[quote]Der_Steppenwolfe wrote:
Maybe so, but according to the figures in patterns of sexual behaviour, it seems that in the simplest possible terms, around 20% of us are homosexual in the strict sense of the term, about the same number are heterosexual in the strict sense of the term, and the rest are somewhere in between. In America, that is.[/quote]
I call malakeis.
Depends how you interpret the figures, but given that the survey was conducted in America during the 1950s, if anything they’re probably under reporting homosexual behaviour. And I’m not convinced the figures will have drifted that much.
Granted, ‘somewhere in between’ covers everything from ‘I sometimes touch myself and think about guys’ to ‘I sometimes leave my wife at home and fuck rent boys behind the bottle bank’, but still…
[quote]Der_Steppenwolfe wrote:
Depends how you interpret the figures, but given that the survey was conducted in America during the 1950s, if anything they’re probably under reporting homosexual behaviour. And I’m not convinced the figures will have drifted that much.
Granted, ‘somewhere in between’ covers everything from ‘I sometimes touch myself and think about guys’ to ‘I sometimes leave my wife at home and fuck rent boys behind the bottle bank’, but still…[/quote]
That’s the thing. There’s behavior and then there’s theoretical behavior extrapolated from flat data and premature conceptions. I’m not saying that you’re “wrong” or that off per say. Simply that it should be treated less as doctrine and more as hypothesis.
Sure, yeah. But I’d be surprised if it was that far off. We all know what it says in the joy of sex.
[quote]Der_Steppenwolfe wrote:
Sure, yeah. But I’d be surprised if it was that far off. We all know what it says in the joy of sex.[/quote]
Also when referencing the completely heterosexual, is that based on a measure of repulsion or indifference? Is it factoring for suggestion susceptibility at all?
From what I remember, It’s not even that sophisticated. It just gives figures as to ‘sexual contacts’ and stuff. I can’t be arsed to get the book out now, but there are a number of problems with it.
Apart from anything else, the author seems to get off on the idea of separating societies into ‘permissive’ and ‘restrictive’ societies. I’m fairly sure it’s not that simple. Personally, I’m a permissive kinda guy, but you couldn’t exactly say that about UK society as a whole.
Right, I’m done discussing the heteronormative paradigm for tonight. Anyone up for some group sex?
[quote]Der_Steppenwolfe wrote:
From what I remember, It’s not even that sophisticated. It just gives figures as to ‘sexual contacts’ and stuff. I can’t be arsed to get the book out now, but there are a number of problems with it.
Apart from anything else, the author seems to get off on the idea of separating societies into ‘permissive’ and ‘restrictive’ societies. I’m fairly sure it’s not that simple. Personally, I’m a permissive kinda guy, but you couldn’t exactly say that about UK society as a whole.
Right, I’m done discussing the heteronormative paradigm for tonight. Anyone up for some group sex?[/quote]
No, I’m not into it.
Oh, my. I see that this thread has gone off in yet another direction.
Carry on.
[quote]WhiteSturgeon wrote:
Oh, my. I see that this thread has gone off in yet another direction.
Carry on.
[/quote]
No, carry out.
Well!
I’ll have to think about all of this.
This turned into one of those “Enters, then slowly backs out, hoping to be unnoticed” type threads there for a little bit.
And then there’s those of us who straddle the gray area…
I thought lesbians liked straddling gray matter?
I met a girl from the dog park the other week… Gorgeous Asian chick. 5’0, 105lbs if that and still had hips, butt, and boobs. Incredible. Hung out a few times, had some drinks, things were slow, but looking very good given the fact that she was as cool as she was hot.
Then we finally fucked.
Bitch is practically asexual.
Son of a…
[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
I thought lesbians liked straddling gray matter?[/quote]
see i’m not a lesbian. i just like genitalia. period.
[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
I met a girl from the dog park the other week… Gorgeous Asian chick. 5’0, 105lbs if that and still had hips, butt, and boobs. Incredible. Hung out a few times, had some drinks, things were slow, but looking very good given the fact that she was as cool as she was hot.
Then we finally fucked.
Bitch is practically asexual.
Son of a… [/quote]
lol
I feel sorry for them.
[quote]Der_Steppenwolfe wrote:
Prude.[/quote]
That’s a first, I’ve never been called that before. So your a bisexual chubby chaser huh? I’ve never really been into women weighing more than I do. I want a chick I can pick up and do all sorts of fun things with. She mustr be flexible. Very flexible.
[quote]WhiteSturgeon wrote:
[quote]The Other Titan wrote:
[quote]WhiteSturgeon wrote:
[quote]The Other Titan wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Women certainly are very much into the smell of a man.
No, I don’t mean the rank smell a man gets after having been hunting and sleeping outdoors for a week at a time.[/quote]
I think TheBeth would disagree with you on that point. [/quote]
No doubt.[/quote]
Found this interesting.
http://www.sirc.org/publik/smell_attract.html[/quote]
That is interesting, and it backs up what I’ve always suspected about how a woman’s sexual tastes will subtly be altered by her estrus cycle. I’m convinced that the premenstrual “bitchiness” of an ovulating woman is an evolutionary mechanism to repel all but the most fit suitors. Only men who are “man enough” (producing a surfeit of testosterone, a high percentage of which would metabolize into androsterone) to get past the hormonally-induced hostility of a woman “in heat” would be allowed to mate with her.
A woman may choose the domesticated cuckold to raise her young, but she would rather the bad boy father them. [/quote]
I was watching a documentary on discovery “The Science of Sex Appeal” and they came to that conclusion as well. Pretty interesting if you see it own. The Nat Geo “Sex: How it Works” was interesting as well.[/quote]
They have some great shows on human nature. I’ve had women tell me that I smelled good before and was a little kind of puzzled by it, but some of the experiments that they’ve shown cleared it up pretty well.
A funny one I noticed with waitresses- Even with my wife present, waitresses will shove in next to me virtually every time no matter where at a table I sit, then douse me with pepsi till my eyes twitch. Fwiw, I’m not particularly good looking, don’t dress very well, and never wear anything more than the basic speed-stick stuff.
[/quote]
I happen to think that women are more attracted to married men than they are to single men. It might sound strange but if you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. THey know the dude is cool with commitment and he has already been prescreened by another chick. I think I’m going to start wearing a wedding ring and see what happens. [/quote]
Titan, I’m shocked that you would need to resort to doing such a thing! After all, you’re always talking about how much game you have. lol[/quote]
I do Sturg but it doesn’t hurt to take it to the next level. If a chick sees that you aren’t hitched they are probably going to want the whole relationship thing. If a woman thinks you are married and is still interested she is only interested in one thing. That’s right, incredible, uninhibited, no strings attached sex. And that’s what I’m talking bout. 
[/quote]
That is all I have to say. [/quote]
I’m going out tonight wearing my wedding band and Chrome. I’ll let you know how it works out for me tomorrow.
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Well!
I’ll have to think about all of this.[/quote]
Hey, while you’re thinking about stuff, can I crash on your couch for a few months?
It’ll be just like camping!