New Book Says Nannies Turn Boys Into Future Adulterers - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-04-2010, 07:54 PM   #46
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511
i didn't want to be known as a slut. do many hetero men worry about that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy
Good question. I wonder if any here will answer it.
Speaking objectively, I'd say it depends on age group - in one's late teens or early-to-mid twenties the male slut type is viewed as someone almost to emulate - the 'Jack-the-lad' character, as it's known here. The Casanova type that is the heterosexual male slut would certainly be envied to an extent by his peer group, at that stage. He would always have the best stories and though he would have plenty of failures his success-to-failure ratio would be something he'd happily boast about. I've know a few of these types, in the end, most of them just settle down and breed, basically.

But if someone is still pursuing that type of promiscuous behavior if they're married with kids and in their thirties or older, I think society would look down on such an individual - although, granted, not to the same extent as a gay male or straight woman who is pursuing a similar lifestyle.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 08:37 PM   #47
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 01:58 PM
Definitely the marrieds, but what about the 30+ bachelor? Is being a man-whore an image problem past the "prime" years?
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 08:54 PM   #48
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
Definitely the marrieds, but what about the 30+ bachelor? Is being a man-whore an image problem past the "prime" years?
Well, yes and no. Certain males of my acquaintance in the 30+ bracket still 'play the scene' - and for the most part do it more successfully than me, frankly - for example I have this friend who is around my age and is a bachelor like myself, but in general more successful with women, and what he does is deliberately target and hone in on women that are 'emotionally needy'. It seems a bit cynical, and it is actually incredibly cynical; but, as I said, it's a relatively successful strategy for him.

At the end of the day, and granted, this is a bit of a generalisation - but my theory is that most women want to be the love of their partners' lives, and most men want to be the exact same thing, but males play around a bit more and are granted the remit by 'society' to sow their wild oats a little bit more than women are granted such remit. Some of this is societally determined, but as Irvine was saying earlier on in the thread, maybe some of it is also innately biological.

But I'm far from an expert on any of this stuff.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 09:11 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 02:58 PM
For me it was always a normal thing that both men and women had a number of relationships before finding the one to settle with. It was the exception that it was the first or second love.

My father was pretty much the opposite of me when it comes to that. He had quite a number of relationships. But my mother also had maybe five or so. That was pretty much the norm, and still is for most people I know. But I wouldn't know of anyone ever making some comment on that.

But I think, and am not alone on that, that there is basically two types of people: the head type and the heart type. The head type is friends who can go to the disco, talk up a guy or girl and have a short-term thing with them without getting "lost" in that, ie. when it breaks up after a few days they don't really suffer much. But for them it's also harder to get a long-term relationship.
Then there is the heart-type people, like me or a good friend of mine, for whom a relationship means much more "investment" of the heart. So it usually also needs longer to build That often makes it harder to start a relationship (especially when shyness gets in the mix), but those are more long-term and well, not more honest I'd say, but deeper emotionally. If that doesn't work out, either right from the beginning or at a later point, they suffer from lovesickness more strongly.
And of course there is everything in between.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 09:15 PM   #50
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
but in general more successful with women, and what he does is deliberately target and hone in on women that are 'emotionally needy'. It seems a bit cynical, and it is actually incredibly cynical; but, as I said, it's a relatively successful strategy for him.
By "successful" you mean gets lucky, yes? I guess that answers the original question. Apparently not an image problem for men.

What do the ladies here think?

I'm no expert either, but I will reiterate that I view the biology excuse as exactly that, an excuse.

But for fun, generally speaking, if men can't be monogamous and woman are serially monogamous and divorce rates are 50%+ or whatever it is (demanded by women usually based on bad behaviour by men), what does that mean for our current model of monogamy? Is there a happy medium?

And where does it leave this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
but my theory is that most women want to be the love of their partners' lives, and most men want to be the exact same thing,
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 12:43 AM   #51
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
what does that mean for our current model of monogamy?

i think this is an interesting question. what good is monogamy? traditionally, monogamy was likely enforced -- sometimes with the threat of death -- in order to prevent the birth of illegitimate children, and to reduce the possibility that a man might be raising another man's child. as well as a form of enforcing the notion of ownership of a female.

we've largely done away with all that now. sure, there are notions of ownership, for both partners, but it's nothing legal, at least in a bodily sense, and contraception has removed the unintended pregnancy risk to, what, 1%? less?

so why then is monogamy important, if we've reduced it's most drastic consequences?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 09:21 AM   #52
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,333
Local Time: 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliEnvy View Post
Definitely the marrieds, but what about the 30+ bachelor? Is being a man-whore an image problem past the "prime" years?
YouTube - Old guy in the club
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 01:05 PM   #53
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 08:58 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
I asked for opinions-but it's really not necessary for me to "take on board" anything in FYM. Unless you're actually trying to insinuate that I don't think women cheat? Not by a long shot, and I said so in the beginning. So you use that quote and refer to the "threadstarter" for whatever reason. And I said the theory of the book is a joke to me-so I don't get the point of you quoting the second quote there.

You seem to have a habit of making these leaps- but anyway
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen 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 08:58 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