Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Moni Duettmann

What's wrong with men?

Recommended Posts


Randall Ahren wrote:

@Carole, you want an example of both observation and animal thang? Observe the behavior of groupies around rock stars. You really think it's logical for a dozen women to all engage in carnal relations with the same guy?

Perfectly logical. There's always an explanation for everything and it isn't animal in your example. It's psychological.

The rock-star thingy, the old, fat but rich businessman thingy and the animalesque hottie are three different things. Three different triggers to three different reactions. I got the impression we were talking about the animal one here, but you keep mixing in new ingredients. Ones which, in my opinion, are not inter-connected. However.....

The animal-appeal thingy is the primitive instinctive one. It’s irrelevant whether he’s rich, clever or has a nice personality. He has “it” and “it” is a magnet on a physical level.

The old fat megabucks guy is a walking bank account. Like a job. Or a pension scheme. You do it, not because you want to, but because you feel it makes financial sense. The sort of reasoning behind such a choice has zero primitive instinct behind it. Quite the opposite. The girl has to fight against a natural distaste for someone who is not physically attractive, is old enough to be her father (or her grandfather) and has to keep focused on the objective. Which is NOT sexual satisfaction.

The rockstar one is divided into two main categories. Young girls testing out their sexual feelings from a safe distance on someone who is wholly unobtainable by screaming and swooning at a concert. That’s what makes him appealing – that he’s just a fantasy. The older gals who do the groupie thingy are on a proxy power-trip. Having been with or being with somebody super-famous makes them feel “special” and “worthwhile”. They share their idol with other women because their objective is not to have an actual relationship, nor even sexual satisfaction, but to acquire some of that reflected glory and second-hand fame.

Men do the same. The curvy, sensual hottie. The older, financially secure sugar mummy. The maternal type who appeals to men with unresolved mummy-issues. The famous ones also appeal, but to a limited audience, as men are usually made to feel under pressure to be the stronger and more powerful one.

Okay. Hyper-oversimplification, but it’ll do for the venue.

Then there are the evolved ones – your 21st century guy and gal – who seek a combination of several roles, and which, in the bigger picture, balance each another out. So, both partners are preferred to be attractive, clever, competent and independent, sensitive, caring, amusing, talented, accomplished, bla bla. That’s what Celestiall was saying to you – some of us like a more complete package and that package necessarily requires the whole package from us too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perrie,

Your response has reinforced the type of person I perceived you to be.  I can only think that people who do come by your way, are greatly enriched.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dillon Levenque wrote:


Carole Franizzi wrote:

Big difference between a girl of 14 and a woman of 40.


And in some cases there is also a big difference between a boy of 15 and a man of 35. I've met more for whom that was true than false, but in my experience immature men are more common than immature women. Neither are much fun to be around.

Boys in high school are still for the most part stuck with the 'cheerleader' thing: cheerleaders are cute, everyone else is a dog. One of the things that struck me most about going to my XXth high school reunion (see how adroitly I dodge the age thing?) was how much more attractive and interesting the women were than I remembered them from my youth.

That's such a nice post. Can I tell you something? Being forty-something I should probably be feeling my age. I don't. I look at my male and female peers and find them utterly fascinating. I have zero envy of the youngsters. They have an odd moment in history to have to deal with and I don't envy them one bit. I like men my own age - with a bit of a margin both ways - a bit younger and a bit older - because they're interesting, rich in personality and experience, are often less interested in themselves and more interested in others.

Maturity - at any age - is attractive. Immaturity never is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Kylie Jaxxon wrote:

Wow Carole, excellent summation.  You have got to be a psychologist/psychiatrist in RL...don't want you to answer that. :matte-motes-silly:

I'm not. Cross my heart.  If I was, it wouldn't ethical for me to even mention the word "psychology". My job, however, is better performed with a decent grounding in certain notions.

And don't try being all nicey-picey with me after hitting on that hot guy in the other thread while i was busy trying to get a date out of him!!!!! ;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Randall Ahren wrote:

Maddy, remember, what your DNA wants isn't necessarily what you want. We are part of something bigger and greater than ourselves that we cannot understand. As Robert Pirsig postulated, imagine two bloods cells in your body asking if they are part of anything bigger than themselves. The body wants that white blood cell to commit suicide by enveloping an invading bacterium, but is that in the white cell's personal best interest?

I'm well aware that my DNA and I don't necessarly agree. But those genetic pulls aren't the be all and end all. I never had kids, though I love having them around me and feel all those motherly instincts I'm wired for. Why didn't I have them? Because I was able to look rationally at my life and decide it wasn't for me. I can mother other's people's kids to get my fix, then send them home so their parents can try to unravel my work.

Now, when I see a Governor's career and family go down the drain as he bawls his little eyes out over his Argentinian soulmate du jour, I'm inclined to think his rationality has been compromised. Did his DNA do that? Who knows? As Carole said, life is complex.

If you wish to compare your intelligence and knowledge to a bacterium, fine. Do ya mind if I look elsewhere for role models?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Kylie Jaxxon wrote:

Maddie...ROFL

 

Oh, for God's sake, don't encourage her! She'll be showing the full set of photos next!

PS Do you think I look like I've put on a bit of weight on that photo? Maybe it was just that dress....red isn't slimming.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

If you wish to compare your intelligence and knowledge to a bacterium, fine. Do ya mind if I look elsewhere for role models?

No comparison was made with the intelligence of a bacterium. The concept of emergent intelligence was being introduced. And no, I don't mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Carole Franizzi wrote:


Kylie Jaxxon wrote:

Maddie...ROFL

Oh, for God's sake, don't encourage her! She'll be showing the full set of photos next!

PS Do you think I look like I've put on a bit of weight on that photo? Maybe it was just that dress....red isn't slimming.....

Well, I would, but by the time I got done bleeping the naughties, you'd see nothing but my toes and your eyes.

 

But oh... those eyes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:

Wow.......

I feel honored here.  I sometimes wonder what folks think about some of my posts.  I know it happens to many people here that things that they say never get responded to.  And I know that at times I have strong opinions regarding some subjects that are not in line with the status quo. 

Though I generally don't openly discuss my personal life both in RL & SL (I don't really separate the two) in this forum or any other forum for that matter, I probably reveal more of myself than I realize.

The so called 'stages of SL,' like the 'stages of life,' have been discussed many times here.  And like many long term SL'ers, I have gone through most of them, from being a pose ball hopper when I first started to being in a committed partnership. 

Several months ago Torley made a statement that I have really taken to heart, to live by not only in my SL but in my RL too.

"It is a difficult thing that, while life in general appeals to a diversity of people, many people's interests are in conflict. This is also true in Second Life, and I continue to be a proponent of responsible disclosure in relationships that matter to you. On top of that, there's insecurity that people keep hidden, not to mention jealousy and other "demons" that drag someone down from acknowledging and living the life THEY really want... in the process they become control freaks trying to prevent OTHERS from feeling fulfilled......."

While Perrie is not In World as often as he used to be, I have found that 'responsible disclosure' has enriched my SL experience.  I am more happy than I have ever been here and the relationships I do have are thriving and growing in the places that I have them.

Torley went on to say,

"The psychology of it intrigues me deeply. I just hope more people can come inworld and use Second Life as a tool of confronting hangups and dealing with their baggage, so they have healthier relationships with others. Not growing means not really living."

If more people were to really take this to heart, what a rich and wonderful place SL could be.  I believe I am a better person for it. 

Thank you both for your kind words.

 

I remember that thread and those words from Torley. He's a wise one, that Torley Linden. I'm strangely glad to know that your SL experience is richer thanks to his wisdom. It makes me happy to hear that other people are happy in SL.

For me, SL hasn't been about confronting hangups so much as broadening my horizons by allowing me to interact with and learn from people with lifestyles and interests that are very different from my own. It's a conversation I've had many times here in the forum and inworld. I love the diversity of SL and the opportunity it affords to understand people better.

In any case, I wholeheartedly agree that any meaningful relationship (whether that's a romantic interest or merely friendship) should be rooted in honesty, or "responsible disclosure." That doesn't have to mean giving up one's privacy or anonymity, but it does mean being open about things that would make a difference to how the other person sees the relationship. My own closest friends in SL are people who, even though I may not necessarily know their RL identities, are nevertheless honest about things that are important.

I once started a thread on character that ultimately went down a path I hadn't expected, but one of my attempted points was this: "Although my friends in SL are a diverse bunch, one thing I believe they share in common with my RL friends is character—a sense of wanting to treat the people they interact with with caring and respect." So both Torley's words and your perspective resonate with me, Perrie. Thanks for reminding me of one of the things I love about SL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Carole Franizzi wrote:

Oh you stinker! You said if I did that "thing" with you, you;d never show anyone that photo!

And you believed her??? :matte-motes-agape:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Randall Ahren wrote:

A typical female strategy on Survivor is for a female to align with a strong male, and even mate with him. In return the male protects her and takes her to the end with him.

And the good looking women are offered more in return for nudity or semi-sexual favors. (An episode in which the women took off their tops for a jar of peanut butter is etched in memory - not for the same reasons as the males who watched that, I'm sure.)

It's depressingly prehistoric, which is why I stopped watching.

Just because we all have a primal brain still linked to caveman times doesn't mean we all have to give in to it. But that show - it's all about the physicality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...