Let's Process Our Feelings II

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

I see orion’s behavior and mindset as self-defeating. And again, I have a problem with the hypocrisy. You guys ARE the carousel . And that bothers me for all the girls and women who ride it thinking you’re a prospective mate, but who are instead one step closer to being the women you disdain (using “you” generally here, not you specifically). I have to put these girls and women back together! They’re hurt. It hurts me.
[/quote]

This is very true, but we did NOT build it .

It is an emergent structure built by female choices as long as they have the upper hand.

You are either a cog in the carousel or you are not participating at all.

�??�?�¢?�??�?�¦�??�?�¢?�??�?�¦.

Plus, I always say the same thing, I am a man, it is my job to bed you.

You are a woman, it is your job to get me into a relationship.

If they still cant do that at 30+, whose fault is that?

Mine?

I worked hard to be able to get laid, that did not come easy at all, but they wont put in the effort to learn how to be pleasant and worthy of committment?

Yeah, because in their teens and twenties having a vagina was enough and they believe that it is their God given right for it to always stay that way…

Well, fuck them then, neh?[/quote]

Neh!

You DID build it, because women still ride whatever men create. Women did NOT decide that their value was in their sexuality, men told them this. But let’s forget about that for a moment and instead look at it this way: most young women today lack the protections they historically had, and are floundering because there are no clear roles and mores - just as the young men are floundering. Do any of them deserve to be punished for being clueless?

I continue to disagree that it’s a woman’s job to get you into a relationship. That’s dumb. You now demand that women manipulate you? Plus, I’ve never initiated a relationship. I wouldn’t even know how to. I thought it was men’s job to push for all the things - kissing, sex, exclusivity, and then whatever the next step is.

I will agree wholeheartedly that people should make the effort to be pleasant and worthy of commitment, and I think they should remain that way once the commitment is made. Both men and women should maintain the level of respect and consideration they displayed when dating, while adding in the joys of shared jokes and favorite meals and all the other good things that come with familiarity. I just can’t see any good reason to be an asshole, in the beginning or later on. What profit?

Why shouldn’t everyone do these things, since everyone wants the same ideal?

Okay, pulling out everything but your last response to unbotch the quotes…

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

I don’t rack those numbers anymore. I am mainly focused on my career at this point. I’m in a relationship at the moment. But when I’m not, it’s not like I need a calendar or spreadsheet to keep track of da bitches (like I used to). Also, I don’t discuss my sexual history or allude to it.

My “moral code” is not that of a “player”. I don’t lie and I don’t lead anyone on. I set a high standard for who I choose to spend my time with. As I get older, I realize that my most valuable commodity is TIME, so I don’t like to waste it. And as I alluded to above, I’m really not very promiscuous anymore, preferring quality over quantity these days. I don’t view relationships as a game. I DO have an impressive set of social tools at my disposal, and I “see the matrix” of attraction/courtship better than most, but that’s not something I can control… I mean if there are three good looking women in the room and two of them are giving me good body language and the third one isn’t, OF COURSE I’m going to approach the third one! LOL I mean, I KNOW that it will just increase the attraction in the other two and that’s just plain good strategy. Plus I have a pretty good chance of attracting the third one and it’s more of a challenge. But that’s dealing with strangers with no emotional investment… For all I know they could all be crazy. Until I’ve screened them, why shouldn’t I increase my chances of tipping the interaction in my favor?

As for my criminal history, it really doesn’t impact me much anymore. It’s been 20 years and I’m very successful now. In fact, it’s kind of like a good “war story” these days.

Also, I differ from Orion in my standard of what constitutes “the carousel”. I’m not particularly fixated on any specific “number”. I can pretty much tell if a girl has had a metric shit ton of dicks up in her which is not what I’m looking for, but neither do I disqualify her if she’s had more than two boyfriends. Know what I mean? I think if I judge her character and actions to be in alignment with what I want, then I tend to give the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise I WOULD be a hypocrite.
You speak of happiness and pleasure and I find both of those things to be temporary. The “state” that I seek is “durable fulfillment”. I know that if I follow MY path and meet the goals in Life that I’ve set for myself, I’ll continue to maintain that state. Happiness and pleasure are simply byproducts of a well-lived life. And I’m living pretty well these days.

[/quote]I recognize and have acknowledged, in the above posts and at other times, that you’re not playing the way orion is any longer, if ever. It’s difficult to respond without lumping you together with orion and the embittered PUA set in general because your first post above has you identifying with the mindset and saying “orion and I.” I see big differences.

I think your “durable fulfillment” is what I’m calling happiness. Pleasure is fleeting and can be from something major (the birth of a child) or from an icy cold beer. It’s a good thing, but it’s not “a life well lived.” Happiness to me is a combination of satisfaction, security, self-regard, and pleasure. I might do better to say contentment, since happiness suggests gaiety and life doesn’t allow for that in any consistent way.[quote]

Everyone is at where they’re at. I don’t know Orion well enough to make any kind of judgements about the way he approaches his relationships or to comment on if his approach is “right”. He’s a grown man and it works for him. He does sometimes communicate some anger and bitterness, but I’ve also done the same. I DO know that he has a VERY good understanding of the true nature of MOST women and MOST relationships. And I share in his assessment/apathy of the current state of affairs in the “battle of the sexes” (if I can generically use that term).

You identify with their victim mentality, even though you’ve worked past yours. How is it MY fault that women are attracted to tall, dark, handsome, well-built, successful, intelligent, witty, well-hung men with a sense of adventure and broad range of experience who has the ability to trigger positive emotions in them AND who doesn’t lie? If I were a chick I’D fuck me! Also, I believe I’ve EARNED (well, earned everything but the well-hung - that’s just lucky) every single attribute I listed with hard work, blood sweat and some tears, so cry me a river about them being “hurt” because they made bad decisions or assumptions and fell in love with someone who told them from the beginning he was unavailable for a long term commitment.

[/quote]I haven’t worked past a victim mentality - I don’t think I’ve ever had one. Victim of what? Men? I have no beef with them. I’ve read both feminist and anti-feminist writings as well as evolutionary biology and psychology and current mainstream conservative stuff and I enjoy thinking about it. When I think about victim vs not victim I tend to feel lucky that I have the attributes I have and would probably thrive no matter the social system. I don’t think about oppression, since I am the beneficiary of both the feminist system and the patriarchal one.

Thinking about women crying a river because they fell in love with men who said right up front, etc. . . I don’t think all men using PUA technique are this honest, do you? (And I WAS careful to note that I was using “you” in the general sense. I respect your sense of honesty and always have.)

BUT I also think - well, we KNOW - that PUA technique is designed to push buttons that suggest both safety and excitement to women lacking discernment. And I suppose by “discernment” I probably mean caution, since I think I would be vulnerable to PUA stuff despite my strong social skills and awareness of attraction, etc, on an intellectual level. It’s only fear and needing time to go home and overthink things that’s kept me out of the clutches of player types. So while there may be honesty, there is also a subtle suggestion that prince charming has arrived.

What would you think of me if I used my body, intellect, and superior social skills to game men I don’t care about into doing things for me? And then said “cry me a river” if they thought there would be something more? They’ve offered. (It’s weird.) I’ve said no because a guy helping me with my car or house suggests a debt to me. On the other hand, I’m happy to have help from a boyfriend because I’m happy to pay my debts within that context.[quote]

If you ever make it to DC, we’ll put your wing man skillz to the test! LOL[/quote]

Ha, I’m better behind the scenes! Although when I gave pickup line advice to a patient Tuesday we both wound up doubled over with laughter.

I do pass on some of the PUA stuff. It has value. But not as the guiding philosophy of a 40-year-old man who wants a decent women to bear him his children.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
And again, I have a problem with the hypocrisy. You guys ARE the carousel. And that bothers me for all the girls and women who ride it thinking you’re a prospective mate, but who are instead one step closer to being the women you disdain.[/quote]
This part made me chuckle; I had never really thought of it like that.

Are they hypocrites though? Think of Slugworth from Willie Wonka. He wants the kids to turn him down and do the right thing. He is the temptation, but he shows disdain for those who fall for him. It’s not quite hypocrisy I don’t think. You can be the carousel and not want people to ride you. In a perfect world you wouldn’t have to exist in that capacity right?[/quote]

Hypocrites do what they judge others harshly for doing, no?

In this case they add the temptation element, which makes the hypocrisy that much more unsavory in my opinion, but if you think that’s simply a way to search for that one special girl who’ll give the everlasting gobstopper back, well, okay.

But on the other hand, Slugworth isn’t gaining anything from the kids he tempts. It’s purely a test.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
And again, I have a problem with the hypocrisy. You guys ARE the carousel. And that bothers me for all the girls and women who ride it thinking you’re a prospective mate, but who are instead one step closer to being the women you disdain.[/quote]
This part made me chuckle; I had never really thought of it like that.

Are they hypocrites though? Think of Slugworth from Willie Wonka. He wants the kids to turn him down and do the right thing. He is the temptation, but he shows disdain for those who fall for him. It’s not quite hypocrisy I don’t think. You can be the carousel and not want people to ride you. In a perfect world you wouldn’t have to exist in that capacity right?[/quote]

Hypocrites do what they judge others harshly for doing, no?
[/quote]
Right, but they do not simultaneously exist as the carousel and its riders. Of course that only makes sense if you apply a double standard which you could in turn define as hypocrisy itself. But the idea is a yin and yang in which women are supposed to be the ones who withhold sex.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
You DID build it, because women still ride whatever men create. Women did NOT decide that their value was in their sexuality, men told them this. But let’s forget about that for a moment and instead look at it this way: most young women today lack the protections they historically had, and are floundering because there are no clear roles and mores - just as the young men are floundering. Do any of them deserve to be punished for being clueless?[/quote]

This doesn’t sound like you…

You must know as well as anyone that men couldn’t mind control half the race into believing something. Women’s sexual value is determined by nature as it only ever could be; that’s what makes you more valuable than us. And lack protections? What do you mean? They have ALL the protections ever!

They have more protection than they even know what to do with! That’s probably part of the issue. They say modern feminism is the mother of all first world problems. And yes they deserve whatever “punishment” befalls them. Ignorance won’t protect the rest of us from anything else; they may as well get used to it. The ones with actual moral fiber won’t have to worry about the fallout of such things anyhow, so to hell with the rest.

[quote]SmilingPolitely wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

Where might we find those provocative photos? :-)[/quote]

Alas, good friend, they were lost in the great SAMA conflagration of 2012.

And let us now bow our heads in silent reflection.[/quote]

:frowning:

Sniff…

:((

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:
Eh, you guys shouldn’t worry about sexual pasts.
[/quote]

That very much depends on what you are looking for.

You cant turn a ho into a housewife.[/quote]

It’s usually what happens actually. Hoes become housewives. Especially college educated ones.

I’d say many of us go through it in different ways and for different periods of time. How many housewives were sorority party girls for a couple years of their lives for example? How many have gone to a spring break party scene and had sex with someone they just met? How many have had a one night stand? How many have had a fuck buddy or NSA friend?

Women are generally deceptive about how many partners they have had, I’m only scratching the surface. For every skanky dude out there, there’s his match. We just keep playing with ourselves pretending like the women we sleep with are this and that. And they play into it to ease our insecurities and to protect their reputations.

I think most women out there knock off a couple men from their list… It’s cultural in part, we don’t want to have a hoe wife… And they don’t want to be a hoe wife… People change.

There are examples of people who only have a few partners, but as we see they are every bit as fucked up as people who have many. Sometimes people become addicted to having relationships and are incapable of developing as individuals outside of some relationship. Some of these women may only have a few partners ever, but they go back and forth, cheat and are very bit hoes as women who have many partners. Whose more of a hoe? The one who stays with the dude who treats her like shit and lets him bang her, or the one who is brave and gets out of that relationship, finds a guy who treats her well and ends up with another partner?

Just saying. There’s a lot of bullshit attached to how many partners people have had. Which is why I don’t really think it’s all that important so long as a person is able to adapt and change. I’d rather deal with a woman whose liberated and has had some partners than a woman who has developed only around her partners and doesn’t truly have a sense of herself as an independent entity.

The whole ownership thing is a weird construct imo as well when we say we belong to this and that person.

We REALLY don’t like the idea that women cheat or have had lots of partners, and women don’t want us to think they do. Put those two facts together and tell me what you come up with haha.

When it comes to a womans preference, yeah they say they want a guy who has only had a few partners, but they also want a guy who is good in the sack, rich, generous, clairvoyant, able to read minds, masculine, well hung and all these other things that usually only come about from having relationship wisdom, which usually comes from having some partners and some relationships.

Also in the end it’s mostly our fault. We shape the world to a large degree as men. A lot of us have this idea about female virgins, pristine vaginas, and all that as an ideal…

Do you think women look at men virgins as ideals? Lol?

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
You DID build it, because women still ride whatever men create. Women did NOT decide that their value was in their sexuality, men told them this. But let’s forget about that for a moment and instead look at it this way: most young women today lack the protections they historically had, and are floundering because there are no clear roles and mores - just as the young men are floundering. Do any of them deserve to be punished for being clueless?[/quote]

This doesn’t sound like you…

You must know as well as anyone that men couldn’t mind control half the race into believing something. Women’s sexual value is determined by nature as it only ever could be; that’s what makes you more valuable than us. And lack protections? What do you mean? They have ALL the protections ever!

They have more protection than they even know what to do with! That’s probably part of the issue. They say modern feminism is the mother of all first world problems. And yes they deserve whatever “punishment” befalls them. Ignorance won’t protect the rest of us from anything else; they may as well get used to it. The ones with actual moral fiber won’t have to worry about the fallout of such things anyhow, so to hell with the rest.[/quote]

Sorry, I’ve been confusing. I’m talking more about individuals here than at the societal level past that first line. Emily Q translated: generally if I use the terms “girls/boys” or “young women/men” I’m in a much more sympathetic place and talking about individual vs cultural functioning. But I did start the paragraph with an historic/cultural statement. It was late!

The historic protections I’m talking about are families and communities who made those decisions to a large extent. Only very recently, historically, have girls and boys had to manage this dance without a half-dozen “helpers.” Because of the fracturing of families and communities and the impersonal nature of large public schools, many young women don’t even have anyone to talk to about these things. I swear that when I worked solely with kids a third of my job could have been described as cock blocking. “And then he pushed my head down and I didn’t know what to do.”

(Now of course I work with adults and some of the men can’t get it figured out, so I’ve added wingmanning to my list of important duties.)

Anyway, men have historically controlled the media, etc, and it shows ideal women as highly sexual innocents. Men have determined the value by fighting over it, just as they have land and precious minerals. But that was a long time ago and not worth fighting about now.

When I say “don’t deserve to be punished” I’m including men with women. Currently all of the roles are confused. I’m telling you because I KNOW that girls and women are confused, too. I’m twisted up in knots over Hockey’s desire to pay for everything because I don’t know if allowing it will make me a millstone or whether my attempts to maintain parity make me a pain in the ass. I have to assume he questions what to do, too. And we’re not young and having to figure every single other thing in life out at the same time.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
And again, I have a problem with the hypocrisy. You guys ARE the carousel. And that bothers me for all the girls and women who ride it thinking you’re a prospective mate, but who are instead one step closer to being the women you disdain.[/quote]
This part made me chuckle; I had never really thought of it like that.

Are they hypocrites though? Think of Slugworth from Willie Wonka. He wants the kids to turn him down and do the right thing. He is the temptation, but he shows disdain for those who fall for him. It’s not quite hypocrisy I don’t think. You can be the carousel and not want people to ride you. In a perfect world you wouldn’t have to exist in that capacity right?[/quote]

Hypocrites do what they judge others harshly for doing, no?
[/quote]
Right, but they do not simultaneously exist as the carousel and its riders. Of course that only makes sense if you apply a double standard which you could in turn define as hypocrisy itself. But the idea is a yin and yang in which women are supposed to be the ones who withhold sex.[/quote]

I wouldn’t think of all men as “the carousel.” Carousels go nowhere. I think it’s fair to say to someone who hones his skills as a pickup artist who scores women solely for sex and challenge that he is part of the problem he decries.

I could be ENTIRELY mistaken, but I don’t think Hockey would pick women up for sex alone.

Do you go out looking to score, csulli?

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
And again, I have a problem with the hypocrisy. You guys ARE the carousel. And that bothers me for all the girls and women who ride it thinking you’re a prospective mate, but who are instead one step closer to being the women you disdain.[/quote]
This part made me chuckle; I had never really thought of it like that.

Are they hypocrites though? Think of Slugworth from Willie Wonka. He wants the kids to turn him down and do the right thing. He is the temptation, but he shows disdain for those who fall for him. It’s not quite hypocrisy I don’t think. You can be the carousel and not want people to ride you. In a perfect world you wouldn’t have to exist in that capacity right?[/quote]

Hypocrites do what they judge others harshly for doing, no?
[/quote]
Right, but they do not simultaneously exist as the carousel and its riders. Of course that only makes sense if you apply a double standard which you could in turn define as hypocrisy itself. But the idea is a yin and yang in which women are supposed to be the ones who withhold sex.[/quote]

I wouldn’t think of all men as “the carousel.” Carousels go nowhere. I think it’s fair to say to someone who hones his skills as a pickup artist who scores women solely for sex and challenge that he is part of the problem he decries.

I could be ENTIRELY mistaken, but I don’t think Hockey would pick women up for sex alone.

Do you go out looking to score, csulli? [/quote]
No I’m lame lol. I’ve had very few different sexual partners and the vast majority of my romantic life has been tied up in a small number of very long term relationships. Probably kinda like you.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
The historic protections I’m talking about are families and communities who made those decisions to a large extent. Only very recently, historically, have girls and boys had to manage this dance without a half-dozen “helpers.” Because of the fracturing of families and communities and the impersonal nature of large public schools, many young women don’t even have anyone to talk to about these things. I swear that when I worked solely with kids a third of my job could have been described as cock blocking. “And then he pushed my head down and I didn’t know what to do.”
[/quote]
Well that totally makes sense. Family/community structure is much lessened in favor of a massively larger shallow pool of acquaintances. I think you’re right on the money that this hurts both girls’ and boys’ ability to engage in the whole relationship field in a more ideal manner.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Anyway, men have historically controlled the media, etc, and it shows ideal women as highly sexual innocents. Men have determined the value by fighting over it, just as they have land and precious minerals.
[/quote]
Ah, but see men did none of this. It is tempting to claim that we have such power, but I don’t think us men should be so pretentious. Men fight over things that have inherent value. As much as we love fighting, we don’t arbitrarily pick things to fight over so that we may assign a value to them. That’s putting the cart before the horse.

Nature instilled the deepest, most innate of drives inside of us that tells us women’s sexuality is a valuable thing. And it is. That is what creates new life, and it requires an exceptionally large time, energy, and defense investment to do so. If there weren’t a genetic prime directive for this, we definitely wouldn’t bother lol.

The media isn’t just controlled by men either. I know I don’t have to explain to you how men are portrayed by female targeted media. Do you know how actually damaging it is to give girls these Disney-esque fantasy romances? A lot of girls actually do start out with insanely unrealistic expectations. Just as insane as the 16 year old boy who wants his girlfriend to be his personal porn star.

And even if you do want to say that the media is controlled by men and projects this message of “highly sexual innocents” as what is desirable to men. Well you know what? It kinda is what’s desirable to men. Sorry. Far be it from me to stop anyone from being a fat whore though if that’s what they want.

Because hey, anyone who allows the media to tell them how to live their life is a pathetically weak-willed schmuck anyway. And there your problem goes back to family and community. Obviously these girls don’t have someone to instill strong enough values and self confidence in them to withstand what fucking Miley Cyrus does.

I’m still trying to figure out the point of the Carousel analogy… It has a lot of parts, and seems irrational when I break my own understanding of it down.

It has to do with how long a woman plays and games before she gets married and settles down…

It has to do with how many partners she’s had…

It also seems to have to do with how much wear and tear she has down there, which is sort of relative in that all women are a little different, and this cant really be determined by how many partners she’s had (Necessarily) nor how long she’s played the game. She might have zero partners and play with really large toys? Or maybe she had two partners, one hung like a donkey.

The aspect of the wear and tear puts a lot of irrational fear into men. Like, she’s more experienced and she didn’t learn that from me, am I the biggest she’s had, am I satisfying/ how could I satisfy such a woman, etc…

The Carousel analogy seems flawed in that it doesn’t directly address the biggest insecurity.

I don’t know why we don’t just talk about these things plainly…

I’ll say it, Penis size, loose vagina… There… Talk about it.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
The historic protections I’m talking about are families and communities who made those decisions to a large extent. Only very recently, historically, have girls and boys had to manage this dance without a half-dozen “helpers.” Because of the fracturing of families and communities and the impersonal nature of large public schools, many young women don’t even have anyone to talk to about these things. I swear that when I worked solely with kids a third of my job could have been described as cock blocking. “And then he pushed my head down and I didn’t know what to do.”
[/quote]
Well that totally makes sense. Family/community structure is much lessened in favor of a massively larger shallow pool of acquaintances. I think you’re right on the money that this hurts both girls’ and boys’ ability to engage in the whole relationship field in a more ideal manner.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Anyway, men have historically controlled the media, etc, and it shows ideal women as highly sexual innocents. Men have determined the value by fighting over it, just as they have land and precious minerals.
[/quote]
Ah, but see men did none of this. It is tempting to claim that we have such power, but I don’t think us men should be so pretentious. Men fight over things that have inherent value. As much as we love fighting, we don’t arbitrarily pick things to fight over so that we may assign a value to them. That’s putting the cart before the horse.

Nature instilled the deepest, most innate of drives inside of us that tells us women’s sexuality is a valuable thing. And it is. That is what creates new life, and it requires an exceptionally large time, energy, and defense investment to do so. If there weren’t a genetic prime directive for this, we definitely wouldn’t bother lol.

The media isn’t just controlled by men either. I know I don’t have to explain to you how men are portrayed by female targeted media. Do you know how actually damaging it is to give girls these Disney-esque fantasy romances? A lot of girls actually do start out with insanely unrealistic expectations. Just as insane as the 16 year old boy who wants his girlfriend to be his personal porn star.

And even if you do want to say that the media is controlled by men and projects this message of “highly sexual innocents” as what is desirable to men. Well you know what? It kinda is what’s desirable to men. Sorry. Far be it from me to stop anyone from being a fat whore though if that’s what they want.

Because hey, anyone who allows the media to tell them how to live their life is a pathetically weak-willed schmuck anyway. And there your problem goes back to family and community. Obviously these girls don’t have someone to instill strong enough values and self confidence in them to withstand what fucking Miley Cyrus does.[/quote]

I can’t find a single thing to disagree with here. So let me merely point out that women didn’t set it all up either. I can tell you, speaking as maybe a 7 on a good day, that male pursuit can be overwhelming. Am I glad that I’ve been lucky enough to live my life as an attractive (to the degree I am) woman? Yes, absolutely. But I’m not purposely wielding this power. In fact, I generally don’t feel in control of very much at all, sex and relationship-wise. I mostly feel confused and intimidated, as every reader of this thread knows by now.

Wear and tear, seriously?

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I’m still trying to figure out the point of the Carousel analogy… It has a lot of parts, and seems irrational when I break my own understanding of it down.

It has to do with how long a woman plays and games before she gets married and settles down…

It has to do with how many partners she’s had…

It also seems to have to do with how much wear and tear she has down there, which is sort of relative in that all women are a little different, and this cant really be determined by how many partners she’s had (Necessarily) nor how long she’s played the game. She might have zero partners and play with really large toys? Or maybe she had two partners, one hung like a donkey.

The aspect of the wear and tear puts a lot of irrational fear into men. Like, she’s more experienced and she didn’t learn that from me, am I the biggest she’s had, am I satisfying/ how could I satisfy such a woman, etc…

The Carousel analogy seems flawed in that it doesn’t directly address the biggest insecurity.

I don’t know why we don’t just talk about these things plainly…

I’ll say it, Penis size, loose vagina… There… Talk about it.

[/quote]
This had honestly never occurred to me as a worry…

The physical “wear and tear” is like dead last on the list of issues if it’s even on the list at all (I had never even thought of it before you said something…). The aversion to women who’ve “ridden the carousel” is that they will give it up for whatever “alpha” happens to tickle their fancy that night. People want someone for a serious relationship who puts more stock into sex than that. They’re not worried about her literally being loose rofl, they’re worried about her cheating on them.

[quote]Severiano wrote:
I’m still trying to figure out the point of the Carousel analogy… It has a lot of parts, and seems irrational when I break my own understanding of it down.

It has to do with how long a woman plays and games before she gets married and settles down…

It has to do with how many partners she’s had…

It also seems to have to do with how much wear and tear she has down there, which is sort of relative in that all women are a little different, and this cant really be determined by how many partners she’s had (Necessarily) nor how long she’s played the game. She might have zero partners and play with really large toys? Or maybe she had two partners, one hung like a donkey.

The aspect of the wear and tear puts a lot of irrational fear into men. Like, she’s more experienced and she didn’t learn that from me, am I the biggest she’s had, am I satisfying/ how could I satisfy such a woman, etc…

The Carousel analogy seems flawed in that it doesn’t directly address the biggest insecurity.

I don’t know why we don’t just talk about these things plainly…

I’ll say it, Penis size, loose vagina… There… Talk about it.

[/quote]

It’s not about that at all. It’s about wholesomeness and assumed fidelity, or the lack of those things. It’s about partner fitness.

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Wear and tear, seriously?[/quote]

He sounds like a good candidate to join our friends in Japan.

I suppose it’s good to know where everyone stands.

Can I just say that I love my job and I love my boyfriend and I love my family and I love my home?

I’m having mushy feelings.