Intersexual Relations
69 replies · 1310 views
20 hours ago, Cult Icon said:
why not?
I am not interested to have sexual contact with another women, I don' t like it, not want it.
7 hours ago, Tania82 said:I am not interested to have sexual contact with another women, I don' t like it, not want it.
If you've never done it, how do you know that you won't like it or want it? 
This reminds me of how I heard that all people have degrees of homosexuality in them. This is why psychologists use the term "predominantly homosexual" or "predominantly heterosexual" when classifying a person. I am mildly curious about a homosexual experience myself but I have so little homosexuality that the curiosity has never manifested itself into action. It would be worth it if the experience unleashed a new discovery about myself.
I don' t want it. It' s so simple. I am not curious about it.
^^^^
Okaaaay! Miss predominantly hetereosexual! 
Today's thought:
There's a saying:
"'They say behind every great man there's a woman. "
Interpretation: I believe that this saying is not 100% true but it is desirable. Every man with a good partner knows that she brings the best out of him, and stirs up his energy. When I experienced this, the energy pushed me to achieve things that I would have normally not been capable. of. I went home exhausted everyday due to the exertion. Somehow , the normal constraints of willpower were breached. I had less fear, too and took more risks.
The best woman for a man is the one that sees the potential of a man that he doesn't see himself. She quietly calls this essence forth, in the spirit of feminine generosity and in exchange for the devotion and love of the man.
Love is a friendship set to music. - Joseph Campbell
What do you guys think?
On 19/10/2017 at 1:58 AM, Cult Icon said:^^^^
Okaaaay! Miss predominantly hetereosexual!
Yes I said it. I can say a woman is very beautiful or pretty but I don' t want sex with them. I love the beauty, but I don' t want sex with other women
For me, the next level and is really finding out how to test & screen women for the inner qualities that I want.
I already do it intuitively but haven't even written it down and tried to codify & make it a more sophisticated system.
To judge women and their lives lived so far, and their potential. And if they can work with me on this spiritual journey to become more excellent and meaningful in life. This is the most essential point, as otherwise there will stagnation, entropy, and perhaps even decline.
I don't know what this beautiful statement means 100%, but I have a clue:
"There is a light that shines from within certain women, a nurturing light that washes over the hearts of men, cleansing them, baptizing them in a way.
In her presence, all is forgiven."
I've listened to about half of the audiobook for
It's a good summary of research results. Thanks for finding it!
^^
I've finished listening to the audiobook. It's really a must read for all people. The book focuses on the hormonal impact in shaping female and male cognition from birth to death. The case studies are largely focused on child psychology with less emphasis on Adult and elderly psychology. There is also a lot of real life patients being analyzed...which provides a lot of insights.
eg. One of the interesting facts is about the "Tomgirl"- They are babies that receive an excess shot of testosterone and progesterone as fetuses and grow up with part of their brain circuitry as more male than normal. (eg. desire for exploration, risk taking, adventure) Also, the Post- menopausal women is just as I expected- the needs of survival and reproduction are deleted from their biology and there is a dramatic personality change that's even greater than the change that elderly, low testosterone men have.
Extremely feminine women tend to have very high female hormonal levels (estrogen, Oxytocin, etc.) which increases social skills, writing ability, personal expression, and intuition but decreases their ability to systematize knowledge (weaker in technical fields).
-Something that came to me:
-Young women (20s/30s) are usually many years (and sometimes even permanently) behind same-aged men in general intelligence because their time and energy is focused more on relationships, childcare/pregnancy, social life, makeup, and dating/sex as adult men of all ages disproportionately converge on them. According to my course, one of the insights was that the female brain stem lacks the degree exploratory/adventure/curiosity/ego impulses than a male brain stem has which would dis-motivate the woman from developing her general intelligence.
-According to sexuality studies, women are attracted to men with high levels of 'general intelligence' rather than geek traits (extreme knowledge in a narrow area). This makes reproductive sense as the male with high common sense and general intelligence is more maneuverable and socially adaptive in the pre-historic world than, say, the traits of an asperger's sydrome ish/fanatical computer programmer or engineer.
-On the waist to hip ratio: studies show that attraction is remarkably consistent among a certain ratio across nations. In some cultures the males are attracted to fat women and some, thin. But they all need that same ratio. The purpose of this evolutionary programming is that the male sees the ratio and it implies that the woman is not carrying a baby and that she has a high level of feminine spectrum hormones.
From "The Mating Mind" (Miller) pg. 40
On how the sexes evolve differently among animals in general:
"Over generations, male
weaponry evolves to be more intimidating and male ornamentation
evolves to be more impressive. There are two results. First,
within each sexual species, males diverge from the female norm.
Mature males become more strongly differentiated, compared
with females, compared with young animals, and compared with
their own ancestors. The other result is very fast divergence
between species. The weaponry and ornamentation of one
species can go off in a very different direction from the weaponry
and ornamentation of a closely related species. Thus, Darwin's
sexual selection idea could explain three enigmas: the ubiquity
across many species of ornaments that do not help survival, sex
differences within species, and rapid evolutionary divergence
between species."
on biological slavery, pg.46:
"sexual selection embodied Darwin's conviction that
evolution was a matter of differences in reproduction rather
than just differences in survival. Animals expend their very lives
in the pursuit of mates, against all the expectations of natural
theology."
"Finally, Darwin recognized that the agents of sexual selection
are literally the brains and bodies of sexual rivals and potential
mates, rather than the mindless pressures of a physical habitat
or a biological niche. Psychology haunts biology with the specter
of half-conscious mate choice shaping the otherwise blind course
of evolution. This"
Thoughts this morning:
-Nonlogical facets of female behavior: Its the tendency for women's subconscious to be obsessed with categorizing and judging people (as opposed to objects with men. This is an obvious fact of life and also is reflected in women's media) for what evolutionary psychologists call "survival value" (or utility and often, social value. It's all for self centered means in my view)
-As men, we're always being judged and usually with a distorted time-frame. The judgement usually appears to be slanted towards what the woman perceives as value in the present moment. In making the judgement, the present/historical facts are vastly overwhelmed by the women's feelings. The feelings take over and are used to distort the recollection of the past, and provide (usually illogical) arguments for what the female subconscious judges as survival value in the present. A tip-off is when the woman starts to ask weird questions (from the male POV). Then these bogus (from male POV) claims start to appear. These claims could be either favorable or unfavorable.
-This is "chick logic" and the source of much conflict/misunderstanding between the sexes. It is logical in terms of what female survival instincts need but it's illogical otherwise. It can be summed up like this: Backwards rationalizing the present feelings. Temporal is key.
-Since the judgement is based on emotions of the present, the judgement can be radically altered in either direction if enough time and change occurs. It can be considered a type of emotional blackmail as far as couples and familes are concerned. But that doesn't matter as far as mother nature is concerned- it is necessary for the survival of the species.
- According to studies supporting "Attachment theory", only around half of couples have a 'balanced' relationship style (the type that is easiest to manage). In Western countries (North America/Western Europe), the rest lean towards "avoidant" attachment style rather than an anxious one.
On the waste of courtship- men bear the burden and women's personality and brain stem are programmed to react accordingly. pg. 129 , the Mating Mind:
"Zahavi's handicap principle and the idea of condition-dependence are different perspectives on the same thing. The handicap idea emphasizes that sexual ornaments and courtship behaviors must be costly in order to be reliable fitness indicators. Their cost can take almost any form. "
"As with Veblen's conspicuous consumption principle, the form of the cost does not matter much. What matters is the prodigious waste. The waste is what keeps the fitness indicators honest. The wastefulness of courtship is what makes it romantic. The wasteful dancing, the wasteful gift-giving, the wasteful conversation, the wasteful laughter, the wasteful foreplay, the wasteful adventures. From the viewpoint of "survival of the fittest," the waste looks mad and pointless and maladaptive. Human courtship even looks wasteful from the viewpoint of sexual selection for non-genetic benefits, because, as we shall see, the acts of love considered most romantic are often those that cost the giver the most, but that bring the smallest material benefits to the receiver. However, from the viewpoint of fitness indicator theory, this waste is the most efficient and reliable way to discover someone's fitness. Where you see conspicuous waste in nature, sexual choice has often been at work."
"Male humans waste their time and energy getting graduate degrees, writing books, playing sports, fighting other men, painting pictures, playing jazz, and founding religious cults. These may not be conscious sexual strategies, but the underlying motivations for "achievement" and "status"—even in preference to material sources—were probably shaped by sexual selection. (Of course, the wasteful displays that seemed attractive during courtship may no longer be valued if they persist after offspring arrive—there is a trade-off between parental responsibilities and conspicuous display.)
The handicap principle suggests that in each case, sexual selection cares much more about the prodigious magnitude of the waste than about its precise form. Once the decision-making mechanisms of sexual choice get the necessary information about fitness from a sexual display, everything else about the display is just a matter of taste. This interplay between waste and taste gives evolution a lot of elbow room. In fact, every species with sexual ornaments can be viewed as a different variety of sexually selected waste. Without so many varieties of sexual waste, our planet would not be host to so many species."
**The male heroes of female romance novels ( eg. the hero of 50 shades of grey- a 20 something billionaire that throws money around and dominates a shallow woman). are ludicrous, and at their core, deeply vulgar and inhumane caricatures- the female equivalent of hardcore pornstars and Pamela Anderson back in her prime. Another popular archetype, since the beginning of human mythology- is the woman "taming" the powerful, dangerous "bad boy" and winning over his commitment to her needs.
-According to data analyzed from the biggest dating sites, Women rate the 50 percentile man at the 15 percentile. So 84% of men were considered "below average".
-studies on the subject of romance novels (basically female porn) show that the male heroes grew more and more outrageously superhuman over time- height/looks, wealth/power, capacity for risk taking/adventure, domination over other people, etc.
***I believe that this has to do with the elitist nature of female sexuality, deceptive impressions accumulated during youth regarding the starved (F*ck everything that's average or above) nature of male sexuality, and also artificial brainwashing from a lifetime of cultural conditioning & media.
- Studies: Men gravitate to fertile, young women (20s and 30s) while older men gravitate to younger women but older and older as they age. This is presumably due to the higher value placed on the women's personality over fertility/looks once a guy is past his 40s.
On Genetic memory and pre-programmed behavior: pg.271
"Biologists no longer draw a boundary around the body and assume that anything beyond the body is beyond the reach of evolution. In The Extended Phenotype, Richard Dawkins argued that genes are often selected for effects that spread outside the body into the environment. It is meaningful to talk about genes for a spider's web, a termite's
mound, and a beaver's dam. Some genes even reach into the brains of other individuals to influence their behavior for the genes' own benefit. All sexual ornaments do that, by reaching into the mate choice systems of other individuals. At the biochemical level, genes only make proteins, but at the level of evolutionary functions they can construct eyes, organize brains, activate behaviors, build bowers, and create status hierarchies."
"Darwin observed that "self-adornment, vanity, and the admiration of others, seem to be the commonest motives" for self ornamentation. He also noted that in most cultures men ornament themselves more than women, as sexual selection theory
would predict. "
*** Westworld's nod to evolutionary psychology:
"accomplished so much, for the basest of reasons.."
On Art, pg. 281
"To be reliable, fitness indicators must be difficult for low-fitness individuals to produce. Applied to human art, this suggests that beauty equals difficulty and high cost. We find attractive those things that could have been produced only by people with attractive, high-fitness qualities such as health, energy, endurance, hand-eye coordination, fine motor control, intelligence, creativity, access to rare materials, the ability to learn difficult skills, and lots of free time."
"The beauty of a work of art reveals the artist's virtuosity. This is a very old-fashioned view of aesthetics, but that does not make it wrong. Throughout most of human history, the perceived beauty of an object has depended very much on its cost. That cost could be measured in time, energy, skill, or money. Objects that were cheap and easy to produce were almost never considered beautiful. As Veblen pointed out in The Theory of the Leisure Class, "The marks of expensiveness come to be accepted as beautiful features of the expensive articles." Our sense of beauty was shaped by evolution to embody an awareness of what is difficult as opposed to easy, rare as opposed to common, costly as opposed to cheap, skillful as opposed to talentless, and fit as opposed to unfit. "
"the fundamental challenge facing artists is to demonstrate their fitness by making something that lower-fitness competitors could not make, thus proving themselves more socially and sexually attractive. This challenge arises not only in the visual arts, but also in music, storytelling, humor, and many other behaviors discussed throughout this book. The principles of fitness-display are similar across different display domains, and this is why so many aesthetic principles are similar."
***maybe this is why so many artistically talentless women are so interested in "critiquing" art rather than producing it?
Virtue signalling to females:
"As we have seen, David Buss's findings indicate that kindness is the most desired trait in a sexual partner around the world. Other research on human mate choice consistently confirms the attractiveness of kindness, generosity, sympathy, and tenderness"
"Perhaps generosity works as a Zahavian handicap that displays fitness, and thus evolved through sexual selection. Amotz Zahavi has argued since the 1970s that apparent altruism could bring hidden reproductive benefits through the social status that it inspires. Anthropologist James Boone recently combined Zahavi's handicap theory and Veblen's conspicuous consumption theory to explain costly, conspicuous displays of magnanimity. While Tessman and I focus on direct mate choice for moralistic displays during courtship, Zahavi and Boone emphasize the indirect reproductive benefits of high status. "
"If, for example, all females refused to mate with any males who ate meat, any genes predisposing individuals to vegetarianism (however indirectly) would spread like wildfire.
The species would turn vegetarian no matter what survival benefits were conferred by meat-eating, as long as the sexual selection pressure against meat-eating held. Natural selection for selfishness would be impotent against sexual selection for moral behavior. "
"Where chimpanzees evolved moral leadership, humans evolved the more advanced capacity of moral vision, including the passionate articulation of social ideals concerning justice, freedom, and equality. Moral vision is sexually attractive, and may have been generated by sexual selection. It takes the impartiality of the peacekeeping primate to a more conscious, principled level. "
"The phenomenon of "charity work" also reveals how generosity is used as an inefficient fitness display rather than an efficient resource-transfer device. "
" For most working people, their most limited resource is time, not money. By donating time, they help the needy much less efficiently, but show their generosity and kindness much more credibly. "
"Another feature of human charity is that givers must usually be given tokens of appreciation, which they can display publicly "
" Donations as courtship displays would also explain the charity fashion cycles, which are especially apparent among young, single donors. For most of us, our charities are cosmetic."
"Turner revealed that when he told his wife of his intended gift, she broke down in tears of joy, crying, "I'm so proud to be married to you. I never felt better in my life." At least in this case, charity inspired sexual adoration"