Im not sure justifying myself to strangers is logical but i will i suppose do that, or try to, and see how it goes
I have met different women with different traits personalities wants etc. On that level they are different unless something like non-dualism is right. But as far as their sexual attractants, since the majority of guys are attracted to pretty much the same thing on a sexual level, I figure girls may be similar. Why not: in just about all other species thats how it is. Also I feel that in our deepest essence as living beings we may all be the same and not just in a feel good way.
Not many of my friends have been women, so I dont have as much experience relating to them as other people do.
That said, I have NEVER gotten a complaint about someone tellin me I just seem to think all women are alike. Not from any girlfriends either.
Also there are certain groups or cultural tribes where I may have had it in my head that a lot of these people are alike.
Since your premise (guys are generally attracted to the same things in women) is incorrect, any conclusions you draw from it are likely to be incorrect as well. You appear to have made a vast generalization from your relatively small sample size of friends, which are likely to be fairly similar in age, social class, and background. What is considered attractive varies dramatically by individual, let alone general societal norms change over time and culture.
The fact that you haven’t been called out on this is a reflection on the crowd you hang out with. It’s not necessarily good or bad, just somewhat sheltered.
Yeah, all the guys I’ve met are attracted to wildly different things. I mean, maybe you’re trying to talk basic lust with absolutely no other considerations like charm or wittiness (i.e. only physical body and literally nothing else), in which case even that varies from guy to guy because some guys like large breasts and some guys like small breasts. Some go for redheads and others brunettes. Some like thunder thighs. And some like other men instead. I mean heck, some guys go for one-night stands, and some guys don’t. I can say the same exact things about women.
So it’s easy to see that your logic is flawed and from there your assumptions about women.
And let me reiterate: there’s no special way of relating to women. You talk to them like you would anybody else in this world.
When did I realize that women were individuals? Uh, that’s not something that you just *realize *all of a sudden. Understanding that other people in the world actually exist and have their own thoughts and feelings is just something you are supposed to know as a child. If you’re old enough to post on a message board and you don’t know this, you’ve got some *serious *issues. Or rather the more likely scenario, you’re simply trolling.
Like I said, just about all animals have a set attracting mechanism, I can’t think of one which I have heard does not. Why don’t humans follow this rule?
In fact, I have watched this documentary about seeing how effective different seduction methods are basing them on monkeys. The test was approaching women based off of the style of the bonono, which the show says we share 93%-97% of our genes with, and also the style of the chimpanzee. The people who approached in the B. style universally got their number where the C. style universally crashed and burned.
Then in another part of the show, they talked about how women like nurturing guys (also based off monkeys). The show provided strong evidence for this as well.
Thats more where I am coming from. More of a lot of women/men sharing base drives (including attraction), rather then everyone being the same person (if we don’t go into philosophical/spiritual ideas of oneness.)
People, have you met any? Why not do a quick search on romance here? You’ll find an equal number of men who complain that women seen attracted to deadbeat, under employed bad boys yet just as many claim that women all want Fortune 500 execs. You’ll find a number of men who prefer small breasts despite the media’s fixation with large boobs. You’ll find women who prefer men close to their height rather than tall, women who complain that men with larger penises cause more discomfort than pleasure. Women who complain that men all want a supermodel, and men who claim that thin, overly made up women are unappealing and they prefer a zaftig figure. There isn’t a formula for finding romance, and if there were one, the men in the seduction community clearly lack the superficial, obvious appeal that the average man has else they wouldn’t resort to tricks and insults to coerce attention from women.
Yes, people can have radically (or erratically, not sure which word you intended) different motivations. Some want an equal partner, some want someone to dominate (and some want to be dominated), some want monogamy and some want to swing (and other variations), some want kids and some don’t, some want to get married and some don’t. You’ll find a very wide spectrum of human behavior, human drives, and human motivation.
EDIT: apparently you removed your question after I quoted it.
There aren’t any other animals that have our level of sentience either. What, you don’t think that would make humans even more of a special snowflake in the species world? We have the ability to develop foibles and preferences because we have the ability to over-think and override our “natural instincts”. And there have been far more studies done on the nature vs nurture argument, which you should probably look to more so than some sort of cross-species documentary that then extrapolates monkey findings into human “seduction techniques” (what kind of doc is that? Seriously, I’m wondering how scientific it is).
I’m a little insulted and I feel like you should be a little insulted about the comparison to monkey mating. I mean, that’s what we as a species have been trying to get away from since forever. I don’t like the “but men can’t control themselves because they have primitive natural instincts that tell them to go for anything that moves!” argument that crops up from those sorts of things any more than the majority of men do. Nobody likes being compared to a monkey unless maybe it actually manages to absolve them of some responsibility in a pinch.
Maybe get out of the whole lowest common denominator thing - the majority of us want to screw someone on a regular or semi-regular basis, true. You don’t need a documentary to figure that out. So get yourself beyond basic stuff like that and see people as separate human beings with thinking minds that control their bodies - not as just another species in the animal kingdom to figure out. Might as well just go find yourself a real monkey if you’re going to stick to that.
First: Gateway, don’t get sucked into the seduction/pick up artist world. Trust me.
Second: bonobos are awesome! In the documentary, what was the bonobos approach characterized by (like, what specific things did the guys do/say/etc to the women)? And what was the chimpanzee technique like?
Okay, now I am almost interested in something said by this poster.
What were the differences between the “bonobo” approach and the “chimpanzee” approach? What research did they cite to establish these two approaches?
I may be a little out of date, but it was my understanding that chimpanzee females are only sexually approachable when they are in estrus, and that they are likely to initiate mating behavior on their own at that time.
Bonobos, on the other hand, use sexual behaviors almost constantly as social interaction the way other primates pick lice from each other. If I recall correctly, a translation of the “bonobo approach” to human interactions would be simply saying “here I am, are you receptive?” and moving on if the answer is “No.”
Here is what I think. As far as for what turns women on, there ARE straight women, bi women, lesbians, transexuals, monogomous or poligamous, fetishes and prudes (if this term is offensive I know not). Yes, huge core differences. BUT, as far as straight women and their biological-psychological preferences, I think its true to a certain extent that there are some rules. For example, I think it’s safe to say that more often then not women are attracted to grooming, confidence and effacaciousy. Also, a way to explain why some women prefer tall men where others don’t is this: Being attracted to tallness might not be about being tall but about being seen as a protector, which also explains why girls like guys who are powerful or wealthy. In other words, the reason why women have these differences is because they see or not the implied value beneath the preferences, which were just an indicator of having the procreation value behind it. And in my opinion, the ultimate procreation values are a blueprint to what straight women are usually into (with exceptions to the rule). Maybe its not there but I think it is .
