| Jan 31 @ 5:43 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
40yearoldvirgin
Posts: 455
|
[/[ QUOTE]\why does your id want to "bang" (interesting, albeit violent, choice of word, which is another good topic for discussion) *all* the "babes" and go through them like "paper towels?" Yet another interesting analogy. In other words, women are something for you to wipe your "hands" on, then toss into the trash can\ QUOTE]
Because it's FUN!!!! And it's not my hands I want to wipe on them - it's my dick! ARGGH!! - I'm getting a boner just thinking about it.
In a more biologically oriented answer, the pupose of thbe human male is to pass on his DNA by breeding. The more females a male breeds with the more DNA he passes on.
|
|
  |
|
| Jan 31 @ 5:51 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
Again, there goes the mentality that sex is a "recreational activity." I never would ascribe the adjective "fun" to sex. What a trivial way to describe such an incredibly pleasurable experience. 
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 5:53 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
Oh and you didn't note my use of the word "analogy," I see.
Anyway...and you ask yourself why you're still a virgin at 40?
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 5:59 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
40yearoldvirgin
Posts: 455
|
I know. I'm a PIG. Oink oink, Whhheeeeeeeeeeeee! WHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEE!! Pigs get sex too.
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 6:05 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
Ohhhh...and sorry for the multiple posts but I'm multitasking here..trying to work and doing this too..
But what a load of crap that passing on the DNA argument is. Puleeeeeeeeeeze. Save it for the bimbae.
That line of reasoning would perhaps work just find when the world was being peopled but by the very nature of the fact that there are far too many people in the world today as it is, it makes no sense whatsoever in today's world, and is purely a lame excuse for why a man "has" to screw around.
The only reason men have a propensity for screwing around is because this is a sexist society, and this sexist society says a man's a hero for doing so, and a woman is a slut for doing so.
But to play devil's advocate...let me ask you this: Say there was no limit to the number of women you could have sex with, on a daily basis...say that was ..ohhhh...20 different women per day. Day in, day out...from now until eternity.
Now, say every single one of those women got pregnant...I mean, after all, that's your goal, isn't it? Procreation? To pass on your DNA?
How willing would you be to support, care for and nurture your offspring?
I don't believe in bigamy whatsoever but at least, from what I've seen, bigamists (I mean those who practice it as a part of their religion) at least do own up to their responsibility as fathers and do support their children.
I can guarantee you when the NEED for men to have sex as a means to ensure continuation of mankind, he did not run out on his family...families...he went out and hunted and gathered and fed, clothed and sheltered every one of them. He didn't run off after he had his "fun."
Again that lame argument doesn't apply to today's man and man does adapt to his environment.
Not to mention, there is a reason for the word "primitive." Cavemen acted purely on instinct and survival ...but did pave the way for modern man; even they had intellect.
Modern man is now much more advanced and any man with any modicum of intelligence would know that, although screwing multiple numbers of women might be "fun," it probably isn't the smartest idea in the world.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 6:59 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
sexyeyes755
Posts: 2
|
What gets me are the 64 year old guys who think they can PLAY women!  ...............as IF they look hot!
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 7:01 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
sexyeyes755
Posts: 2
|
Doesn't mean ALL the ladies WANT to bang you,now does it?
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 7:02 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
40yearoldvirgin
Posts: 455
|
Ohhhh...and sorry for the multiple posts but I'm multitasking here..trying to work and doing this too..
But what a load of crap that passing on the DNA argument is. Puleeeeeeeeeeze. Save it for the bimbae.
That line of reasoning would perhaps work just find when the world was being peopled but by the very nature of the fact that there are far too many people in the world today as it is, it makes no sense whatsoever in today's world, and is purely a lame excuse for why a man "has" to screw around.
The only reason men have a propensity for screwing around is because this is a sexist society, and this sexist society says a man's a hero for doing so, and a woman is a slut for doing so.
But to play devil's advocate...let me ask you this: Say there was no limit to the number of women you could have sex with, on a daily basis...say that was ..ohhhh...20 different women per day. Day in, day out...from now until eternity.
Now, say every single one of those women got pregnant...I mean, after all, that's your goal, isn't it? Procreation? To pass on your DNA?
How willing would you be to support, care for and nurture your offspring?
I don't believe in bigamy whatsoever but at least, from what I've seen, bigamists (I mean those who practice it as a part of their religion) at least do own up to their responsibility as fathers and do support their children.
I can guarantee you when the NEED for men to have sex as a means to ensure continuation of mankind, he did not run out on his family...families...he went out and hunted and gathered and fed, clothed and sheltered every one of them. He didn't run off after he had his "fun."
Again that lame argument doesn't apply to today's man and man does adapt to his environment.
Not to mention, there is a reason for the word "primitive." Cavemen acted purely on instinct and survival ...but did pave the way for modern man; even they had intellect.
Modern man is now much more advanced and any man with any modicum of intelligence would know that, although screwing multiple numbers of women might be "fun," it probably isn't the smartest idea in the world.
Sorry, but that was too long to read. I did see the part about no limit to the number of women I could have sex with. I'd be doing it till my dong fell off! The kids would have to fend for themselves.
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 7:06 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
40yearoldvirgin
Posts: 455
|
I'm going to a sexy 64 year old STUD someday sexyeyes. I'm like a fine wine, getting better and better as I age.
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 7:43 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
Too long to read? Sorry. Try breaking it down to one sentence a month.
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 8:01 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
sumdaysoon
Posts: 11,781
|
now ya'll play nice........  
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 31 @ 10:26 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
I was trying to be helpful. 
|
| |
|
| Feb 1 @ 10:36 AM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
alybai42
Posts: 7,179
|
Is it all about looks?
No...
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 1 @ 10:45 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
cricketbob
Posts: 2
|
I view promiscuous men with as much disdain as society tends to view promiscuous women.
lolthisistoofunny:
So how do you view a man who doesn't have the experience?
It seems that women want a man who's experienced, so how much is not enough and how much is too much? Or does this really not matter to you?
|
| |
|
| Feb 1 @ 11:54 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
There's a word for men who don't have sexual experience these days: Preschoolers.
LOL.
All joking aside...big difference between being promiscuous and being "experienced." To me, there are "man-whores" just as much as there are females who are...more, even.
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 2 @ 5:36 AM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
ynot7769
Posts: 17,358
|
All joking aside...big difference between being promiscuous and being "experienced."
mostly cause to be experienced you DON'T need a list of partners thats a who's who .......with a million names on it.................just experience ....added with some education i find works even better but..........thats jmho 
|
| |
|
| Feb 3 @ 9:01 AM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
justajerseyguy
Posts: 4
|
Well this is how i feel, looks are what attracts you to a person at the start but i think thats just part of our dna,how nature fits you to the kind of person you would best produce offspring with, this go's both ways of course male and female,its just natures way of assuring survival of the species
Have to edit this didn't see the post you feel not part of our dna,and of course having sex is a pleasurable thing if it didn't feel good,no one would have it and then people and well any species that is not asexual would no longer exist,its really simple if you don't find someone sexual attractive it just dosn't happen,and being attractive can be many things i have found myself attracted to some woman because of many diffrent reasons including just the fact get along so well,some its just a physical thing its all really a case by case thing.
[Edited on 2/3/2008 9:13 AM]
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 3 @ 10:39 AM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
lolthisistoofunny
Posts: 516
|
Don't know who you're referring to when you say "you feel not part of our DNA"...first of all, our DNA is our genetic makeup, and I'm not sure DNA has anything to do with whom we find attractive or we don't find attractive.
Anyway...I'm not arguing the fact that attraction is a factor..I'm arguing the fact that, in many cases, for many people, men especially, it is the ONLY factor in deciding whether or not he wants to be with her.
From what I've seen, a man can look at a woman....ANY woman...he finds attractive and think "I'd sure like to bang her." Conversely, women can find a man attractive and not automatically want to "bang" him."
Then comes the "men are more visual" b.s.
Huh?
Whatever that means. That statement doesn't really even apply to the topic, for men are no more "visual" than women are. There's not a damn thing wrong with my eyesight, anyway.
What it really means is "here's another excuse to justify or sexist behavior." Men are socially conditioned that it's okay to treat women as though we were on this earth to serve them, and also that it's acceptable to change women as often (well, hopefully as often) as they change their underwear.
I'm very curious about where the notion that men are superior to women ever came about...I suppose during Bible days. But I don't think God had intended the word "superior" to be taken quite the way that men seem to think it's supposed to be taken.
Why the double standards for rules of conduct? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, except as a means to keep women in a position of inferiority and submission.
Anyway...going a little bit of main topic, but ...all thoughts are related.
Now, fortunately, there are men in this world who have evolved and grown along with modern society and who treat women with respect and who choose whom they want to be with based on more than a criteria that includes, "Does she have a nice ass?" but...we do still have a long way to go...
We need to stop teaching our sons to treat women like they are something you just use and toss aside ...and we need to treat our daughters to understand not to tolerate being treated with such disrespect. It can be done...but it ain't gonna be easy...too much complacency and resignation, I suppose. I've been fighting it all my life and though I've made no major strides in society I sure have in my own personal life...and I feel a whole lot better for it.
I think if men were on the receiving end of what women go through, though the novelty of it would be "cute" at first...would grow very weary of in in a short time.
|
| |
|
| Feb 9 @ 4:57 PM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
Dragon099
Posts: 13
|
The best lover I was ever with, would be considered below average by most men.
|
|
| |
|
| Feb 10 @ 5:20 AM |
Is it all about looks? |
|
Mascara
Posts: 709
|
looks are a bonus, but its not all im looking for. all i really want right now is a guy who is actually NICE and gives a damn about my feelings - i've been burnt one too many times ...
|
| |
|