New Book Says Nannies Turn Boys Into Future Adulterers - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-31-2010, 10:32 AM   #16
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
Sex addiction exists I suppose but it seems like an easy excuse for some people.


due to my job, i actually know something about this. and like most addictions, sex addiction isn't a problem until it becomes a problem. like, when you can't function, or when it measurably detracts from the quality of your life and facilitates the destruction of relationships, it's a problem. i suppose it gets cloudy when you have someone who might not actually care about said relationship. perhaps that's more douchbaggery than sex addiction.

however, it does exist, and it's much more of a problem for the janitor in Oklahoma who spends 6 hours a night online masturbating and spends $10,000 a month on pornography, phone sex lines, and strip clubs, and their life is going down the drain just as assuredly as if he were an alcoholic. Jessie James can afford super-fancy rehab and will always have the money to get himself out of trouble.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 10:47 AM   #17
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
but why do you think that most men seem to be able to bounce from partner to partner without nary a thought, whereas this doesn't appear to be the case for women?
I think both those scenarios are culturally engrained myths in the same tradition as the virgin/whore mentality - which we teach to our sons as much as our daughters, btw.

Quote:
Yet, as many women know only too well, men are quite capable of remaining emotionally detached within a relationship but simultaneously loyal and sexually faithful.
And vice versa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
and does the above mean anything in that it *isn't* a male biological imperative? that it might also be for women doesn't mean that many men really do have impulses to have sex as much as possible.
Quote:
To suggest that men somehow feel genetically or hormonally compelled to have sex with as many partners as possible is as absurd as arguing that women are biologically destined to do the cooking and cleaning.
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 10:50 AM   #18
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,327
Local Time: 03:25 AM
i had a girlfriend for over a year who cheated on me. my best friend packed up his life, gave us his career and moved to maine to be with his college girlfriend, only to find out 3 months later that she was schtooping some other dude. this is not a quality that is inherent in males and not females...

we're all animals. this same type of behavior is common in the animal kingdom. it's our ability to reason that makes us not want to do it, but i believe it is a natrual thing for both men and women. just seems more prevelant in the alpha male because, well, they're more obnoxious about it.


i fully agree with the statement that if you're really unhappy with the relationship and want to move on then just do so. that's where our ability to reason comes on... "hey, maybe this isn't such a great idea!"

some people just can't figure that part out.



as for jesse james... something about this whole sandra bullock thing doesn't seem right...

the guy is apparently facsinated with nazi-ism, and you're telling me in 5 years of being married she never even caught a whif?

bullok lived in germany until she was 12. she's fluent in german. and now her husband appears to have a thing for nazi's.

that's just a coinkydink? really?

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:09 PM   #19
War Child
 
ShipOfFools's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 814
Local Time: 04:25 AM
That's funny, I had nannies and I can't seem to find even one good woman, much less several. I'd like to know where all my multiple girlfriends are?
__________________
ShipOfFools is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:14 PM   #20
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 03:25 AM
the only thing i'll add, however, is that though it might seem to make sense that a woman would want to have sex with as many powerful men as possible to ensure that her baby is, likewise, powerful, from an evolutionary perspective, the need to "keep" someone around to help provide for the baby likely overrides this suggested impulse.

i've heard it said -- from my friends who have babies -- that newborns most resemble their fathers, and it's suggested that this is an evolutionary adaptation because if the newborn looks like the father, he recognizes the baby as his own, and therefore won't kill the baby because it's a baby by another man.

so, looking at it that way, it does seem as if there are more biological incentives for a woman to value monogamy more than a man might.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:21 PM   #21
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
i fully agree with the statement that if you're really unhappy with the relationship and want to move on then just do so. that's where our ability to reason comes on... "hey, maybe this isn't such a great idea!"

some people just can't figure that part out.
But if monogamy is unnatural, does that mean every impulse a man has to sleep with someone else (when followed through) implies that he's unhappy in his relationship?

A friend of mine in university days was a (seemingly) insensitive playa. When he eventually met the one and got married, I was quite sure he wasn't capable of long-term monogamy. And there were clues to that along the way.

Before turning 30, she'd developed a rare and deadly form of cancer that needed radical surgery and treatment over an 8 week period in another city. Of course regular life went on hold and he was there with her for every minute. Various friends and close family made short visits but for the most part, he was on his own to take care of her and deal with his own experience.

This was in the days just before blogging and for his own sanity and to update loved ones who couldn't be there, he'd send a daily journal-type email to a bunch of us.

I can hardly describe what it was like to take that journey with him. It was harrowing in the horrific detail of what radical cancer treatment can be like up close. But more than that, it was a rare and intimate glimpse into the depth and strength of his unwavering loyalty, commitment and love for his partner, and when it really mattered most, had her back.

She recovered.

She ending up leaving him.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:42 PM   #22
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
But if monogamy is unnatural, does that mean every impulse a man has to sleep with someone else (when followed through) implies that he's unhappy in his relationship?

no, i think it means that, if monogamy is unnatural, he might be momentarily unhappy that he cannot have sex with many other people, but he's made the rational decision that choosing to remain monogamous will increase his overall happiness because he values his relationship. he understands that sexuality is but one component of a relationship.

i also agree that many men can be perfectly happy in their relationships but simply want to have sex with other people. it can be entirely independent of their partner. however, it's the choice to cheat that may represent problems in the relationship because he's clearly putting his momentary pleasure above their mutual trust in one another.

however, what do we think about the idea -- the anecdotally French idea -- that men often do have women on the side, and that this might actually help a long-term relationship? that if the extramarital sex is understood as being sex-for-sex, and nothing else, that a man having an outlet -- possibly a don't-ask-don't-tell kind of thing -- actually helps him remain committed to the marriage.

just food for thought.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 12:55 PM   #23
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,327
Local Time: 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
But if monogamy is unnatural, does that mean every impulse a man has to sleep with someone else (when followed through) implies that he's unhappy in his relationship?
i believe the problem that many make is that they directly tie relationships with sex.

i'm very happily in a relationship right now. it doesn't mean that i don't have urges. that i don't turn and look when someone attractive walks by. i just don't act on those urges because it would ruin the relationship, and that's a hell of a lot more important thatn a quick lay.

we all have these same sexual urges for someone else... as if nobody here who's married or in a happy relationship hasn't oogled over some celebrity or sports figure who's just so dreamy... some of us just have the ability to not act upon those urges better than others.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 01:09 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache-in-a-suitcase
i had a girlfriend for over a year who cheated on me. my best friend packed up his life, gave us his career and moved to maine to be with his college girlfriend, only to find out 3 months later that she was schtooping some other dude. this is not a quality that is inherent in males and not females...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ship of Fools
That's funny, I had nannies and I can't seem to find even one good woman, much less several. I'd like to know where all my multiple girlfriends are?
I am not convinced the threadstarter is taking on board the different perspectives being offered.

But anyway:

Quote:
Many studies have convincingly documented the point that men
are far more susceptible than women to severe and intractable loveshyness.
For example, in a 1983 study which incorporated a large sample
of university students, sociologists David Knox and Kenneth Wilson
obtained strong support for the view that love-shyness is primarily a
male problem. Fully 20 percent of the male students surveyed complained
of painful feelings of shyness vis-a-vis the opposite sex in informal
social situations. Less than 5 percent of the women students had a
similar complaint. And very few of this small minority of women students
suffered emotionally from their shyness vis-a-vis the opposite sex
to the debilitating extent to which the male love-shys suffered from their
shyness.

A seldom mentioned factor which I believe serves to increase the
shyness (and diminish the self-confidence) of young men as compared
to that of young women is the fact that women do the lion's share of the
rejecting in male/female relationships. Within marriage, 90 percent of
all divorces are sought by wives and not by husbands. And among
courting couples at least two-thirds of all of the break-ups which occur
are precipitated by the female partner, not by the male partner. In a wellknown 1976 study by sociologists Charles Hill, Letitia Peplau, and Zick
Rubin, most of the terminated "steady dating" relationships had been
terminated by the girl, not by the boy.

Even normally self-confident men have been found to suffer far
more than women when courtship relationships are terminated. Yet
most young men are forced to suffer far more such relationship breakups
than women. Such broken relationships very often take a severe
emotional toll upon many of the men who suffer them. It is often forgotten
that males are human beings with feelings too, every bit as much
as females. Yet the relationship terminations which men are forced to
endure often create large-scale and often dangerous emotional upheavals;
and some victims of such persistent rejection eventually become so
emotionally scarred and calloused that they become incapable of expressing
their feelings, even to themselves. Women often complain that men
cannot express their feelings in a meaningful way; yet the steady stream
of rejections which some men suffer at the hands of women often creates
a trained incapacity for the expression of inner feelings.
It is also important to note that even normally adjusted young men
experience significantly fewer serious man/woman relationships before
marriage than (even very average) young women do. And I think this
too bespeaks some of the serious shortcomings in contemporary courtship
norms. Human beings do not like to be rejected. It can be extremely
painful when a person is rejected by an opposite-sexed stranger upon
asking for a date. And it can be profoundly devastating to the emotions
when a man is rejected by a woman with whom he has maintained a
relationship over several months or longer. Why does the American
culture persist in requiring the male (not the female) to withstand the
lion's share of such emotional devastation?! I would suggest that the
severe emotional scars endemic in severe and intractable love-shyness
very often reflect a history of such rejection. In essence, the risk-taking
involved in starting new relationships must be shared equally by women
and men alike.
Source: Love-shy.com: Support for the dating-challenged - Dr. Gilmartin's book
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 01:10 PM   #25
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
... some of us just have the ability to not act upon those urges better than others.
If the general stats are correct, about 2 in 10 men have that ability.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 01:52 PM   #26
War Child
 
ShipOfFools's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 814
Local Time: 04:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I am not convinced the threadstarter is taking on board the different perspectives being offered.

But anyway:



Source: Love-shy.com: Support for the dating-challenged - Dr. Gilmartin's book
I wouldn't quote that link if I were you. I've visited the love-shy.com forums before, and there are some crazy mofos over there. I mean, literally insane, psycho, loony, crazy people.

They seem to think that, just because they're men, they're entitled to a woman. And they say horrible things about women who join the site (you can't be love-shy! You're a woman, so therefore you can get sex whenever you want!), advocate rape and murder, and glorify people like that gym shooter who shot a bunch of women because he wasn't getting any (they considered him somewhat of a hero.)

I'm not denying that the condition exists, because I believe I have it. But I also believe that women can also be love shy, which is something that Gilmartin neglected to mention in his book. I've known several women who fit the profile, as well as many other guys.
__________________
ShipOfFools is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 02:00 PM   #27
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
however, what do we think about the idea -- the anecdotally French idea -- that men often do have women on the side, and that this might actually help a long-term relationship? that if the extramarital sex is understood as being sex-for-sex, and nothing else, that a man having an outlet -- possibly a don't-ask-don't-tell kind of thing -- actually helps him remain committed to the marriage.
Do French wives do that too?
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 02:00 PM   #28
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,327
Local Time: 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
If the general stats are correct, about 2 in 10 men have that ability.
i know more women that have cheated then i do men.

does this mean anything? absolutely not. neither does that "general stat"
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 02:09 PM   #29
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
But anyway:
That was interesting.

My parents were among the first big divorce wave in the 70s. Many of their broad social circle ended up separating in a small time frame. From what I recall, it was mostly the wives that initiated.

In the spring after 9/11, many many couples in my broad social circle ended up separating or divorced, virtually all initiated by the women.

Perhaps it's a female version of polygamy.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2010, 03:05 PM   #30
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
Do French wives do that too?


no idea.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com