Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Of nice guys and nasty guys...
Near my home is a path that's just wide enough for two people to pass .. or walk abreast as the case may be. a wall on one side and railings on the other. So when two people (male and female) are walking abreast and another person is coming the other way it is inevitable that one of the abreasters has to fall behind the other to allow the person traveling the other way to pass. It seems to be a social convention that the woman falls back. So your intrepid researcher deliberately ignored the social convention by staying on the same side as the male - the woman doesn't drop back because the obstruction isn't on her side and the guy doesn't drop back because he's a guy. Four times out of six the guy dropped back as you might reasonably expect (I'll call them the nice guys) . On one occasion the guy reluctantly dropped back at the last instant and made a comment about rudeness - maybe 6/10 on the unpleasantness/arrogance scale. On the sixth occasion the guy came to a halt a few feet in front of me with his wife or whatever by his side - completely blocking my path - maybe 9/10 on the arrogance scale. He didn't look like much of a fighter so I just waited for him to do something. His wife bailed him out by moving forwards so he could move sideways behind her.

---

Zinman Wrote:A slug of gin before going over the top creates a sexier corps(e).

Why didn't I think of that?

(Aug 1, 2018 08:43 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]As expected, after all your avoidance fails, you just beg off.

Learn something? Right here: https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3027-p...ml#pid8084
Although I doubt you have the integrity to admit it. Just like you don't have the integrity to support claims you've made about "nice guys".

You're not likely to ever be interested in anything that runs counter to your own biases.
And quit flirting with me.

Oh, now you're just trying to make me feel guilty, but that is how you come across. 

I am interested but you're not listening to me.  

I remember every interaction that I’ve had with almost everyone.  I knew what it was.  I just wanted see if you were keeping tabs. 

I’m not flirting with you.  I’m not even trying to befriend you. I already told you that.

Maybe you didn’t get the memo.

What’s wrong with you? Did you forget why we’re here?

Syne Wrote:I'm here to have my biases challenged.

I debate with others to hone my own thinking. I'm not seeking validation, as many on these sorts of forums seem to desire. I'm disappointed when I can't find challenging arguments.

(Oct 11, 2016 04:49 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]I debate to be challenged and sharpen my own thinking. People who respect your views are not likely to challenge you enough to test those views. No one can play devil's advocate to their own views better than someone opposed to those views. I don't feel any need for respect from effectively anonymous strangers, and quite frankly, find it somewhat pathetic that anyone does.

As women mature, we become more confident and self-aware.  Sure, sex is great, but we don’t need it for validation.  One thing that I’ve learned from reading Wheelis, though, is that men do.  Why is that? Perhaps they’re bound up in the social conditioning of seeking validation through sex. As they age, they get even more desperate and then they’re the ones pining for a relationship. Is there a gender difference in strength of our sex drive? I don’t think so. I think that’s a myth. 

• Purely physical—desire
  
• Relieving stress
  
• Having a sense of power and control over others
  
• Seeking validation
  

Are these good reasons to have sex? Feeling insecure and seeking validation through sex?  If women sought sex for the same reasons that men do, we’d be viewed as weak and wounded.  

So, I ask myself, how would I behave and feel if this behavior was culturally encouraged instead of discouraged?  What if the expectations were reversed?  Would I feel any pressure to have numerous sexual partners?  Would I feel entitled?  I think I might.

When Wheelis viewed his daughter he entered a relationship, dealt with a person.  When observing other women he abandoned human relations, dismembered her, dealt with parts: breasts, buttocks, belly, and genitals. They shattered like a pane of glass into erotic shards, into mounds and curves and apertures.  

If this was socially acceptable, I could see myself doing the same thing.  I mean, we even do it to some extent now.

Quote:What is it that I’m clawing after so desperately over these surfaces?...For love?...With shards?
You know what Camus said about this? It’s difficult to return to the places of one’s early happiness.

 
Wheelis goes on to say that as he gets older, his trouble is the loss, not the right to love them, but the ability to fuck them. 

Quote:No, that’s not right either. It’s the loss of the desire to love them.  I’m so ashamed, also angry, and confused.  What is this anyway?  Do you guys have an explanation?  Is this an infantile conflict—to be analyzed? Or the way things are—to be accepted? I’ve had this longing all of my life, but it used to be something quite different.  It was always sexual, I think, and perhaps the union of bodies was always the culmination.  But it was not carnal. In essence it was spiritual. Ethereal. The raw energy of sexual drive, like fuel for a rocket, was used for a loftier purpose and was able thereby to lift the longing into a higher realm.  I was concerned with symbols—the dropped handkerchief, the veiled face, the red rose, the scented stationary. Where has all that gone? I used to idealize a beautiful face. The expressive mouth with its minute quiver of vulnerability, the lashed and limped eyes with their unfathomable depth, sweeping over me so close, like a touch, and that exalted courage in one so frail.  It would choke me up. Those were the things that swarmed in my mind.  I wanted love, I wanted the two of us to become so precious one to another that a crisis calling for the sacrifice of life would come almost as a relief. A tragedy too, of course, since it meant parting, but a relief in that it would enable me to prove in action what otherwise could only be professed: that I loved her more than life itself. Where has all that gone?  That’s what Camus talks about.  Maybe he didn’t live long enough to come upon this degradation of this yearning with age.

Seeing others in the light only of our own needs, we encounter but projections.

Women want to be understood because it’s a necessary prerequisite to being liked, accepted, loved, and cared for. We’re not alone in this. Men yearn for the same.  

I want both of my boys to learn to value women for something other than sex.  I want them to have that love and support.

(Aug 2, 2018 10:26 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]As women mature, we become more confident and self-aware.  Sure, sex is great, but we don’t need it for validation.  One thing that I’ve learned from reading Wheelis, though, is that men do.  Why is that? Perhaps they’re bound up in the social conditioning of seeking validation through sex. As they age, they get even more desperate and then they’re the ones pining for a relationship. Is there a gender difference in strength of our sex drive? I don’t think so. I think that’s a myth. 

Who ever said women need sex for validation? O_o
Validation, in general, only comes from high values sources...which are largely determined by scarcity. Sex is scarce for many men, just like social validation is scarce for many women. That's why you seek male friends, because they can offer you a kind of validation that is scarce among women. Women are more likely to seek attention, even sexually, as validation from perceived high status men.
No, I don't think the sex drives differ much...only their expression, where a woman's age is a large factor.

Quote:

• Purely physical—desire
  
• Relieving stress
  
• Having a sense of power and control over others
  
• Seeking validation
  

Are these good reasons to have sex? Feeling insecure and seeking validation through sex?  If women sought sex for the same reasons that men do, we’d be viewed as weak and wounded.  

No, women just constantly fret about their looks, wear uncomfortable shoes, fear looking like a slut, etc. to seek validation. But yes, the sexes differ, have different mating strategies, and different scarcities.

Quote:So, I ask myself, how would I behave and feel if this behavior was culturally encouraged instead of discouraged?  What if the expectations were reversed?  Would I feel any pressure to have numerous sexual partners?  Would I feel entitled?  I think I might.

Entitled? Only high status men, who have no sexual scarcity, feel entitled. That lack of scarcity is because they can readily have numerous sexual partners. It's the same entitlement as attractive women, only without the worry about stigma and social status.

Quote:When Wheelis viewed his daughter he entered a relationship, dealt with a person.  When observing other women he abandoned human relations, dismembered her, dealt with parts: breasts, buttocks, belly, and genitals. They shattered like a pane of glass into erotic shards, into mounds and curves and apertures.  

If this was socially acceptable, I could see myself doing the same thing.  I mean, we even do it to some extent now.

That's just twisted. Even as a man, I don't view women that way.

Quote:Wheelis goes on to say that as he gets older, his trouble is the loss, not the right to love them, but the ability to fuck them. 

Maybe you should quit reading men who only affirm your misandrist tendencies.

Quote:Women want to be understood because it’s a necessary prerequisite to being liked, accepted, loved, and cared for. We’re not alone in this. Men yearn for the same.  

I want both of my boys to learn to value women for something other than sex.  I want them to have that love and support.

Who disagreed with any of that? O_o

What you seem to miss is that empathy and understanding are necessary components to emotional engagement. But women are so desperate for that level of attention and acceptance that such ability in a man removes sexual scarcity. Believe me, you don't want your boys picking a partner out of scarcity and validation seeking (and in many men the sex is just a clear indicator of acceptance). Hopefully you want them to be happy and find a high quality woman, instead of settling for one that just accepts them.

Syne Wrote:a high quality woman

Therein lies the rub.

(Aug 2, 2018 06:58 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]

Syne Wrote:a high quality woman

Therein lies the rub.

Yeah, that's based on the premise that they do exist in sufficient quantity to be attainable. Luckily, quality is quite subjective.

(Aug 2, 2018 06:58 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]

Syne Wrote:a high quality woman

Therein lies the rub.

And you think that rats get a bad rap? This rap group won an Oscar.

Slob on My Knob

Oh, yeah!  There’s some real winners out there.

I will start by saying yes, sex is validating!

Quantity? Quality? Attainable?

Sounds like he's shopping for a product. Don't worry, sweetie. They're just around the corner.  You can even try before you buy.

https://money.cnn.com/video/technology/2...index.html

Guaranteed to raise your self-esteem or your money back. The cheesy infomercials are going to be awesome!

"Help! It's fallen and I can't get it up!"  

Men...

More broad, general statements of misandry from SS. #NotAll

Syne Wrote:If you were truly committed to having male friends, you could eliminate sex as a consideration...by offering it freely and without any commitment or stipulations.

Syne Wrote:Sex is a huge, some might say ultimate, sign of acceptance and approval.

Now…that is what Wheelis was describing.  Men spend their whole lives seeking approval and validation from women.  How pathetic is that?

Sorry, Syne, but you can’t flip flop between nature and nurture to justify your behavior.  Most diseases are due to both genes and the environment.  Your height is not even exclusively genetically-determined.  Proper nutrition influences male stature, as well.

LOL! I love the caricatures people have to invent to justify themselves.

You can’t paint me with hereditable brush strokes without painting yourself into a corner.  

You can’t use nature to justify your so-called mating strategies and then play the victim by throwing up a hashtag.

#NotAll

Aww…poor baby.

(Aug 3, 2018 04:13 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

Syne Wrote:If you were truly committed to having male friends, you could eliminate sex as a consideration...by offering it freely and without any commitment or stipulations.

Syne Wrote:Sex is a huge, some might say ultimate, sign of acceptance and approval.

Now…that is what Wheelis was describing.  Men spend their whole lives seeking approval and validation from women.  How pathetic is that?

Only "nice guy" beta males seek validation from women. It is pathetic. Just now realizing the point I've been making this whole time?

Quote:Sorry, Syne, but you can’t flip flop between nature and nurture to justify your behavior.  Most diseases are due to both genes and the environment.  Your height is not even exclusively genetically-determined.  Proper nutrition influences male stature, as well.

LOL! I love the caricatures people have to invent to justify themselves.

You can’t paint me with hereditable brush strokes without painting yourself into a corner.  

You can’t use nature to justify your so-called mating strategies and then play the victim by throwing up a hashtag.

There's no flip-flop at all. Apparently you need me to draw you a picture.

Evolutionary psychology (nature) has determined mating strategies. For women this includes a high sensitivity to social status/pressure (as women needed to rely on others during pregnancy) and an emotional intuition for social cues (to protect her reputation) and honest signals (to determine which men were high status, alphas who had the best genes, and which would stick around, betas who would provide). All to ensure her offspring survive, where she has limit biological time and resources. For men this includes a high risk for both being rejected (as negative social proof in small tribes) and often violent competition (which could mean death). But after that, his strategy can either be to spread his unlimited genetic resources with abandon or work to ensure his offspring survive to adulthood.

Society (nurture) largely reinforces a woman's strategy with social pressure (slut shaming, etc.). It also reinforces the downside for men by keeping sex more scarce, which feeds into their evolutionary anxiety about rejection and competition. See, in both nature and nurture, there are problems for both sexes.

Beta males seek validation because both their evolutionary anxiety and societal narrative tell them to. Just like women don't enjoy all the sex they would really like to because their evolutionary need for social approval makes them particularly susceptible to social pressure.

But just like there are alpha men, there are also alpha women. Like alpha men, an alpha woman is largely immune to social pressure and the approval-seeking behavior (social for women and sexual for men). But generally being less assertive, there is likely a much smaller percent of alpha females.


Again, beta male behavior is pathetic and a large majority of men are betas. Society reinforces and women even claim to want that behavior. And at a certain age, they actually do, since they legitimately want a provider for their children. The problem is that beta males do not really satisfy the emotional needs of a woman, especially where she can divorce a man for half his worth...still having her children provided for.

I'm no victim, but many men have no idea that the social narrative is a shame that keeps them pathetic. And it does this to maintain order. Just imagine what would happen if every man were an alpha. It would be chaos.