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 04:17 AM

2. Before the predictable howls o' outrage ensue, I will say that anecdotally there is a lot of

evidence for a link between testosterone and a strong sex drive (duh) of a variety* not normally experienced by many women given their low but not nonexistent testosterone levels. This anecdotal evidence comes from FTM transsexuals who have related their experiences upon beginning testosterone therapy. I remember one article in the SF Weekly by a man, who had been a woman, relating how "all of a sudden I was noticing women all over the place- wanting to have sex with them, thinking about sex constantly", that sort of thing.

I want to add this about the whole "sex objects" thing, because I really think this terminology is unhelpful, unscientific, and at the end of the day, ridiculous. Because it purports, in most cases, to make a totally arbitrary distinction between sexual attraction to a person as-a-person, and a person as-a-(so called) "sex object". Well, look- I can't speak for anyone but me

(and I've already been told that NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU FIND ATTRACTIVE, BUDDY )

but, I am attracted- sexually attracted- to women. Female human beings. In fact, in my entire history of sexual attraction, I have ONLY been attracted to female human beings. That is my own orientation, of course I celebrate and accept the spectrum of orientations my brothers and sisters have as well. That said, I have never been attracted to, say, a shoe or a tree or a rock or a blender. I have never been sexually attracted to, what is commonly considered in the parlance, an object.

So; how is it that sexual attraction to a woman, because she's a woman, is "seeing her as an object"? If I saw her as an object, I wouldn't be attracted to her. It's because she's a woman, that's what's attractive, sexually.

It's fucking nonsense, and it's driven (as I've posted before) by a sociological agenda from people who want to categorize the way that many people -men and women- in our society feel attraction based on perhaps superficial physical characteristics, as somehow "bad" or "misprogrammed", some societal "problem" that needs to be "cured".

Are some people attracted, like I said, sexually to others on superficial basises? For sure. And do some people experience a failure or a deficit of empathy in their sexual interactions, as well as other social ones? Of course. The height, to my mind, of empathy and interpersonal connection is being able to as much as possible if not completely see oneself through the other person's eyes, and vice-versa, and it's no coincidence, to my mind, that some of the BEST sex comes with that level of connection. Of course.

But that does not mean that lower chakra, lusty, purely physical or superficial attraction is somehow "bad" or even "objectifying". It just is, it's what people often do, and it's natural.


* note I said "variety". This does NOT mean that testosterone is the only chemical driver of desire, or that women don't experience strong sexual desire as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:07 AM

13. "Objectifying" is reducing someone to an unthinking, unfeeling object.

It's basically stripping someone of all of the qualities that make them human, so that their only purpose in life is sex. Being attracted to someone, or even wanting to have sex with them is not objectifying them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:10 PM

17. And again, I think it's a made-up phenomenon dressed up as "science", that some people have decided

takes place in other peoples' heads.

Are there varying degrees of empathy, or even a lack, accompanying some sexual desire? Absolutely. But "Objectification" is a bugaboo, an imaginary mental boogeyman created, again, to offer a scientific-sounding label to slap on sexual attraction that bugs some folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #17)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:21 PM

19. Objectification isn't a scientific concept.

Attraction without objectification is different because it can involve at least seeing someone as a living, breathing, feeling person.

Objectification, on the other hand, can involve attraction, but one person thinks of the other as an object (with women, usually as a collection of body parts). There's no acknowledgement that the person has the qualities mentioned in the first sentence of this post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:27 PM

20. It is presented as an allegedly scientific concept. And unless YOU are the one doing the

"objectifying", I'm not sure how you're qualified to make these authoritative statements about what is happening in someone else's head when they are attracted to another person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 06:21 AM

3. Interesting read

Thanks for posting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 07:37 AM

4. Not outrage, bemusement.

How noble we are to not just rape very skirt in sight. Seriously?


When we analyze the realities of the male sex response and the underlying biology that contributes to it, the control men exert over it is actually a triumph of evolved psychology and social directive.


That gets some sort of prize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #4)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 08:02 AM

5. Strawman prize. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 08:12 AM

6. exactly - the 'way to miss a point' prize

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 08:23 AM

7. from the article

And realize no man is ‘horrified’ when he see’s massive throngs of females all itching to slit each others throats and trample the bodies of their boyfriends as they go into a hyperventilating fit at the *idea* that they can possibly get Justin Timberlake or Beiber to notice them, much less touch them, much less take them backstage.

No one is horrified when we realize that a woman smile a wry smile to a well built man in a suit. No one is horrified when her vagina tingles when holding onto a man for dear life on the back of a crotch rocket bike. No one is horrified that a woman would drop her jobless man who spends his days playing xbox for wealthy media mogul Ronaldo when he asks her to come with him to spend a weekend at a chalet in the swiss alps.

http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/male-sexual-response/

but if i look at a pair of breasts im a .. well the names are endless

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 08:44 AM

8. For me, the issue is how male behavior is "pathologized"...

whether we are talking about over-active and energetic boys at school or horny men, male behavior is often pathologized and treated as it is aberrant.

The term "testosterone poisoning" comes to mind.

Again, female nature + beautiful and nurturing and women are encouraged to get into contact with it while while male is violent and overpowering and we are encouraged to suppress it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #8)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 09:48 AM

9. i remember testoerone poisoning - i think alan alda was throwing that around in the 70's

yea it's a double standard. thanks for posting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #8)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 10:56 AM

11. Well, I refuse to believe there is anything abnormal or wrong with the average guy.

By definition, average is average. It's the extremes on the bell curve, several standard deviations away, that are problematic either way. Men who are sexually aggressive, sex addicts, or on the low end have poor sex drives and little interest.

Why 'they" have to keep insisting there is a non-existent problem is beyond me. Nothing wrong with me, I am happy to consider myself a normal hetero man, even if it's been a long time due to personal circumstances.

And, despite the admonishment I got last week from a female poster on another thread, I see nothing wrong with noticing women as long as it is done in a respectful manner.

I also question the notion that women are not as sexual. Having had a grandmother in a nursing home, while hardly a great example, I can tell you that these elderly women, who outnumbered the men about 4 to 1, were quite aggressive in their pursuits and their infighting over the men. It reminded me of high school, albeit with walkers and Depends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Denninmi (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 08:04 AM

31. you and i are on the same page

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 10:55 AM

10. What a horrible article.

Another article that says men can't help themselves, and should be excused for treating women like dirt.

It has the same Evo-psych hackish pseudoscience that all of these men's rights type articles have.

What these articles always ignore is, men are human beings and can make their own decisions.

Also, using a Fox reality show as serious scientific exploration is just hilarious. Says all that you need to know about this article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #10)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:03 AM

12. It doesn't ignore it at all. It makes a POINT of it. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:17 AM

14. The point I got is more apologia.

There's nothing wrong with sexual attraction. The author goes above and beyond this and makes the tired argument that men ought to be rewarded for not doing creepy things, because it's only natural to do otherwise!

It's a terrible, MRAish article. It's insulting to both men and women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #14)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 11:29 AM

15. I don't think painting it with the MRA title is fair but I can see the strategy.

It is a dirty strategy and I see no evidence that you have thought it out beyond a knee jerk conditioned response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #15)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 02:40 PM

16. Looks and quacks like a duck.

It has the same themes:

- Evo-psych, broad brushing all men and women with junk science. Example: applying testosterone to the extreme examples of his article. Yes, testosterone is linked to sex-drive, but making stupid decisions is a personal failing.

- uses horribly insulting language - what exactly is a 'stripper grade' woman?

- 'men just can't help themselves!' I'm so tired of hearing this. It's insulting to men, and totally wrong. Also, 100% of men failed the test on a reality show? Not exactly Nobel Prize winning research there.

- not cheating is a sacrifice? *facepalm* That's so patronizing - 'you women are lucky we don't cheat on you. I think we deserve a little recognition.' Horrible.

There is no hormone in the body that forces men to see women as personal sex objects. Not seeing women as such is not any more worthy of recognition than is not being a jerk in other aspects of life. I don't know what the author wants - a gold medal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #14)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:14 PM

18. I agree that no one deserves a "prize" for being a decent human being. That aspect bugged me, too.

Still, please don't come into this group and start tossing around "MRA" accusations. We have established that that's not what this group is about, and we're not starting that shit again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #18)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:32 PM

21. My opinion is about the blog. Nothing more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dash87 (Reply #21)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 03:54 PM

22. Still, it's not helpful. In my experience some folks here think merely saying "MRA" is some sort of

argument-winning trump card. There is plenty wrong with that article, that can be criticized, to my mind- yet going "aha! MRA! MRA!" as if that proves something... what exactly is it supposed to prove?

Can't the article be criticized on the points it contains, without trying to tie it to shadowy forces?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 05:28 PM

23. I think the main element of virtuous masculinity is self control.

TV masculinity isn't the real thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 06:03 PM

24. There seem to be a lot of women who immediately pull the disgust card....

....on so many things relating to male sexuality.

For example, a guy complaining he can't find a relationship and would like to have a girlfriend is now a "creep just looking to get laid" and "thinks he's entitled to sex". In other words, no man is really looking for romance, intimacy, or someone to hold. They just want to put their penis in a vagina.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #24)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 06:23 PM

25. AFAIC, there's nothing wrong with the latter one, either. Lots of people -of both genders- like sex.

I found that whole "he thinks he's entitled to sex" grousing around the OK Cupid stuff pretty ridiculous. Like, isn't the whole point of putting up an ad on a dating site, after a fashion, believing that you are somewhat "entitled" to sex, or love, or a partner, or something?

Never mind that it borrows the whole right wing framing about "entitlements"; the words "entitled", and "entitlements" are like "arugula" or "elite", or like talking about women "demanding" abortions and birth control- it's a dog whistle, a cue for a 15 minute hate.

"ZOMG O NO teh menz iz errntitled!" No, they're lonely, and maybe at times not 100% happy with the response they're getting. Probably like many, if not most of the people on those sites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 02:53 AM

26. Just for the record, I'm not terribly impressed with this article.

Or the rest of this guy's blog, what I could take for about 5 minutes. YMMV, of course, but he sounds like a grade-A asshat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #26)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:10 AM

27. Noted and I don't really disagree in general.

But there is truth, nevertheless, hidden in there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #27)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:41 AM

30. Like I said, anecdotally there seems to be a lot of stuff about the effect of testosterone, as

reported by FTM Transpeople.

The interpretation laid over some of it, I'm not so sure I agree. I certainly don't agree that somehow it's a great accomplishment for men to control themselves, or that men deserve some sort of prize or cookie for not being cauldrons of uncontrollable id.

On the rest of it, the stuff about the guys who acquiesce to the hot girl 100% of the time- here, let me run down another anecdote... Way back before my wife and I were married, when we were still dating and even had some periods, due to conflicting responsibilities, educational environments, etc, that we were spending periods of significant distance apart... Well, let me rewind even further, and mention that, as a young man, well before she and I got involved at all, I did have trouble remaining faithful in relationships. I got it out of my system probably by 25 or so, but the experience of cheating- and being cheated on- (not to be confused with being in an open, non-monogamous relationship, mind you- not the same thing) the emotional fallout and how that dishonesty can poison a relationship, really grounded in me an appreciation for -not faithfulness per se, but honesty and transparency.

So, FFWD to when my current wife and I were dating, during one of the distance periods. During that time I was thrown into several situations with an absolutely gorgeous, incredibly hot woman who, it quickly became apparent, was real interested in me. Who was having relationship problems of her own, many of them pertaining to her sexual dissatisfaction, which she proceeded to tell me in great and intimate detail. And she was coming on to me, directly and aggressively.

Any other time in my life up to then, I would have been all over it. Had I been single, for sure. Had I even been a few years younger- for sure. But even though my then-gf and I were, at that particular time, in a rough patch, throwing the future of the relationship into question; even though we were far apart, even though there was a part of me that really, really wanted to get together with this person (attendant drama and all)... I knew that the person I was involved with, was possibly-probably-someone I wanted to make a major commitment with and to. And I didn't want anything to potentially get in the way of that, even if, as was likely, we probably could and would have worked past it.

So, I said 'no'. And I guarantee this opportunity was at least as sexually enticing as ANYTHING they threw at those "100%" guys in that study. She was hot as hell. I hope she didn't take it personally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #26)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:19 AM

28. Agreed, but I think there are some valid points.

In my opinion, it comes down to our (the world) discomfort with sex, sexuality, and the like. Look at the Superbowl shit exploding in the other forums. No one has noticed that it is OK to celebrate, cheer for, and admire people whose job is to beat the shit out of one another, but let a female performer gyrate, wear a "sexy" costume, and "HORRORS!" "The Super bowl is a family-friendly event!!" Really, beating the shit out of someone is "family friendly?!" I'd rather watch sexy women, and I am gayer than a tree full of feather boa wearing parrots! Though, I do lurves me some "Spartacus!" Hmmmm!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #28)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 03:36 AM

29. That was my point, to the one who said "I don't want my 5 year old watching beyonce!"

Right, those guys in helmets cracking into each other; your 5 year old really appreciates that, do they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread