Philosophically, why should men make the first move?

Page 4 of 6 [ 82 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

polymathpoolplayer
Velociraptor

Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 473

03 Sep 2009, 3:44 pm

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

That's a fair point. Nonetheless, you have said nothing to substantiate your point of view.

It has been substantiated by authorities guses you don't read much. Ans BTW I don't need to prove anything to refute your illogic; it's for you to prove that the way your friends think represents the majority.

Polymathpoolplayer wrote:

Second of all a virgin has no power over a woman in his life to "punish" her by abstaining.

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

Neither of us said, nor implied, that.

Yes you did, by implying your virgin friends could have some effect on such a "rebellion quashing".

Quote:

That role would go for the men who do have women in their lives. Such men would not be able to go two weeks abstaining from sex for the mere reason of trying to consolidate control over women in general.

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

Right...so if a man has a woman in his life, he is a slave to sex?

more so than a hermit, yes.

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

Just because a woman can survive desert/wilderness deprivation scenarios much better, does not mean that they can tolerate a lack of sex better than a man. Everyone has different levels of sex drive: some think about it all the time, others rarely. That goes for both genders.

Again you are talking about ONE WOMAN. I am talking women in general.

Quote:

Men are the weaker sex you better realize that now.

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

What's your justification?

What I observe in the world; if you open your eyes you can see it too.

Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

03 Sep 2009, 3:51 pm

Nobody here has read "Lysistrata", the 2,500 year old play by the Greek playwright Aristophenes? He tackled the "who can hold out longer" question to hilarious effect. He theorized that women can. I tend to agree with him. A 2,500 year old play is not a study, but it is food for thought.

polymathpoolplayer
Velociraptor

Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 473

03 Sep 2009, 3:51 pm

idiocratik wrote:

polymathpoolplayer wrote:

To CrinklyCrustacean and Idiocratik: I doubt seriously if your friends represent most men on the planet, which is the point: that this discussion is about MEN and WOMEN not about your friends/acquaintances on the small scale. Many studies have been done on people's sexual/religious/political affiliations and how their friends are usually the same, whereas this is NO indication of the tendencies of the population at large, hence extrapolating ones' friends' opinions to the opinions of the population at large is a dangerous flaw in logic.

Second of all a virgin has no power over a woman in his life to "punish" her by abstaining. That role would go for the men who do have women in their lives. Such men would not be able to go two weeks abstaining from sex for the mere reason of trying to consolidate control over women in general. This makes them weaker, as some women can frequently go all their lives without it, as concomitantly case after case proves that women can survive desert/wilderness deprivation scenarios much better.

Men are the weaker sex you better realize that now.

BTW I am not suggesting nor am I even in favor of such a "revolt" by men - it's a misguided and ridiculous notion.

You've got to be kidding me. Yeah, we'd better "realize", cos you're clearly the authority on this. *chokes on sarcasm*

You know, if men are the weaker sex it's because of Liberalism and Feminism, not because of sex drive.

Check this out: http://www.amazon.com/Decline-Men-Ameri ... 0061353140

I am not going to dignify your misogynist bias that all of this is women's fault. On the contrary if it is anyone's fault it would be men for allowing it to happen (IF what you say is true).

And I think 61 trumps whatever age you have as far as experience goes (14 girlfriends, one was a sociopath the rest mainly fine - not perfect - but fine). I say realize it because if you do you can do something to "even" the odds, which is mostly becoming positive and not seeing a "commie under every bed" and giving yourself back the power you "think" someone has purloined from you - you took it from yourself (other than in the usual Aspie shooting-oneself-in-the-foot-issues of which I also am guilty).

BTW I am a Libertarian not liberal not conservative, so stop trying to pigeonhole me to make your logic appear logical. You only succeed in impressing yourself.

idiocratik
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 784
Location: OR

03 Sep 2009, 3:58 pm

Woah, I am NOT misogynist.

Quote:

... if it is anyone's fault it would be men for allowing it to happen (IF what you say is true)

That's about all I can give you.

There's clearly a communication barrier here, so I'm not gonna bother with this anymore. Too stressful.

_________________
"Occultism is the science of life; the art of living." - H.P. Blavatsky

deadeyexx
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 758

03 Sep 2009, 4:55 pm

polymathpoolplayer wrote:

Second of all a virgin has no power over a woman in his life to "punish" her by abstaining. That role would go for the men who do have women in their lives. Such men would not be able to go two weeks abstaining from sex for the mere reason of trying to consolidate control over women in general. This makes them weaker, as some women can frequently go all their lives without it, as concomitantly case after case proves that women can survive desert/wilderness deprivation scenarios much better.

Men are the weaker sex you better realize that now.

You have some notion that all women act as one, & can accept or deny a man sex. This simply isn't the case. If one woman won't have sex with me, I can find one that will.

You also assume that sex is the driving force of the entire world. That men will do anything to get it. Not the case either. I've refused sex for many non-sexual reasons.

I'm not the only man to claim these things either. True, some women dominate some men, but in turn, you find out those women are dominated by other men. The world is too complex to break everything down to this man vs. woman malarkey. There are too many variables.

Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

03 Sep 2009, 5:03 pm

Men do not have to make the first move.

Women do not have to make the first move.

Nobody has to make any moves at all. Celibacy is an option for anyone who chooses it. Suppose you don't actually want celibacy? You have a choice. You can accept whichever woman makes a first move on you, or you can make a first move yourself. Suppose no woman makes a first move or only ones you don't want? Oh well. That's the exact same risk a woman takes by not making the first move. Some women accept that risk. Some don't and make first moves themselves.

Do a thought experiment. Suppose a signal went out to all men across the world that starting on tomorrow, no man on earth would make a first move. What do you think would happen? Eventually, many (though of course not all) women would start making first moves. You would have your pick of any woman who asked you out. Which you already do, come to think of it. I've seen some threads on here where men complain about this or that undesirable woman who just won't stop hitting on them.

Or did you think that a mass mandate of all men no longer making first moves would mean that women you want hit on you? It doesn't work that way for women now (per the "I'm a creep magnet" threads) so there's no reason to think it would work that way if the roles were suddenly reversed. If the roles were suddenly reversed you would experience what young women have always experienced- being hit on by people you truly have no interest in and possibly find quite creepy (per the "how can I make her leave me alone?" threads.

Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

03 Sep 2009, 5:13 pm

deadeyexx wrote:

polymathpoolplayer wrote:

Quote:

You have some notion that all women act as one, & can accept or deny a man sex. This simply isn't the case. If one woman won't have sex with me, I can find one that will.

No hive mind. Absolutely true. I still think people here should read "Lysistrata" by Aristophenes. It's highly relevent to this thread and highly funny.

Quote:

You also assume that sex is the driving force of the entire world.

Freud assumed it. I think it's one of the things he got right.

Quote:

That men will do anything to get it. Not the case either. I've refused sex for many non-sexual reasons.

Many men will. They risk their marriages, their careers and in some cases they risk jail time. In the case of autoerotic asphyxiation, they risk death. I know that's a rare kink, but it still astounds me that anyone would risk death for sex.

Quote:

I'm not the only man to claim these things either. True, some women dominate some men, but in turn, you find out those women are dominated by other men. The world is too complex to break everything down to this man vs. woman malarkey. There are too many variables.

CrinklyCrustacean
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,284

03 Sep 2009, 5:17 pm

polymathpoolplayer wrote:

It has been substantiated by authorities.

Which authorities? I've read stuff on relationships before and none of them have mentioned this point of view.

Quote:

And BTW I don't need to prove anything to refute your illogic; it's for you to prove that the way your friends think represents the majority.

No, I was proving that you were making a false generalisation. You were stating your opinion as if it applied to everybody.

Polymathpoolplayer wrote:

Yes you did, by implying your virgin friends could have some effect on such a "rebellion quashing".

It was you who mentioned a rebellion. We didn't even mention it in our posts, let alone address it.

Quote:

more so than a hermit, yes.

On what grounds? Who's to say that a man in a relationship will have a higher sex drive than a hermit?

Quote:

Again you are talking about ONE WOMAN. I am talking women in general.

If I'd said 'women' instead of 'a woman' it would have meant the same thing.

Quote:

Men are the weaker sex you better realize that now.

Quote:

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:

What's your justification?

What I observe in the world; if you open your eyes you can see it too.

Since I clearly can't, would you please enlighten me?

Last edited by CrinklyCrustacean on 03 Sep 2009, 6:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Dilbert
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,728
Location: 47°36'N 122°20'W

03 Sep 2009, 5:20 pm

Philosophy is science: organized, logical and reasonable.

Love and sex are driven by emotions and social rules which are all but logical and reasonable.

Philosophy doesn't even factor into this.

Present social rules require men to make the first move. The rule is completely arbitrary and in my opinion antiquated and ridiculous. The rule exists simply because a certain inertia to change is built into society.

If you are asking for my direct opinion, "society" is just people being stupid in large numbers. They couldn't possibly make their own mind about subject and issues, so they must do what everyone else does. This will change some day, but we won't be around to see it.

NicksQuestions
Sea Gull

Joined: 25 May 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 218

03 Sep 2009, 6:39 pm

Dilbert wrote:

Dilbert, I am just curious about what you think of the research I found on page three? Do you think it may be possible that there are some "evolutionary" reasons why men go after women, and women send the signals?

Shebakoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Sep 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,759

06 Sep 2009, 2:02 am

I've been raised to believe that a woman that makes the first move will scare a man away.

Dilbert
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,728
Location: 47°36'N 122°20'W

06 Sep 2009, 4:05 am

NicksQuestions wrote:

I clicked the link and frankly the long LONG boring text lost my interest in about 2 seconds flat. I'll read it when I get a chance. Sorry.

Quote:

I've been raised to believe that a woman that makes the first move will scare a man away.

Yeah that may have been so in the 50s! :roll:

I wish women would make the first move more. They don't though; they don't. It's only happened once to me in the past couple of years. And I asure you I'm good looking and in great shape. They check me out but never approach.

MikeH106
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 May 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

06 Sep 2009, 7:38 am

Sometimes I need to feel that a woman is interested in me before I feel comfortable initiating a relationship.

In making the first move, I'd be sweeping her off her feet and taking her to... a three-room apartment? With a cheap car, a low-paying job, $300 in my bank account, and a life story full of sickness and emotional problems? How can I have the confidence to make just any girl happy?

If women occasionally showed interest in me, it would relieve me of the burden of deciding whether to make advances toward someone I might just end up bothering.

It's been so painful. I wish I were less tortured.

_________________
Sixteen essays so far.

Like a drop of blood in a tank of flesh-eating piranhas, a new idea never fails to arouse the wrath of herd prejudice.

ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

06 Sep 2009, 7:54 am

MikeH106 wrote:

In making the first move, I'd be sweeping her off her feet and taking her to... a three-room apartment? With a cheap car, a low-paying job, $300 in my bank account, and a life story full of sickness and emotional problems? How can I have the confidence to make just any girl happy?

It could be worse... you could be living in your parents basement with no car and no job... at this point i'd say you've made quite a life for yourself...

Quote:

If women occasionally showed interest in me, it would relieve me of the burden of deciding whether to make advances toward someone I might just end up bothering.

Same deal here... I've often said that the one thing I need from a potential romantic partner is a woman that actually likes me back (okay, that was technically two things), yet even that yields no response at all...

NicksQuestions
Sea Gull

Joined: 25 May 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 218

06 Sep 2009, 11:33 am

Dilbert wrote:

NicksQuestions wrote:

I clicked the link and frankly the long LONG boring text lost my interest in about 2 seconds flat. I'll read it when I get a chance. Sorry.

Here, I'll save you the time and effort of reading it; it's 25 pages long! Basically that link is from the Social Issues Research Centre, and they take quite a bit of the scientific peer-review journal research on flirting and summarize it into layman/practical terms, particularly how to flirt. Here's a relevant paragraph for the subject of the woman doing the asking:

Quote:

Dating manuals and articles in glossy women's magazines also constantly insist that it is perfectly acceptable nowadays for women to take the initiative in asking men out. In fact, they never fail to exclaim, men love it when women take the initiative. This is quite true, and if you read the more scientific research on the subject, you will find out why. The studies and experiments show that men perceive women who take the initiative in asking a man out as more sexually available. To put it more bluntly, if a woman asks them out, they think they have a better chance of 'scoring'. Naturally, they are delighted.

On the right hand side, there's a link to a detailed report. It talks about how most of the time when women ask a guy on a date, they're not rejected. However, they're seen as more sexually available. Then I just barely found an interesting paragraph that I didn't read before:

Quote:

So, what is the answer to the Big Question? Should women ask men out or not? Leaving aside our egalitarian, feminist sensibilities, our response would be, on balance, 'Not'. Or rather, to put it slightly less bluntly: they may do so if they wish, but it is not necessary. The primeval, instinctive pattern of subtle female initiation, using ambiguous non-verbal signals to discover the male's intentions, followed by a transfer of initiative to the male at the critical point of declaring interest, has worked perfectly well for thousands of years. Whether we approve or not, the latest research findings show that not much has changed. Males still tend towards an over-optimistic interpretation of female signals, females still judiciously adjust their signals to encourage only selected males, while allowing males to think that they are making the choice. Some females (perhaps 34 percent) may occasionally attempt to take charge of the entire process, denying males the already very small element of control nature has left them, but the majority, perhaps wisely, stick to the tried-and-tested formula.

Since women who ask the men out are seen as more sexually available, women have more need to be selective (since if they get pregnant they're out for 9 months plus 18 years of care), and women do a lot of controlling by sending the body language signals anyway, I wonder if there's an evolutionary rationale reason why women typically don't do the asking? Maybe there could be more than just society norms?

NicksQuestions
Sea Gull

Joined: 25 May 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 218

06 Sep 2009, 11:44 am

MikeH106 wrote:

Sometimes I need to feel that a woman is interested in me before I feel comfortable initiating a relationship.

If women occasionally showed interest in me, it would relieve me of the burden of deciding whether to make advances toward someone I might just end up bothering.

I'm in the same boat.

That's why I'm trying to now be studious on figuring out the body language signals that they send. I've seen several places say that there have been studies finding that usually when a man asks a woman on a date, she sends him certain signals. Most of the time when she rejects, he asks when she didn't send those signals.

If I could figure it all out, I'd think my confidence in asking would go up.

Page 4 of 6 [ 82 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

Philosophically, why should men make the first move? Post Reply New Topic

Philosophically, why should men make the first move?