rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
520 posts
12/21/2005 1:55 am

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm


The following is just my theory on men and women's biological clocks, ticking and stock written with the sole purpose to remind others of the grossly different biological demands of the sexes.

Women menstrate once a month to shed their unused egg for that month. On the other hand (pun completely intended), the average male in his sexual prime must masterbate in order to rid his bodies of his unused sperm (because he didn't get any sex) which has a much shorter "shelf-life" than women's eggs. Sperm has a 72-hour window of ideal freshness. If that sperm is not used the body will attempt to reuptake some of it, but it meanwhile has a new batch ready to load (again, a pun I couldn't resist). If men go prolonged periods of time without ejaculating, their bodies will soon have an excess of sperm, buidling up in the ballsack, backfilling their 'lines' and creating an increasing amount of pressure and discomfort. Men masterbate because they cannot menstrate. So perhaps women should be a bit more patient when they find a crusty sock under the computer desk, after all, men suffer one week every month for every woman he knows because of her 'Aunt Martha's Visit" and all the "fun" emotions she brings with her.

They also have the luxury of beating off to donate unneeded sperm to local sperm banks and making a quick bundle of money. Women have to have more invasive donation procedures, that can only be done in a limited capacity with greater risk of a botched donation. Thus explains the vast financial difference in donated eggs versus sperm donations.

With all this in mind, I ask myself: Are men perverted by nature or does nature pervert men? Is porn the moral decay of monogamy, relationships, and fidelity or is it a necessary evil created to ensure the sucess of all mankind in a Darwinish sense? If Sperm ATMs where on every corner making it easier for women to procreate despite not being in a relationship or having any immediate need for a male in her life, would more and more women skip the dating horrors of this life for increased free time she could use instead for her career or baby? Would dating cease or would it be uneffected by women's discontinued need for sex to procreate because it is human nature to seek conflict where none exists for the entertainment value of it all? hmmm.... just some thoughts!

rm_TwiztedCharm 57M
456 posts
12/21/2005 9:39 pm

Men are perverted by nature and women have used this tool against them for centuries. I don't believe I know any modern women who even consider monogamy as a serious part of a relationship except to expect that from THEIR partner. I don't expect it because I have never seen it from anyone I have been intimate with, HAVE YOU?

I do believe women will always want men in their lives just to have someone to drive fucking crazy because after all the best things in life come without clear price tags. theres that entertainment value

This line I will borrow to demonstrate a womans view of SEX after all it was written by a woman in every sense of the word......."could someone PLEASE explain to the confused the difference between MAKING LOVE and FUKING for FUK'S SAKE!!"


rm_Young102 41M
181 posts
12/22/2005 2:37 pm

If we accept that idea of perversion then we should define normality. We tend to use epithets chracterizing people according to standard norms. But the dominant notions of normality are subject to change and as such ideas of anomaly are altered. In a broader sense it can be said that since humans are part of nature, we are as normal or perverted as nature is. I tend to think that the nature is meaningless and anomalous comprising antithetical elements that sometimes create harmony and other times create disharmony or if you like it perversion. We are a result of bio-chemical processes and after that we create everything else in our minds and souls. Here comes love and hate, meaning and meaninglessness, normality and perversion.

rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
98 posts
12/31/2005 3:40 am

TwiztedCharm, now now.... let's not pretend men don't use their perversities against women as well. Which came first, the pimp or the ho?
I have a sister who is in a monagamous marriage and has only ever had sex with her husband... so have i seen it? SURE I HAVE, do i believe in it? HELLLLL NOOO!

Young102, Your rhetoric is appreciated and about as ambigous as a senior-level, college philosophy class. Thanks for writing, it's fun to think, isn't it?

HedonisticGuy69 47M
90 posts
12/31/2005 11:18 am

Are men perverted by nature or does nature pervert men?
Isn't that the classic biology/ genetics vs social learning debate?
My take on it is that men are predisposed to perversion, sexually speaking in the standards maintained and supported by the majority. After all, it's a been shown that we are visually and physically oriented which means when it comes to relationships we tend to stray in directions which would be in line with this.
Society innundates us with all sorts of images of SEX so with this predisposition what more can one expect? Of course there's a pull towards 'perversion' unless you have a different meaning for the word.
I don't think man as to be so weak that there's a real danger to monogamy, relationships and fidelity then again perhaps give it a few decades.
Porn may be looked at as a necessary evil, however, it's just the product of supply and demand. Enough individuals saw a demand and were more than willing to supply for profit or otherwise. What's that line about the oldest profession?
Porn is just a tool in a Darwinish sense, but for some who have addictions, deficiencies or other social impairments then it becomes something more, sadly.
We already have sperm ATM's, sperm banks for those discriminating and wealthy, the local bars for those who aren't More and more women are taking that route.
Dating will not cease but be transformed as it already has. It will be unaffected by women's freedom from the need to procreate because those interested in dating want and need more than a sperm donor.
Your views on relationships and dating indicate you see it as 'human nature to seek conflict where none exist'
Wow that's something!
Regardless of the accuracy of that statement, your cynical views regarding relationships as 'entertainment' as in games perhaps?... is skewed.
You have stated a fear of commitment and attachment, with this in mind, don't you think that your views on dating and relationships may just be a little if not a lot out of whack?
I am not a pro majority rules kind of guy and perhaps I am misreading or misinterpreting, yet I get the sense you aren't hitting the mark on this.
Meeting someone who's views challenge us, compliments our own is one great reason to explore a relationship, to see where it goes. If that individual happens to be attractive on other dimensions then that's hell of a lot of reasons to look into where that may lead. Soemtimes fears get in the way of the exploration and all that can be gained from it. Sometimes, it all becomes a game for certain individuals. I have nothing against play, but if all that is in a relationship is that without honesty then where's the potential in that?
Is there perhaps fears in yourself that has led you to such conclusions?
Life is dynamic.... life is fluid, without change there's no growth.
Without growth, what's left?

rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
98 posts
1/2/2006 6:02 am

HedonisticGuy69, I am dismayed by your assumption that the words 'entertainment' and 'games' are one and the same. While I can understand how my wanton and often unconventional views on dating and mating rituals in our modern society could mislead someone to impetuously categorize me as a woman who plays “games” in relationships, I cannot standby and allow this proverbial ‘flogging’ to publicly persuaded misinterpretations of my true intentions or infamously taint my reputation.

First of all, I have a bigger porn collection than most of my male friends. I, too, am very visually stimulated. It was a rhetorical question about porn perverting men asked with the specific intention to require self-reflection and personal interpretation to find the answer, which I purposely made no attempt to answer for the readers. I asked it just to flavor my writing style and challenge a thought process if possible. Here’s another one: Which came first, the pimp or the ho? Who cares really? My point exactly.

Secondly, I carefully choose the word ‘entertainment’ because the word infers a personal choice to define. What is entertainment to me? Entertainment to me is the antidote to boredom or something to help pass the time when there is a lack in purpose in how I am spending time. I don’t think of playing games, in any sense, a form of entertainment. I associate games with sports since both imply a competitive intent and define winners and losers. Seeing a play is entertainment, playing head games is a sick and twisted type of “sport” when done to make someone feel like a loser. Entertainment at the expense of another is sadistic and barbaric. It is simply not in my nature to treat other human beings in that way or make sport of exploiting another’s feelings. I live in a way that would reciprocate the kind of karma I would want to have come back to me. Odd how you associate the two so easily though, I bet you used to make little girl’s cry by teasing them or pulling there hair, and then probably wondered why she hated you when you really liked her. Little boys play like that because that is there nature.

When I said “it is human nature to seek conflict where none exists for the entertainment value of it all”, I meant that dating, in absence of a relationship goal and without a financial or biological need, would become something done more as a cure for boredom than out of necessity. Relationships are drama and drama is conflict. Why would people choose the conflict without warrant if they didn’t absolutely have to? FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT VALUE, IT’S SOMETHING TO DO!

I simply wondered what if women could satiate their own needs for orgasms, food, shelter, companionship, and now reproduction elsewhere, what would become of the male role in our society? Face it, there isn’t a lot, outside of the bedroom, that women and men like to equally do. The first year a man and women live together in or out of marriage is filled with extreme conflicts, compromising and confusion. MANY WOMEN SACRIFICE THEIR HAPPINESS AND SANITY FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING AND RAISING CHILDREN! Would they still choose to if given the option? Just another one of those rhetorical questions that I really thought hard about for a second, and got over it.

Third, your labeling my views as ‘skewed’ lacks merit and more appropriately reflects poorly on your for assuming that I play games with people in such ways. Your tendency to assume that warns me that you might be the game player, because we all have been told before that ‘it takes one to know one’ or THINK you know one. My views on relationships and dating were largely void in this post as it was more rhetorical in nature than anything else and basically side tracked from my original attempt to justify men’s increased need for sex and masturbation. I was DEFENDING men’s needs while just Thinking out loud in my blog and sharing some brainstorming thoughts with whomever might happen upon it while seeking entertainment. I am neither skewed or whacked, I am simply exercising my right to think and write my thoughts. You verbally abusive and undeserving comments were a result of YOU coming and taking a shit on MY playground, then bitching you don’t like the way it smells. You certainly didn’t call me names and belittle my opinions because I sought to offend you, I never asked for you advise, name calling or opinions, so maybe You are a little WHACKED for raining on my parade.

Forth, I admit my fears of commitment and relationships SOLEY because I openly acknowledge that I am not a person who honors those type of things BECAUSE I am cynical and find little to validate CHANGING my convictions to conform to or please the moral majority. BY YOUR standards, I am the antithesis of marriage material and that doesn’t bother me for you to think that in the least bit. I probably am not, but with the exception of monogamy, I am a WONDERFUL person to be in a relationship with sexually, spiritually or plutonically. MY FEAR is hurting someone else’s feelings because of my lack of willingness to conform or disappoint someone I care about.

Using majority rules as a standard to morality is INSANE for many reasons. ONE being that the majority of people on AdultFriendFinder are BY FAR one of the largest collection of MINORITY thinking people on earth! THIS IS A SWINGER SITE, not e-match dot com! This site by design encourages extra marital affairs, exploring sexual boundaries and homosexuality for example, NONE of which are supported by the MAJORITY RULES crap you deny adhering to but clearly do!

I do not allow fears to control my life, and I probably lack fear more than most people as I am the most exploratory person anyone- who- has- ever- met- me- knows! The only other thing I fear is never enjoying the sexual delights with different people and watching my sexuality die a slow, painful death by the restrictions of monogamy!

I am COMPLETELY honest and straightforward about who I am and what I believe in. I lay the cards out on the table for all to see, because I am not desperate and I make my own rules and I will not choose to date someone or being involved with people who want something from me that I cannot or will not be able to give them. Sex is sex and love is love… That’s my whole theory in a nutshell… Like or leave it, doesn’t’ really matter to me either way because I am going to just keep on being me and living my life for me and if people wandering in and out of my life who can at least TRY to live with my SKEWED ways, than good for both of us, but I will NEVER waste my time or yours pretending to be something I am not or buying into societal notions that are so blatantly failing to provide standards that anyone can successfully live by these day.

Here’s something I hope grows on you. THERE IS NOTHING MORE UNATTRACTIVE that someone who is FAKE for the sake of social acceptance and NOTHING MORE PATHETIC than PEOPLE WHO STAND IN CHURCH AND MAKE VOWS AND PROMOSISES THEY CAN’T KEEP, and live a life of LIES and DECEPTION because they think that’s what they were told is the RIGHT THING to do. Marriage and monogamy is a joke, look at the divorce rate. Look at every couple you know and see if MONOGAMY still exist! The MINORITY are successful at it anymore. So why should I live my life any other way than that which allows me to live with myself free of guilt, hypocrisy and self-sacrifice? Don’t answer, it was a rhetorical question and besides I have my answer and really don’t care what you think. Just being me.

And you call yourself a hedonist!

HedonisticGuy69 47M
90 posts
1/3/2006 2:50 am

Hmmn consider me properly chastised
However, you certainly have misinterpreted my motives or thoughts in response to your own.
I din't come to belittle your opinion, unfortunate that you take it that way
It's late and all that comes to mind at the moment is that if there's any hostility here, it would seem to be coming from you.
Again, I apologize for getting your dander up.
You come to a lot of conclusions about me, in response to your perception of an attack that I have supposedly made.
I will answer one though, nope never teased the girls and made them cry, too busy playing with my friends and running around. I certainly don't claim to be perfect or even near it, by any means so feel free to keep dishing out the euphmisms/ insults if that really provides you such comfort. Have a Happy New Year!

rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
98 posts
1/3/2006 9:34 am

HedonisticGuy69, you are forgiven and I hope you don't take offense to my reply, but I have written some articles on here and if ONE person misinterprets any little part, phrase or word in some of my stories, it starts an AVALANCE of backlashes against me and my whole purpose becomes lost. It's extremely frustrating. Besides, I was PMSing and I actually LOVE LOVE LOVE to debate. You made me use my old debate skills in rebuttling in effective argumentation.

I really never thought you the type to pull hair anyhow... I just HATE being called WHACKED! *rolling eyes*

My insane sense of logic often dwarfs my ability to experience emotions like most people (except anger- never have a problem with that one). That kind of dehumanizes me at times and I guess that does make me seem abnormal. Oh well. I gotta work with God gave me, and that's just me.

you know, after-an-argument sex is the BEST! Wanna Kiss and make up??

Either way TRUCE!

Haopy new year to you too!

blueguy1051 61M

1/3/2006 5:39 pm

In answer to your original question, free sperm and dildoes may be able to take care of some needs a woman might have, but they won't cuddle and keep you warm. And that, in a nutshell, is why men won't become obsolete - at least in cold climates.

rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
98 posts
1/3/2006 8:19 pm

blueguy1051, ha, so true, but electric blankets work wonders, too (found that out from necessity). there will never be an end to men and women wanting to be together... our human bodies are just to chemically and physically driven that way.

KDR305 47M/47F

1/6/2006 9:54 pm

Uh oh. I found a sexually adventurous woman with a brain who likes to debate.... JJ, I think we're going to have a hell of a time!

And since you've answered some fairly long posts with lengthy responses, I'm just going to let go and see what comes out.

BTW: I didn't follow very much of the thread up 'til now, but I did scan a little. I'm addressing your initial post here.

I have a feeling I might be restating some of what you meant in my opening, but as you didn't clarify these points I'm inclined to do so.

Comparing the prevelance of male masturbation in our society to the cleansing process of the menstrual cycle sounds good, but it's pretty much hogwash. The male body can go on indefinitly without ejaculating with no adverse effects.

The reason men (especially monogomous ones) jerk-off so much is a combination of biology, psychology and society.

In the earliest days of our species, and through many millenia our societal structure was very similar to that of the Wolf, the Lion or the Elephant. Only the strongest male in the group mated with ALL of the females. Whichever guy could fight off all the other suitors and still have the endurance to get it on with all the ladies was the winner. As a result, the offspring were stronger and so on. This is how we made our way to the top of the food chain.

So, men are hard-wired for sex. It's in the very chromosomes that make us men. To this day, there are men who have a stronger drive than others. For the most part, these guys are automatically more attractive to women. It's just part of being human.

Add to this formula the (unnatural) concept of monogammy. In which you take a man who is programmed from birth to want nothing more than sex. Everything we do is for sex in one way or another. You connect that man to a woman who (no matter how sexually free) has a completely different outlook on and response to the act itself.

Very soon after recovering from an orgasm, the man is already anticipating the next one. How to get there. That one was good, but the next will be better.

Whereas the woman finds contentment and repose.

Again, this is integral to the continuation of the species. After all, the first and foremost reason (biologically) for intercourse and orgasm is procreation. So women are predisposed to that period of repose in preparation of the arduous task ahead.

And this is where the societal element comes in. The woman in this day and age (assuming she's not completely dense) will have a VERY good idea of her chances for becoming pregnant during any given encounter. So her inherant calm can switch quickly into post-coital bliss. She is further aided by the knowledge that whenever the mood strikes her, she can have it again. Anytime, anywhere, for any reason, with whomever she chooses.

Likewise, the man is now (more or less) at his woman's mercy. He has promised himself to her and only her until death. Yet his sex drive has just been fed, which makes it grow rather than diminish. And he is constantly bombarded by sexual images. Granted, most of the bombardment is self-imposed, but either way ..... a release is needed.

Not to save his sperm, but to maintain his sanity.

And so we have the porn industry and the strip clubs and the massage parlors with their "happy endings".

The PROBLEM with the societal part of the equation is that women are taught that sex is dirty, while men are taught that it's necessary. And woman are taught that a man masturbating is this horrible, filthy, disgustingly depraved act perpetrated by a sick, perverted individual.

So men are relegated to a lifetime of frequent masturbation. Which is not a problem for most of us.

The problem arises from the fact that we have to hide it. We have to do it in the shower, or in the basement, or ONLY when nobody is home.

I can't imagine how many guys went out to find their first prostitute, or one-nighter at a motel with a barfly after being browbeaten by the wife for masturbating.

"You know what? Fuck it. YOU won't do it. And now you're trying to tell me I can't even do it to myself? Fuck that. There're PLENTY of women out there who would LOVE to have this cock."

And he's right. And then he goes and and learns just how right he is. And suddenly he doesn't want HER anymore. Why should he bother to beg for it, when he can go outside and find women who are beggin for HIM?

So, are men perverted by nature? NO.

Does nature pervert men? NO.

Society perverts reality by treating sexuality as filth.

People pervert fidelity by having unreasonable expectations.

But contrary to popular belief, there is nothing perverted about the exercise of sexual desire.

(DISCLAIMER: the previous sentence presumes that the sexual desires and activities are of a purely consentual nature among a person or persons above the age of reason).

The sperm ATM's: Oh, please.

Do you remember the famous quote from Gloria Steinem: "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle."? Funny, and pithy as that might be, it simply does NOT apply when the woman in question is a mother.

She might not need a man, but the kid sure as shit does.

I'm a child of divorce. As is my wife. As are most of my friends, and most of us turned out okay. Even those of us who had one parent just bail. That doesn't mean it should be PLANNED for.

And how exactly does a single mother have MORE time to devote to her career? That's a new one.

I know a woman who dumped her babie's father as soon as she learned she was pregnant. "Fuck him... I'll do it myself. I don't need HIM."

Well, after a couple of months on her own with that infant, who do you think was getting weekly phone calls demanding he be more "involved" in "his" sons life?

Having a kid takes 2 people. The child needs to see that there are different ways of approaching problems and different ways of celebrating victories.

Any person who decides to raise a child completley alone before the child even arrives is doing a disservice to that child. It's simply one of the most selfish things a person can do.

That's it for now.... thanks for getting the juices flowing!


rm_JuicyJulia2 42F
98 posts
1/9/2006 11:18 am

KDR305 my intentions were achieved!! Ig got your juices flowing and we both still have our pants on! that's what I love to see! Now doesn't it feel good to THINK!!! the brain is the MAIN sex organ!! too bad it isn't used enough! I'm finding myself oddly attracted to you right now!

KDR305 47M/47F

1/12/2006 4:28 pm

See that, and I haven't even posted a picture yet!

Yes! I love to think, and debate.

The difficulty is finding enough people with the proper mind-set to get the juices flowing properly.

I think I'll go see what you've been up to since my last visit.

Become a member to create a blog