[QUOTE=mr. jp]
I do not believe that all those things she mentioned were true. I guess I could have been more diplomatic about it. But she annoyed me with her personal attacks.
Did you read my suggestion for a question you could make in order to decide whether sex is the main reason to spend time with women? Do you agree that this is a fair way to decide it? Do you think that almost all guys except me would choose the no sex option? If not, do you think most guys are freaking pathetic, and not just me?
[/QUOTE]
The problem with that is, it’s not a realistic question, and it’s not a pertinent question. The question here is, do most men habitually spend, say, four hours of an evening spewing out conversation in which they have little to no interest with the basic view that this is for the purpose of getting sex. Not do most men ever do this? According to you, men pretty much always do this. Yes, they might find that the conversation is a tad more interesting than they expected, but that given a choice then, at the end of virtually every evening, between going home with the inane bimbo to get laid or calling the girl whose conversation you enjoyed the next day with the idea of getting together (quite possibly without sex) again, they will pretty much always choose the bimbo.
You know, one guy I dated - and this is absolutely true and absolutely unmistakable - was highly impressed with me because at the end of the first date, I gave him a chaste kiss or something of the sort (it might have even been a handshake), rather than just leading him into the bedroom. He called me the next day to demand if I knew what a tachyon was, and he was utterly thrilled that I did. He told me these things flat out, after we were living together in an SO relationship, so there was no seduction value here. Sure, he liked sex just fine - quite a lot, as I recall. But what he actually wanted was something more.
Would he have still stuck with me if sex weren’t a possibility? I don’t know. Our relationship eventually got rocky and broke up a year or two later. But I DO know there are husbands of women who are disabled and unabled to have sex anymore who nonetheless remain loving and faithful husbands, because what their wives give them is more important to them than sex.
So yeah, I’d say the guy who picks sex over conversation *every time * (or even most times) is pretty darned pathetic. The guy who does it occasionally is normal - we all have our times when we want what we want, and what we want is physical rather than intellectual or emotional. And if you, as a guy, haven’t had any sex in quite some time and/or rarely have the chance to have sex, you may well value the opportunity to get some more than the opportunity to hook up with someone who matches you as a person. I can understand that, but it’s an understanding mixed with pity. Because a regular four or five hour investment for a five minute engagement is an awfully big cost-to-benefit ratio, and that five minute engagement really doesn’t seem to me to be worth the obsession you guys put into it, if that’s all there is to it. I mean, if that’s really your highest criterion, you’re investing an awful lot into - what? Push comes to shove, an orgasm. Doesn’t last very long, can’t do it all the time. Can’t even do it most of the time.
As I said from the start, boring. If that’s your primary interest, you’re just not very interesting to me, or to a lot of women. Dunno about you, but I’ve got better things to do with my time. Sex is fine, sex is great. But it’s just not that important, because most of the time you’re not having sex, and you never will be having it most of the time - you’re not biologically capable, and you’d probably come to hate it if you were.
Sorry, Frank, I got a little hot under the collar there. My apologies.
And what’s with these guys who are finished in five minutes? Don’t they know what a tongue is for?)