Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-11-2018, 07:41 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Women aren't sexually attracted to the male body?

My reasons.


1. Girls can't be sexually attracted to random men they haven't met or spoken to.



2. They aren't physically turned on by men's bodies except with an erect penis from their BOYFRIEND only. This is because it shows the guy is horny and desires her which results in her feeling turned on. But the initial desire comes from the guy.

3. Most girls are sexually fluid and are able to get off to other girls, lesbian porn and still claim straight because its not the male physicality they're attracted to but the emotional attachment/context.

4. Girls look at guys/girls as partners only eg. Boyfriend/husband material (how well he can provide for her and the child, how well they get along and only after this do they want to sexually explore) where as guys look at girls sexually and after they establish an emotional connection then look at them as girlfriend/ wife material.

5. Men ask women out and pay for dates because men are initially/ already attracted and need to prove to the girl they are husband/ boyfriend material. Where as in order for the girl to begin to feel attraction they must be close be able to see a future together.

Summary: Men are more directly attracted to girls so they ask women out and pursue them and are driven by their large attraction toward women where as women feel nothing until they meet a guy they can see a future with and only then begin to feel attraction.

So basically men are attracted to women and how well they get along with them.
girls are attracted to personality/ providing potential (of either gender, usually guys) and after feeling close and desired they begin to express sexual interest.


It is widely said that women feel physical turn on only if they have some sort of connection with the person. Sex is not physical for them it all about mental and psychological. Girls say they don't feel physical attraction before knowing the person. For women, it's a lot more typical to need a little bit more to feel physical attraction. When they see guys doesn't matter how hot they are they won't feel any attraction physically or sexually until they know him a little bit and until interaction with him. Before knowing guys personalty girls don't experience physical attraction. at first they can just recognize them that they are attractive then if they show interest, if they talk to them then you start to feel attraction. Before it their feelings is just neutral.

If it is stranger and unknown guys whom them never meet before then they won't experience any physical sparks because hot body doesn't turn them on. They feel neutral when they see sexy guys. But after talking them, after interaction with them if they realize that the guy has a good sense of humor, good personality then they will experience physical sparks before that they feel neutral. Same as when gay guys see hot women they can just acknowledge that the person is hot but wouldn't feel any physical sparks.
  #2  
Old 02-11-2018, 07:49 AM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,489
Don't print too many newsletters just yet. You may have to eat your words and you wouldn't want to cause a bowel (bowl?) obstruction.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #3  
Old 02-11-2018, 07:50 AM
panache45 panache45 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NE Ohio (the 'burbs)
Posts: 39,815
Maybe not YOUR body.
  #4  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:07 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by panache45 View Post
Maybe not YOUR body.
This a popular bullshit answer. If you are not interested then don't waste your time here. I heard it quite often that's why I asked.
  #5  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:08 AM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 11,884
I wouldn't go as far as the OP - there are many instances of women being sexually turned on by celebrities they've never met - but it does seem that women require more "personal context" to be sexually turned-on - for instance, maybe hearing the celebrity's voice, or seeing him on TV, etc. - whereas a lot of men can get aroused just by looking at a photo of a nude woman - no voice, little context, no knowledge of who that woman is or what her personality is like or even what her name is, etc.

Isn't it true that women generally want more "background story" in order to get aroused by a porn video or whatnot, while men don't need any "story" to get aroused by porn?

Someone once said that romance novels are to women what porn is to men, and I think the theory is that the romance novel provides story and background, something that men usually don't need as much of.

Finally, there are numerous instances of women marrying or being attracted to ugly but rich/successful/famous men. Whereas a lot of men would have a hard time being sexually attracted to an ugly woman, even if she were rich/powerful/smart/famous etc.

So I think the OP is partially or mostly right.
  #6  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:10 AM
elbows elbows is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 13,540
Possibly THE silliest mansplaining that there ever was!

Thanks for the laughs! A great way to start the day!
  #7  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:13 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I wouldn't go as far as the OP - there are many instances of women being sexually turned on by celebrities they've never met - but it does seem that women require more "personal context" to be sexually turned-on - for instance, maybe hearing the celebrity's voice, or seeing him on TV, etc. - whereas a lot of men can get aroused just by looking at a photo of a nude woman - no voice, little context, no knowledge of who that woman is or what her personality is like or even what her name is, etc.

Isn't it true that women generally want more "background story" in order to get aroused by a porn video or whatnot, while men don't need any "story" to get aroused by porn?

Someone once said that romance novels are to women what porn is to men, and I think the theory is that the romance novel provides story and background, something that men usually don't need as much of.

Finally, there are numerous instances of women marrying or being attracted to ugly but rich/successful/famous men. Whereas a lot of men would have a hard time being sexually attracted to an ugly woman, even if she were rich/powerful/smart/famous etc.

So I think the OP is partially or mostly right.
So, women don't sexually attract to random men body?
If it is the case then initially they are not attracted to any gender's body so logically they can date any gender and should feel same interest towards same gender?
Everytime they have to experiment which gender they are sexually attracted to?
  #8  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:16 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Possibly THE silliest mansplaining that there ever was!

Thanks for the laughs! A great way to start the day!
How it is silliest mansplaining?
  #9  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:16 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
I'm gonna jump in here (and may live to regret it), because this is a subject that I've thought about and have discussed with my female friends (and a few mail/male ones) over the years.

I notice great looking men, as do basically all the women I know. Whether in person or on film, an attractive man in great clothes, formalwear, grubbies, or bare-chested-- I notice him and note that he is attractive. A fully, frontally nude guy in a picture gets my attention, but is not sexually arousing. =

When I see a man who is really physically attractive, I do not automatically feel the inclination to cross the room and go talk to him. His physical attractiveness is not enough to pique my interest in him. If I can hear him talk and he seems friendly, kind, smart, funny--THEN I might be interested in seeking him out and meeting him. Physical appearance alone isn't enough.

Also, if he's not particularly physically attractive by generally accepted standards (short, bald, overweight, even disabled, i.e., crutches or a wheelchair) I will still want to meet him and talk to him if he seems friendly, kind, smart, funny, etc.

However, regarding appearance, there is something that applies to both physically attractive and (objectively) unattractive men: he needs to be on top of hygiene. He can't look like a slob (to me). I realize that a fair amount of fashion today is pre-planned and paid-for slobbiness--torn jeans, partially shaven, whatever. But the guy needs to be aware of how he presents himself to the world and that includes having bathed/shaved (to whatever extent he does).

All of this will make me want to meet the guy, but the drive to become intimate (and it is a drive in women, too) will not appear until there is some sort of personal click/connection, and that can happen quickly (minutes, days), but more likely, slowly (weeks, months).
  #10  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:19 AM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
This a popular bullshit answer. If you are not interested then don't waste your time here. I heard it quite often that's why I asked.
You didn't ask a single fucking question. It was a declaration.

A declaration of what is what we'll get down to revealing.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 02-11-2018 at 08:22 AM.
  #11  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:23 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
So, women don't sexually attract to random men body?
If it is the case then initially they are not attracted to any gender's body so logically they can date any gender and should feel same interest towards same gender?
Everytime they have to experiment which gender they are sexually attracted to?
Look at it this way: most of the time the possibility of a sexual encounter is not the first thing that occurs to a woman when she meets a man. (Although she may be aware that HIS first thought is the possibility of a sexual encounter with HER.) A woman likely has already figured out whether she is generally attracted to men or women, so that's not a question she has to ask herself every time. But for myself, I need to feel some kind of connection even to consider an intimate relationship at some point in the future.

As for being attracted to both men and women-- certainly some people are. I have a girlfriend who was married to a man for 30+ years and after he died, she entered into a long-term intimate relationship with a woman. It certainly can happen, and it's not all that rare, but mostly I think people know which gender they are sexually attracted to.

Your question illuminates a type of male thinking that I didn't know much about. Just ignore the ridicule. Some here are juvenile.
  #12  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:24 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Possibly THE silliest mansplaining that there ever was!

Thanks for the laughs! A great way to start the day!


Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
You didn't ask a single fucking question. It was a declaration.

A declaration of what is what we'll get down to revealing.
  #13  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:37 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
I'm gonna jump in here (and may live to regret it), because this is a subject that I've thought about and have discussed with my female friends (and a few mail/male ones) over the years.

I notice great looking men, as do basically all the women I know. Whether in person or on film, an attractive man in great clothes, formalwear, grubbies, or bare-chested-- I notice him and note that he is attractive. A fully, frontally nude guy in a picture gets my attention, but is not sexually arousing. =

When I see a man who is really physically attractive, I do not automatically feel the inclination to cross the room and go talk to him. His physical attractiveness is not enough to pique my interest in him. If I can hear him talk and he seems friendly, kind, smart, funny--THEN I might be interested in seeking him out and meeting him. Physical appearance alone isn't enough.

Also, if he's not particularly physically attractive by generally accepted standards (short, bald, overweight, even disabled, i.e., crutches or a wheelchair) I will still want to meet him and talk to him if he seems friendly, kind, smart, funny, etc.

However, regarding appearance, there is something that applies to both physically attractive and (objectively) unattractive men: he needs to be on top of hygiene. He can't look like a slob (to me). I realize that a fair amount of fashion today is pre-planned and paid-for slobbiness--torn jeans, partially shaven, whatever. But the guy needs to be aware of how he presents himself to the world and that includes having bathed/shaved (to whatever extent he does).

All of this will make me want to meet the guy, but the drive to become intimate (and it is a drive in women, too) will not appear until there is some sort of personal click/connection, and that can happen quickly (minutes, days), but more likely, slowly (weeks, months).
1. I notice great looking men, as do basically all the women I know. > Do you notice great looking women? Then what is the difference between noticing great looking men and women?

2. Whether in person or on film, an attractive man in great clothes, formalwear, grubbies, or bare-chested-- I notice him and note that he is attractive. > When do you see attractive women on tv or flim you can also notice her and note that she is attractive then what's the difference between noting attractive men and women and noting they are attractive?

3. A fully, frontally nude guy in a picture gets my attention, but is not sexually arousing. > Nude women in picture arouse you? Then what is the difference between looking at nude guys and nude women?

4. When I see a man who is really physically attractive, I do not automatically feel the inclination to cross the room and go talk to him. His physical attractiveness is not enough to pique my interest in him. > What do you feel when do you see attractive women? Is it same as seeing attractive men?

5. Also, if he's not particularly physically attractive by generally accepted standards (short, bald, overweight, even disabled, i.e., crutches or a wheelchair) I will still want to meet him and talk to him if he seems friendly, kind, smart, funny, etc. > What about woman and hermaphrodite? They can be friendly, kind, smart, funny, etc?

I appreciate your post.

Be so kind and tell me some more about this:
If it's true that attractiveness is caused by personality, a to you unknown man and woman are both maybe good looking and their form can be appreciated but only the guy can become sexually attractive if everything fits?
What would happen if the woman offers said desired characteristics in way of speaking, mannerism and chemistry?

I am not talking about being in a relationship with a person. I am talking about basic sexual attraction. If it is the case for you they very hard you do experience sexual attraction?
  #14  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:38 AM
GreenWyvern GreenWyvern is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 858
I suppose the success and popularity of the Chippendales and many similar male strip shows for the past 40 years must be imaginary.

  #15  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:46 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
Look at it this way: most of the time the possibility of a sexual encounter is not the first thing that occurs to a woman when she meets a man. (Although she may be aware that HIS first thought is the possibility of a sexual encounter with HER.) A woman likely has already figured out whether she is generally attracted to men or women, so that's not a question she has to ask herself every time. But for myself, I need to feel some kind of connection even to consider an intimate relationship at some point in the future.

As for being attracted to both men and women-- certainly some people are. I have a girlfriend who was married to a man for 30+ years and after he died, she entered into a long-term intimate relationship with a woman. It certainly can happen, and it's not all that rare, but mostly I think people know which gender they are sexually attracted to.

Your question illuminates a type of male thinking that I didn't know much about. Just ignore the ridicule. Some here are juvenile.
Actually you didn't get my question. I am not talking about attraction for affection I am talking about basic sexual attraction.
Why do we (straight) guys attracted to attractive member of our opposite sex when we see them on train, bus, or street though there is no chance whether we will meet them again or not or no chance of mating?

According to you women only sexually attracted to whom they have enough chance of being in a relationship. Without this confirmation women won't attract to guys whether the guys is super hot or not?

It means women don't experience new sexual attraction often, they are sexually attracted to same person everyday, every month.

They become asexual when they go in public/street.
  #16  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:04 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
I suppose the success and popularity of the Chippendales and many similar male strip shows for the past 40 years must be imaginary.

I've been to Chippendales shows and have also been to parties where there was a male stripper. The atmosphere is pure circus, wild party, laughing, screaming, and carrying on. It was sexy without being sexual. I'm guessing it's difficult for a man to understand. Maybe another woman can come along and explain it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
Actually you didn't get my question. I am not talking about attraction for affection I am talking about basic sexual attraction.
Why do we (straight) guys attracted to attractive member of our opposite sex when we see them on train, bus, or street though there is no chance whether we will meet them again or not or no chance of mating?

According to you women only sexually attracted to whom they have enough chance of being in a relationship. Without this confirmation women won't attract to guys whether the guys is super hot or not?

It means women don't experience new sexual attraction often, they are sexually attracted to same person everyday, every month.

They become asexual when they go in public/street.
You've raised some very interesting questions! And please remember that I'm only talking about myself and not about women in general.

And it's not exactly attraction for affection... it's more like an attraction to be joined to someone, wholly joined in all ways, especially including physical. Affection is the smallest part of it. And I'm (just me--I'd like to hear from other women) not going to feel like being sexual with a man unless some part of me senses the potential for this kind of profound joining on all levels, even in only one or a few encounters. IOW I don't have to marry the guy, but I won't even be interested unless it goes--however briefly--beyond the physical. Even though I came of age in the Swinging 60s, I was never one to sleep around. I was always looking for more. And BTW, this isn't something the man can do anything about-- it's how I see him and experience him as he is. It's not a line, or an approach, or some behavior or appearance thing that he can change. It's chemistry. And it's a mystery.

I do notice attractive women, and frankly, I'd rather look at naked women than naked men. But looking at naked women does not sexually arouse me. For years I did therapeutic massage, but working on naked people never aroused me. I worked on some perfect athletic bodies (even a guy who went on to win three gold medals in the Olympics), and I recognized the perfection of their physical selves, but not sexually moved.
  #17  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:05 AM
lorene lorene is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Boston
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
How it is silliest mansplaining?
Maybe because you seem to think all women think and act one common way, which is untrue. There's no one single standard of female behavior.
  #18  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:09 AM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorene View Post
Maybe because you seem to think all women think and act one common way, which is untrue. There's no one single standard of female behavior.
The man has raised some interesting discussion questions. He has said, "this is how it seems to me. Tell me if this is how it seems to you." Ok, not stated in the most polished way possible but why not DISCUSS instead of dissing him??

You are correct: there is no one single standard of female behavior. So elaborate already. Help out here.
  #19  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:10 AM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 19,777
gisaaanr, what does it mean to be "sexually attracted"?

1) There's a certain sense in which you seem to be using (what you understand to be) men's way of being sexually attracted to women as the definition of "sexually attracted", whereas women's way of being sexually attracted to men (as you understand it), to whatever extent it is different, isn't "really sexually attracted". In other words, using the male model as the definitive model.

2) Even if you nod with agreement to that observation, that leaves your other thesis, that men's way of being sexually attracted to women is fundamentally different from women's way of being sexually attracted to men. How universal do you intend this assertion to be? Do you mean all heterosexual men's attraction to women follows Pattern A and all hetero women's attraction to men follows a different pattern, Pattern B? Or do you think of it more like hetero men have more of a tendency towards one pattern than hetero women, who are more inclined towards the other pattern than men are?

3) Either way, you haven't really described the men's way of being attracted; you've spend more descriptive text on how women are attracted to men. You're sort of treating the men's way of being attracted as if it's something we all already know and are in agreement about.
  #20  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:15 AM
Lamoral Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 1,806
I don't think it's news to anyone that women, in the main, tend to place more value on a man's confidence, status, sense of humor, and intellectual abilities than men do on women's. Cultural sexism, hard-wired neurological responses that go back to caveman days, nature, nurture, whatever...the phenomenon undoubtedly exists. As a general rule, I think it can be said that men are more turned on by what they see, women are more turned on by what they hear/know/understand. Maybe that makes women more intellectually evolved; I don't know.

But come on. I see and hear how women talk about Jason Momoa, Johnny Depp, Idris Elba...believe me, they are sexually attracted to men's bodies. I can't believe this is even up for debate.

Women objectify men. Men objectify women. People objectify each other. You know why? Because people are objects! We are all, literally, physical objects!
  #21  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:21 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
I've been to Chippendales shows and have also been to parties where there was a male stripper. The atmosphere is pure circus, wild party, laughing, screaming, and carrying on. It was sexy without being sexual. I'm guessing it's difficult for a man to understand. Maybe another woman can come along and explain it.

You've raised some very interesting questions! And please remember that I'm only talking about myself and not about women in general.

And it's not exactly attraction for affection... it's more like an attraction to be joined to someone, wholly joined in all ways, especially including physical. Affection is the smallest part of it. And I'm (just me--I'd like to hear from other women) not going to feel like being sexual with a man unless some part of me senses the potential for this kind of profound joining on all levels, even in only one or a few encounters. IOW I don't have to marry the guy, but I won't even be interested unless it goes--however briefly--beyond the physical. Even though I came of age in the Swinging 60s, I was never one to sleep around. I was always looking for more. And BTW, this isn't something the man can do anything about-- it's how I see him and experience him as he is. It's not a line, or an approach, or some behavior or appearance thing that he can change. It's chemistry. And it's a mystery.

I do notice attractive women, and frankly, I'd rather look at naked women than naked men. But looking at naked women does not sexually arouse me. For years I did therapeutic massage, but working on naked people never aroused me. I worked on some perfect athletic bodies (even a guy who went on to win three gold medals in the Olympics), and I recognized the perfection of their physical selves, but not sexually moved.
It's just the way a man makes you feel, the things he can provide you with mentally, emotionally and materialistically is that you prefer to be in relationship with a man , although if a woman would provide you the same things you would prefer her over a man any day without an eyes blink?

You do notice attractive women, and frankly but look at naked women than naked men. But looking at naked women does not sexually arouse you also nude men do nothing for you.

First tell me what is your sexual orientation if no gender physically attract you visually?

If you aren't sexually attracted to on one's body the logically you can date any gender any time? Right?

You don't have to tell about other women, I know If I ask the same question to them I will get same answer.
  #22  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:23 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
gisaaanr, what does it mean to be "sexually attracted"?

1) There's a certain sense in which you seem to be using (what you understand to be) men's way of being sexually attracted to women as the definition of "sexually attracted", whereas women's way of being sexually attracted to men (as you understand it), to whatever extent it is different, isn't "really sexually attracted". In other words, using the male model as the definitive model.

2) Even if you nod with agreement to that observation, that leaves your other thesis, that men's way of being sexually attracted to women is fundamentally different from women's way of being sexually attracted to men. How universal do you intend this assertion to be? Do you mean all heterosexual men's attraction to women follows Pattern A and all hetero women's attraction to men follows a different pattern, Pattern B? Or do you think of it more like hetero men have more of a tendency towards one pattern than hetero women, who are more inclined towards the other pattern than men are?

3) Either way, you haven't really described the men's way of being attracted; you've spend more descriptive text on how women are attracted to men. You're sort of treating the men's way of being attracted as if it's something we all already know and are in agreement about.
read it http://wiki.asexuality.org/Primary_v...traction_model
  #23  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:23 AM
Renee Renee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,537
Literally every single one of your bullet points is completely false for me.
  #24  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:25 AM
wonky wonky is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: DC area
Posts: 30,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
gisaaanr, what does it mean to be "sexually attracted"?

1) There's a certain sense in which you seem to be using (what you understand to be) men's way of being sexually attracted to women as the definition of "sexually attracted", whereas women's way of being sexually attracted to men (as you understand it), to whatever extent it is different, isn't "really sexually attracted". In other words, using the male model as the definitive model.

2) Even if you nod with agreement to that observation, that leaves your other thesis, that men's way of being sexually attracted to women is fundamentally different from women's way of being sexually attracted to men. How universal do you intend this assertion to be? Do you mean all heterosexual men's attraction to women follows Pattern A and all hetero women's attraction to men follows a different pattern, Pattern B? Or do you think of it more like hetero men have more of a tendency towards one pattern than hetero women, who are more inclined towards the other pattern than men are?

3) Either way, you haven't really described the men's way of being attracted; you've spend more descriptive text on how women are attracted to men. You're sort of treating the men's way of being attracted as if it's something we all already know and are in agreement about.
Absolutely agreed on all parts.
  #25  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:27 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renee View Post
Literally every single one of your bullet points is completely false for me.
Explain please
  #26  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:35 AM
wonky wonky is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: DC area
Posts: 30,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
You don't have to tell about other women, I know If I ask the same question to them I will get same answer.
What a great thread.
  #27  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:40 AM
JackieLikesVariety JackieLikesVariety is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 2,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
Explain please
Renee is nice and therefore does not suggest perhaps your trousers have ignited. I think SAFETY FIRST and you might consider sitting in a nice pool of water.
  #28  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:43 AM
Riemann Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 4,696
The evolutionary basis for this general tendency in instinctive human behavior is straightforward. Men can increase their reproductive success by spreading their seed widely, including impregnating women with whom they will make no investment in raising the child. Women cannot do this, and a woman will therefore be more picky in seeking out a man who is likely to commit to investing time and effort in raising a child with her.

This dynamic predicts that we would expect to see men more interested in casual sex, and that male discrimination among casual sex partners would be based more on markers of purely physical childbearing ability (prime age, physical health). It also predicts that when men are looking for permanent partners with whom they do plan to commit to a long term child-rearing relationship, what they look for in a partner might be more similar to what a woman looks for in a partner.

Just let me reemphasize the words general tendency in my first sentence.

Last edited by Riemann; 02-11-2018 at 09:46 AM.
  #29  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:46 AM
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 13,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
The man has raised some interesting discussion questions. He has said, "this is how it seems to me. Tell me if this is how it seems to you." Ok, not stated in the most polished way possible but why not DISCUSS instead of dissing him??
What, like posts that are nothing but eyerolls? Wonderful discussion.
  #30  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:52 AM
gisaaanr gisaaanr is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Ireland
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
The evolutionary basis for this general tendency in instinctive human behavior is straightforward. Men can increase their reproductive success by spreading their seed widely, including impregnating women with whom they will make no investment in raising the child. Women cannot do this, and a woman will therefore be more picky in seeking out a man who is likely to commit to investing time and effort in raising a child with her.

This dynamic predicts that we would expect to see men more interested in casual sex, and that male discrimination among casual sex partners would be based more on markers of purely physical childbearing ability (prime age, physical health). It also predicts that when men are looking for permanent partners with whom they do plan to commit to a long term child-rearing relationship, what they look for in a partner might be more similar to what a woman looks for in a partner.

Just let me reemphasize the words general tendency in my first sentence.
That's why when do women see their opposite sex, same sex, cat, dog, mountain, sunset they don't feel any difference except acknowledgement?

Your EP is totally bullshit, I don't want to explain because it's doesn't make sense.
  #31  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:56 AM
Riemann Riemann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 4,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
That's why when do women see their opposite sex, same sex, cat, dog, mountain, sunset they don't feel any difference except acknowledgement?

Your EP is totally bullshit, I don't want to explain because it's doesn't make sense.
I have no idea what anything you said here means. I'm one of the few people in this thread who's not just being rude to you, maybe tone it down a bit?
  #32  
Old 02-11-2018, 10:03 AM
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 13,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
That's why when do women see their opposite sex, same sex, cat, dog, mountain, sunset they don't feel any difference except acknowledgement?

Your EP is totally bullshit, I don't want to explain because it's doesn't make sense.
Seriously dude, if you really want to have a discussion, and if you're genuinely asking a question here (and not just making declarations and assumptions), maybe tone it down.
  #33  
Old 02-11-2018, 10:07 AM
Dangerosa Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
I suppose the success and popularity of the Chippendales and many similar male strip shows for the past 40 years must be imaginary.

As well as the posts in my facebook feeds of shirtless firefighters holding puppies. Apparently that's all about the puppies.

(The puppies ARE really cute, but, although I'm not usually a fan of oiled and muscular shirtless men, the puppies are not the first thing I notice and my reaction to a shirtless oiled muscular man is sexual)
__________________
One day, in Teletubbie land, it was Tinkie Winkie's turn to wear the skirt.
  #34  
Old 02-11-2018, 10:31 AM
Darren Garrison Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 7,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerosa View Post
As well as the posts in my facebook feeds of shirtless firefighters holding puppies.
I gotta read more slowly. At first I thought that said "shirtless firefighters humping puppies."
  #35  
Old 02-11-2018, 10:48 AM
Maserschmidt Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonky View Post
What a great thread.
If you want to think of this as a preview, go check out the longer narrative on Reddit.
  #36  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:28 AM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 19,695
Women may not be turned on by men the way men are turned on by women. But I'm pretty sure women appreciate an attractive male body.

Tall, broad shoulders, muscular, thin, etc.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #37  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:29 AM
Asimovian Asimovian is offline
The Zeroeth Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 11,442
Moderator Note

gisaaanr, you've managed to make quite an introduction for yourself on the board. Unfortunately, the manner in which you've been posting so far runs afoul of our "Don't be a jerk" rule. It's not clear to me from what you've shared thus far if you're looking for a discussion, a debate, or just an opportunity to rant about your personal views. Based on your open dismissal even of the people who are engaging you seriously and your refusal to acknowledge that there are people in here whose experiences contradict your blanket statements, I'm inclined to think it's the latter.

On the chance that I'm mistaken about your intent, I will allow this to remain in IMHO for now, but I'd strongly encourage you to take a deep breath and engage with the other posters in a less hostile manner. You're entitled to feel strongly about your views, but you still need to interact civilly with others here.

Of course, the admonition to post civilly applies to every poster in this thread, and not just the OP.

Thanks, everyone.
  #38  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:36 AM
Moriarty Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,456
Dude, I'm a guy, and even I know that women can have a visceral reaction to the male form.

(Sometimes in...incredible...ways).
  #39  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:54 AM
MoonMoon MoonMoon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 987
Iíll admit Iím having some trouble understanding your posts, since English doesnít seem to be your first language, but dude, youíre wrong.

Iím a woman, and Iím emphatically attracted to the male form, and not the slightest bit attracted to women. I reject the trope that naked women are more aesthetically pleasing than naked men. I dig men.
  #40  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:12 PM
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 26,816
OK, some of the following is strictly my opinion or my personal experience, but I have had experience in being a female human for over 50 years so I like to think my words carry some validity for this discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post
1. Girls can't be sexually attracted to random men they haven't met or spoken to.
Yes, yes they can. They are less likely to experience this than boys, but it can happen.

However, I wish to point out that most of your post was clearly framed from a man's viewpoint (which, assuming you're a man, is quite understandable). Women are not looking for the same things men are. Which means what men focus on when looking at a, say, a naked woman is NOT what women focus on when viewing a naked man. Please try to assimilate and understand that nugget of knowledge.

Quote:
2. They aren't physically turned on by men's bodies except with an erect penis from their BOYFRIEND only. This is because it shows the guy is horny and desires her which results in her feeling turned on. But the initial desire comes from the guy.
This is incorrect on several points.

First of all, as a heterosexual woman I do have some interest in penis, but it is not my only interest. Your statement demonstrates why 1) men send naked dick pics to women and 2) why men get into trouble for doing so.

Men tend to really, really focus on penis. I'm not sure, but maybe it's because they themselves like to focus on vagina and assume that women will want to focus on the male counterpart. This is an error. As I said, I have some interest in penis and enjoy activities involving them, but they are not the sole focus of sexual attraction for me or millions of other women.

Understand that I am capable of orgasming from sexual play (a.k.a. "foreplay" though there's no reason it can't be done simultaneously while engaging in intercourse or afterwards as well) that never goes near my vagina or clitoris. It's a lot easier to engage the clitoris, but neither penetration nor manipulation of my crotch are required for me to have my fun. Women's sexuality is much less focused on just one bodypart. It's one way we differ significantly from men.

Also consider that while a man viewing an aroused, naked woman approaching him is most likely to think "hey, hey - fun times ahead!" a woman viewing a naked man she doesn't know approaching her with an erect penis is more likely to think "OMG - am I about to be raped?" Such a thought is what is known as a "mood-killer".

The above is why a man thinking that surprise sexting a pick of his naked erect dick to a woman is fun, and a woman tends to view receiving an unsolicited, naked, erect dick pic to be a threat. Be very, very, very sure of your relationship and the woman's sincerity before fulfilling a request for a pic of an erect dick, and only send one if the lady in question has asked for one.

Quote:
3. Most girls are sexually fluid and are able to get off to other girls, lesbian porn and still claim straight because its not the male physicality they're attracted to but the emotional attachment/context.
This notion that all or most women are bisexual has been enormously oversold and I blame porn. If there's a difference between men and women in this area it's small, and LOTS of women are in no way bisexual at all. I am tired of explaining to people that I do not in any way find my fellow women to be sexually attractive or interesting. I find lesbian porn boring because women don't interest me at all. It's as exciting or arousing to me as discussing the sexual life of, say, apple trees. Maybe interesting the first time I hear about it, from a pure curiosity viewpoint, but afterwards boring. The only people who really seem to get my complete lack of sexual interest in women are the asexuals, who understand NOT being sexually attracted at all.

Keep in mind, I am in no way claiming I am a measure for all women - women really do run the spectrum between "only homosexual" and "only heterosexual" with everything in between. Be wary of anything trying to "explain" women by saying "most or all". Because there's a lot of variability between us.

Quote:
4. Girls look at guys/girls as partners only eg. Boyfriend/husband material (how well he can provide for her and the child, how well they get along and only after this do they want to sexually explore) where as guys look at girls sexually and after they establish an emotional connection then look at them as girlfriend/ wife material.
Untrue. True to some extent, particularly for women looking for long-term relationships, but women having short-term relationships (one night stands, short affairs particularly while cheating during a longer term relationship, etc.) seem to look more for physical attractiveness than "boyfriend/husband" qualities.

This can be summed up with the very unscientific observation that while women might be attracted to "dangerous" men, they usually settle down with an office worker or corporate type guy. Or, to put it another way, women might want to have a fling with James Bond, but the guy they marry is much more likely to be Sidney the Accountant. This might be because, while James has some high quality genes Sidney is the guy who will stick around and actually help raise the kids to adulthood. This pattern - trying to gain some nice genes from the guy passing through the neighborhood while seeking a more stable, long-term provide for the long-term relationship - is seen in many, many species and not just mammals but also birds. So while I can't prove it to you it's not unreasonable to suppose something similar at work in our own species.

Also keep in mind that while men do gain an evolutionary benefit from flinging genes far and wide, they can also benefit from monogamy - just the reduced stress from having a relatively assured source of sexual fun as well an increased confidence in the paternity of any children they're helping raise can benefit a man and may be one factor in why married men tend to live longer than single men. Also, fewer fist-fights and gunshot wounds from conflicts over access to women, or from jealous husbands discovering they've been cuckolded.

So the distinction is really between "is this woman looking for a short-term fling?" or "is this woman looking for a long-term relationship?"

Quote:
5. Men ask women out and pay for dates because men are initially/ already attracted and need to prove to the girl they are husband/ boyfriend material. Where as in order for the girl to begin to feel attraction they must be close be able to see a future together.
Two factors here.

First, historically, men have had a lot more disposable income than women. This has a lot to do with "man pays for date"

Second, if the woman is indeed looking for a long-term relationship then yes, having some assurance the man has a source of resources is, in fact, important and paying for dates (and engagement rings and bride-price and a lot of other stuff) is the way our species displays this. It's also related to men pouring time and energy into something like sports, because it demonstrates their physical health and fitness.

It's akin to bower birds building a bower (look! I can amass resources!) and birds of paradise doing elaborate dances to attract mates.

However, for short term flings and "friends with benefits" situations this is much less required and might even be turned around with a wealthy, powerful woman paying the way (which is how gigolos make their money).

Again, are you talking short term fling or long term relationship? Women act differently depending on which they're looking for.

Quote:
Summary: Men are more directly attracted to girls so they ask women out and pursue them and are driven by their large attraction toward women where as women feel nothing until they meet a guy they can see a future with and only then begin to feel attraction.
This totally disregards long-standing cultural traditions that condemn women who take the lead as whores and imposes social penalties on them vs. men engaging in courting rituals.

There have been instances where I have asked a man out. Oddly enough, men don't always react positively to that.

Quote:
So basically men are attracted to women and how well they get along with them. girls are attracted to personality/ providing potential (of either gender, usually guys) and after feeling close and desired they begin to express sexual interest.
I think you might be confusing feeling sexual interest with expressing sexual interest. Expressing sexual interest too soon can carry risks for women and can lead bad situations like rape if she misjudges the man's character. She's probably been feeling interest for awhile, but only expresses it when she feels it's safe to do so.

Quote:
[I]It is widely said that women feel physical turn on only if they have some sort of connection with the person. Sex is not physical for them it all about mental and psychological.
The hell it isn't physical!

That said, even men usually express that having a mental and psychological connection with a partner usually does make the overall experience better. Men and women are not so far apart on this as you think.

Quote:
Girls say they don't feel physical attraction before knowing the person.
No, they don't express that attraction before knowing the person.

Plenty of times my woman friends and I have discussed how sexy this or that man is... but we aren't going to act on that, or express that to the man until we feel safe in doing so.

Quote:
If it is stranger and unknown guys whom them never meet before then they won't experience any physical sparks because hot body doesn't turn them on.
Again, you're looking at this from the man's viewpoint.

Yes, a hot body can turn a woman on.... but just because a woman is sexually attracted to a stranger does not mean she's going to act, or even express, that to anyone.

Also keep in mind that what women are looking for is not always what men assume women are looking for. Men tend to focus on things like boobs or vagina or pretty face. Women tend to look at both the overall package and more subtle things.

Let's take the subject of personal hygiene: This doesn't mean a man has to be in a suit. It does mean he has to take care of himself. Are his teeth clean or does he have food gunk stuck in them? Does he smell like he's showered recently? (Men doing physical labor aren't expected to smell sweat-free, but it should be fresh sweat, not a week old). Are his hands at all clean and somewhat tended or does it look like he hasn't washed his hands in a month and uses a table-saw to trim his nails? Is his hair greasy or clean? If he has a beard is it clean or can you use it to determine what he had for lunch yesterday? In other words, does it look like he gives a damn how clean he is and/or how he smells?

Let's look at the body: he doesn't have to have a six pack (although they're nice) but does he look like he at least occasionally gets up off the couch? Does he wear attire that looks, if not flattering, at least doesn't accentuate the negative? Does he dress appropriately for the occasion?

Let's look at personality: how does he treat those around him? Is he a dick to everyone? Then why would I want to associate with him no matter how much he is currently flattering me or showering me with gifts? He's only going to turn on me in the end. Is he kind in general? Is he confident? Does he have a grasp of both his talents and what he's not good at?

Yes - that's what a women is looking at when she's thinking long term relationship. "Hot body" comes into that, but it's far from the only factor she's looking for. If she's looking for a fling then "hot body" will be a bigger factor.

So... that's my piece for now.
  #41  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:21 PM
Chimera Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,090
I'm curious as to whether the OP is male or female. I admit that I have not fully read every post here to find out.

But if you're male, then dude, your OP is the epitome of mansplaining. And you're wrong.

If you're female, you're trying to speak for all women and this thread makes it clear that you're wrong.
__________________
Have lost my patience with the refusal to moderate trolls and hate on this board and am taking a break.
  #42  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:36 PM
cochrane cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 20,575
Sorry. Didn't see the mod note.

Last edited by cochrane; 02-11-2018 at 12:37 PM.
  #43  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:37 PM
Typo Negative Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 16,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by gisaaanr View Post

Summary: Men are more directly attracted to girls so they ask women out and pursue them and are driven by their large attraction toward women where as women feel nothing until they meet a guy they can see a future with and only then begin to feel attraction.

.
[/I]
This does not explain why some women fall for losers, lotharios, miscreants and violent psychopaths. Attraction is completely subjective.

If we are to believe what women tell us, they absolutely DO find men they do not personally know to be sexually attractive. There does seem to be a difference in how they may or may not act on that attraction. But these differences may be due less to biology and more to societal mores and gender roles. Even after the sexual revolution.

But I must ask. Have you really never met a sexually aggressive woman?
__________________
"God hates Facts"

- seen on a bumper sticker in Sacramento Ca
  #44  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:47 PM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 19,777
Periodically, in this venue or some other venue, someone like gisaaanr comes along and makes a post like this.

There tend to be a handful number of replies in which people reject the sexist assertion that men and women are different in the stated way, and don't give any credence to the notion that such a difference exists. Let's call those people "egalitarians".

There tend to be a substantial number of replies in which people take a nuanced approach: that the differences alleged by the OP (of whatever thread it happens to be) aren't that absolute, that they've been overstated here, that some of the reasons for the observed differences may be social or situational, and that it is misleading to make such a sweeping "men from Mars, women from Venus" type of reductionistic statement. Let's call them "acknowledgers of difference". They aren't saying the observed differences are bullshit, don't exist, etc, but they aren't necessarily onboard with attributing them to innate differences.

And then there tend to be a handful of replies in which people state or imply that yes there are built-in differences created by biology or evolution or whatever which are responsible for the differences spoken of by the OP, even if they disagree with some specific things that the OP said. Let's call these folks "fundamentalists", in the sense that they believe there's a fundamental (built-in, innate) difference between the sexes involved here.

———

One of the most difficult concepts I've tried to explain is that after a few zillion of these threads, each of which has people replying to them in those ways, one tends to absorb a notion of what the prevailing attitude is. And that prevailing attitude is sort of an "average" of those types of replies and beliefs. And it lies somewhere between egalitarian and not-so-egalitarian, if you see what I mean. Not anywhere close to as fundamentalist as gisaaanr's assertions lie, mind you, but somewhat more fundamentalist than, say, GreenWyvern, Lorene, Renee, or Chimera would seem to be based on their posts in this thread.

Last edited by AHunter3; 02-11-2018 at 12:48 PM.
  #45  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:49 PM
nightshadea nightshadea is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 3,164
isn't the ops ranting part of that incel screed on reddit and other dives ?
  #46  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:54 PM
ThelmaLou ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 13,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
What, like posts that are nothing but eyerolls? Wonderful discussion.
Grrr. I didn't want to be accused of junior modding. But since you ask, those posts were mean and not the least bit helpful. Unlike yours.

You know damn well that *I* know how to discuss when discussion is warranted. Sometimes what is warranted is a big fat eyeroll.

ETA: I can be civil to the OP, but not to the other posters. Therefore, I'm outta here.

Last edited by ThelmaLou; 02-11-2018 at 12:57 PM.
  #47  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:59 PM
BeeGee BeeGee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,084
I'm curious to know how you've come to hold these ideas. Of course women can find men sexually attractive before they know them. We have eyes. We have preferences that spark that initial attraction. Like someone else pointed out, your theory doesn't take into account all the bad boys and losers out there who are quite attractive, but don't have any intention of becoming a provider of any sort. For example, I give you the ex Mr. BeeGee. I didn't show interest in him because he had a great job or looked like a provider for the children i never planned on having. No, I saw a tall drink of water with dark hair and a leather jacket. I was hooked.
  #48  
Old 02-11-2018, 01:02 PM
Patx2 Patx2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 3,316
As a female, I disagree. I have been very sexually attracted to some men based simply on their looks. That doesnít mean Iím going to jump in the sack with them. And, of course, looks are only one thing. If, hypothetically, I was single and looking for someone, those looks wouldnít be worth a damn if he couldnít string together an intelligent sentence or have a sense of humor.
  #49  
Old 02-11-2018, 01:07 PM
Lamoral Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
This can be summed up with the very unscientific observation that while women might be attracted to "dangerous" men, they usually settle down with an office worker or corporate type guy. Or, to put it another way, women might want to have a fling with James Bond, but the guy they marry is much more likely to be Sidney the Accountant. This might be because, while James has some high quality genes Sidney is the guy who will stick around and actually help raise the kids to adulthood. This pattern - trying to gain some nice genes from the guy passing through the neighborhood while seeking a more stable, long-term provide for the long-term relationship - is seen in many, many species and not just mammals but also birds. So while I can't prove it to you it's not unreasonable to suppose something similar at work in our own species.
What you're describing has a very specific name for some people who do indeed believe it to be a human mating strategy: "Alpha Fux, Beta Bux." Often it's tied to "red pill" and MRA talking points that are very nihilistic, but I do think the theory may indeed have some science behind it, from an evolutionary standpoint.
  #50  
Old 02-11-2018, 01:28 PM
digs digs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West of Wauwatosa
Posts: 8,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
But I must ask. Have you really never met a sexually aggressive woman?
I was going to ask a broader version of this question. Free advice: Get to know a wide variety of women (and men, too - we're not all Barney Stinsons)... and instead of talking at them, listen to them.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
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 Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


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

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017