Why are men shamed into controlling their sexuality?
 

I don't think it is a cognitive choice at all no matter how civilized we pretend to be.

Well in the interest of fairness aren't women forced to suppress their sexual desires for the fear of being dubbed a "slut"? Men have often been expected to be somewhat promiscuous (sp?) whereas women are scoffed at for it. One of those undying social pressures.

Re: Why are men shamed into controlling their sexuality?
 

No. Menstruation is an entirely involuntary function like your heart beating. While feeling sexual desire is uncontrollable, actions aren't. Looking at a girls ass, fucking someone, etc. etc. are actions. We can't control the desire to do the listed things but we have control over whether we do them or not.

It's called reason and it's why we dominate the planet.

I would hope that individuals who enjoy the TFP can make the distinction between healthy sexuality (looking at other human beings and become sexually aroused) and unhealthy sexual behavior (having an affair behind your partners back).

I'm gonna use that line on my GF next time she says something.. :p

Men are _not_ shamed into controlling their sexuality.

A guy that respects his woman does not drool over other women in front of her. He has enough brain matter to control his urge to mate - just as he controls the other urge that is testosterone driven - violence.

So men should change? You don't accept them as they are? My dad always has a saying I quite agree with "You work up an appetite outside, but you eat at home". Sorry if it sounds strange, it's translated from dutch.
Off course, if you start turning your head while you're with your g/f... that's just asking for trouble, but I don't see how it is strange for a guy to appreciate the female beauty when he sees it.
Personally I like to see a woman just like I like to see a painting, it is beautifull, doesn't mean I want it in my house.

Or else what? He's disrespectful? He doesn't find his woman attractive? I hope you're not equating simple looks at attractive passersby to "drooling". I wouldn't be caught dead with a woman so insecure or unwilling to accept more realistic and rational opinions over a momentous glance.

I disagree that violence is "driven" by testosterone, but if it is, who weilds the control? The man as you claim in the former part, or testosterone?

Desires/urges/thoughts are all private and should be held as valid in a relationship without value. They are just thoughts, they are not secrecy or lies or deceit.

People shouldn't feel pressured to awkwardly ignore attractive passersby or feel restricted in what they do with their partners. I feel that jumping to conclusions or not accepting all thoughts, feelings, and desires of your partner as valid is a red flag that something could be done to improve the security of the relationship.

People in relationships: there are people more attractive than you and your SO, period. Deal with it. You can act apprehensive, offended, ignored, hurt, whatever when it happens, but just know you don't have to and that relationships and love and in a separate league than attractive passersby. As I saw earlier this morning on this board, (ideally) you're not with someone because of their looks.

Drooling= ogling =more than a momentary glance

Quote:

I disagree that violence is "driven" by testosterone, but if it is, who weilds the control? The man as you claim in the former part, or testosterone?

A man controls how he reacts to the surge in the hormone in his body, by using his cognitive abilities.

Quote:

People shouldn't feel pressured to awkwardly ignore attractive passersby or feel restricted in what they do with their partners. I feel that jumping to conclusions or not accepting all thoughts, feelings, and desires of your partner as valid is a red flag that something could be done to improve the security of the relationship.

In a commited relationship, one has chosen *a* partner. If one wants to not feel *pressured to awkardly ignore attractive passerby,* one should not be in a commited relationship. It's pretty simple.

Appreciation of beauty - aesthetics, is one thing, but it is
classless, to *ogle* women. It objectifies them - making them less than human beings.

Quote:

People in relationships: there are people more attractive than you and your SO, period. Deal with it. You can act apprehensive, offended, ignored, hurt, whatever when it happens, but just know you don't have to and that relationships and love and in a separate league than attractive passersby.

I assume you meant that relationships & love *are* in a separate league than attractive passerby, but you seem to be saying that someone in a *love relationship* should be able to include attractive passerby. This is contradictory.

when in mixed company i try to keep the *ogling* to a minimum, well depends on who the mixed company is :p lol
but yea at times its easier to quickly glance and no one notices but other times you just cant.


but if your in a relationship, i think that you should do your best not to, but also shouldnt be punished if you do, by accident if u are actually trying not to.

Agreed. Insecurity can mess up relationships. And women are attracted to men that aren't their partners, too. I think we are just more subtle about it sometimes ;)

I disagree. I think that your guys can care about their SO enough to not flaunt the fact that they notice other women, but that doesn't change the fact that they notice.

Besides, would you rather be with a man because he refuses to consider the possibility that he might be more interested in another person, or because he looks at the competition and decides that he still wants you the most?

I think that most guys want to bang every thing with two legs and a nice rack. The fact that we don't is a testament to how much we care about our committment to our SO's.

How are we disagreeing then? Semantics (flaunt v. drool)?

We are drawing a distinction between maybe involuntary glancing at an attractive someone and pulling it out in public and beating one off, right? Noticing someone's sexiness is natural, obsessing about it can be unhealthy. People need to understand that, and get over their insecurities.

men are genuinly at a disadvantage here, because a womens body and form is more beautiful than a mans body, in that a male's body is utilitarian. Which kinda goes back to the hunter/gather males and nurturing/mothering of females when we were primates. Although i know that, that is not fact! just what i think, which may be convoluted from a hetrosexual male...

Back to menstration, i see that an erection would be the male equilivant of menstration, sorta. I think both are unstoppable human functions for both sexes, but people seem to be arguing over how the male one is derived. Do you think males act any different if they have an erection? i don't think i do, unless i am acting in a way to cover it up!
generally there is the idea that females are less resaonble or more moody during there post menstral cycle. maybe i've gone off the topic a bit...

As for males looking at other women, it seems that the main things is the excessiveness of the looking. In that there is ogling and also just looking, to me one is more excessive and less respectful to women. That is to say, i feel i can look at a women and appreciate her beauty, without wanting to primarily sleep with her, but just appreciate it. I also don't agree (doesn't mean i don't sometimes do it myself though) with the objectifying of women and reducing them to tits and ass, however for males it is extremely difficult and so i kinda agree with greg700 in that, as unreasonable as it sounds, girls should appreciate that guys don't want to bang everything in sight.

Wasn't it Larry Miller who said that the only thing stopping men from screwing absolutely everything (human, inhuman, animate, or inanimate) is the fear of shame from their mates?

He also said that if women EVER knew what we were thinking, they would never stop slapping us.

not exactly on topic, but you've got a very good point that i think all women should think about.

myself included.

thanks.

I can honestly say that my wife has directed me to specifically look at another woman's large breasts in a restaurant.

I still don't know what I did to deserve her.

oops, your right. I wrote that one after getting back from a long night at the bar.

Typically in my experience, passersby don't stick around too long.

Anyway, what is the consequence?

You do have the freedom to choose a multi-partner lovestyle and not have to be upset or feel awkward about attractive passersby.

Why is this?

No, I'm saying one needn't feel threatened or hurt by an SO looking at attractive strangers because the relationship is most likely founded on sturdier ground than appearances.

I'm guessing the root is insecurity, but if it isn't please explain.

How is this any different than "ogling" attractive people on television and in movies?

Why should person 1 be punished or seen as disrespecting for not catering to the insecurity of person 2? Why not just work through the insecurity?

Oh man. Do you really think that could be the reason?:confused:

Though insecurity may be an issue for some, the *root of it* is respect or lack thereof. My belief is that if a man is in a committed, i.e. monogamous relationship with a woman, that he shows said woman the respect and courtesy of not making obviously overt glances of a sexual nature at any other woman than the partner he is in the company of.
ogle: ( Merrriam-Webster) to look at in a flirtatious way.
The difference is that ogling is interactive. TV & movie watching is not.

Why not just break up with the um, person that doesn't appreciate his partner enough to respect her? He doesn't have to wear blinders, for goodness sake, just show a bit of awareness for the feelings of the one he is with.

Any man that is a slave to his hormones to the point that he can't refrain from overtly admiring women that are most likely out of his league whilst in the company of his woman, failing to appreciate the qualities of the one he has chosen to be with, is not evolved enough for my company and needs to grow the ---- up.

I treat my wife the way I want her to treat me. If I saw her looking at a guy like she wanted to jump on him right there it would crush me. With that in mind I never more than glance at another woman when with my wife. Like a lot of you have said, it is a respect issue. Show some.

Oh, I'm sorry, from the original post I decided that this was about having the desire to look at attractive strangers, not ogling. (And yeah, I knew what it meant, but I thought it might have been an exaggeration, since I felt it was quite clear this wasn't about flat out "drooling" or flirting. "However, if guys desire to look at other women.")

If it's an active thing and more than just an innocent, automatic look, then I think it might be disrespectful. I don't really understand what this "desire" thing is all about, but I know my eyes find attractive appearing people seemingly automatically.

Who said anything about not appreciating qualities or even overtly admiring, for that matter. Maybe it is just semantics, but when I read the original post nothing similiar to flaunting/drooling/whatever came to mind. I thought it was just looks, which people some people seem to get upset about. Looking at someone doesn't necessarily mean interaction more akin to ogling.

I apologize for the confusion.

Sexual activity, according to Carl Sagan (Read: The Dragons of Eden) is handled by a portion of the brain known as the R-Complex. This portion deals with the most primitive biological functions necessary for the survival of a species: breathing, eating, fighting, fleeing, and sexual reproduction.

Since sexual activity is directed innately by the R-Complex, we would normally have no control over it....Its a trait necessary for survival.

However, Another portion of the brain, the Neocortex, came much later on the evolutionary scale. (If you believe in evolution).
The Neocortex is present in most mammalian creatures, and introduces things such as caring, emotions, self-control, advanced intelligence, etc.
It is possible to muffle some R-Complex demands through the neo-cortex. The most prominent example would be control of sexual demands. Of course, this is extremely difficult for most people, since you are going against an ancient evolutionary process that is part of us.

Whether its a "cognitive choice" or not depends on the individual. We cannot compare this to menstruation: which is a completely different bodily function. Menstruation has nothing to do with your cognitive abilities: its simply a vital biological process, like breathing and eating, that keeps a female's uterus in good condition.

In the end, sexual desire is a completely cognitive function. Your brain instructs your body to respond a certain way. Whether it is controllable or not is a gray area.

Re: Why are men shamed into controlling their sexuality?
 

Frankly, I disagree. I am capable of controlling my sexual urge, the same as I control my violent or greedy urge.

The fact that we are societal and organised, and the creation of a behavioural system which is not natural means that men and women (yes, women can be aggressive, in fact this is a leading problem in modern society) must behave.

The menstruation thing is evidence of the key problem with modern western society (esp, english language areas). The theory that a man is nothing more than a walking sexual organ is frankly debasing and idiotic. If I were to refer to women purely as devices for creating children, I would be pilloried.

Human self control is a voluntary response. Why should we not give in to each and every hind-brain driven violence? Because we have transcended that in a conscious manner.

there's a fine line between repressed behaviour and inappropriate behaviour. Just looking at some other girl is only inappropriate when your lady is standing next to you, and should be repressed.

what is wrong with acknowleging the attractiveness of another person?

If you are in a relationship and you are looking around, how is this "bad"?

It seems to me that the ones who feel that this behaviour is wrong, are the ones with inferiority/insecurity problems.

IF you are in a committed relationship, the fact that you have looked at another woman/man and admired their form is incosequential compared to the overall relationship you are in (well hopefully). Compare it to being on the worlds biggest rollercoaster, and on the other hand having to pull up your sock.

Use these rational abilities you are talking about to control your insecurities, rather than apportion blame to the SO in your relationship.

(as an aside : my SO point out good looking women to me, and we compare notes.)

no matter how civilized we claim to be, the male of every species is attracted to the younger, 'prettier" girls for one reason only. to procreate and make the species last. to deny nature is to deny yourself

forgot to add that i meant looking is all subconcious to some extent. acting on it is a show of how civilized we are, but is still driven even if only a little bit, by the subconscious mind

Amen to respect! A natural, healthy desire is one thing but true love comes when you "forsake all others." When you're in love, you don't even want anyone else.

The problem with these arguments are predicated on the assumption that people are all the same. They aren't. Not every woman feels jealous or "disrespected" when men look at other women, and an excellent case in point is my ex girlfriend; she's bisexual and often emailed me pictures of women she thought were exceptionally hot.

Of course, you might say that this is just an isolated exception to the rule that most people feel the same way and want the same things, but it isn't, Double D. As another example, you define "committed" relationships as "monogamous" ones, but polygamy is perfectly acceptible throughout much of the world. For instance, "A survey of over six thousand women, ranging in age from 15 to 59, conducted in the second largest city in Nigeria showed that 60 percent of these women would be pleased if their husbands took another wife. Only 23 percent expressed anger at the idea of sharing with another wife." (From http://www.polygamy.com/Islam/Myth-Reality-Polygamy.htm )

I hope you don't think I'm picking on you, Double D, as the idea that everybody wants the same things and feels the same way is fairly widespread:

Killconey, are you sure that when I'm in love, I don't even want anyone else? I think you should be very careful before making statements like that! It's generally wiser to speak for yourself. I can believe that when you're in love, you don't want anyone else, but I've been in love with more than one woman at a time, and I've known women who have been in love with more than one man at a time. Not everyone is the same.

The most important thing in any relationship is to be flexible for your partner, listen to what they want from you, and tailor your behavior to the relationship. If I were with someone who found profanity unnerving, I'd try not to swear around her. If I were with someone who was insecure or got jealous easilly, I wouldn't look at other women around her.

In my current relationship, she likes to spend more time alone together than I would ordinarily, so I do my best to make time for her; and I really don't like passive women, so my girlfriend makes an effort to make decisions every now and again. Specifically regarding the subject of looking at other women, I certainly don't stop myself from looking at women when we're out. In fact, we're always pointing out attractive members of the opposite sex to one another. She certainly hasn't complained yet - although she does sometimes question my taste in men!


--Mark

Yea, wrong. Beauty and form are cultural constructions. Male bodies are as much more beautiful than female bodies as red is a better color than blue. Quote Plato and die: the Greeks found boybodies to be the apex of hotness.

The only reason men find women's bodies more attractive than other men's is that they are told to do so. And don't play the procreation card. Because if consummation were necessary for sexual pleasure, only coital sex would be pleasing, and we all know there are various other methods that offer greater and lesser degrees of enjoyment.

If that is the case how come we have homosexuals now? No one told them it was the right thing to do.
I suppose we'd have an internal switch that turns off the nerves in our genitals when we arent making babies.
Sexual attraction and sexual pleasure are simply functions that ensure the continuation of our species.

I'd say that if required to name the single most deleterious force in human history, I'd utter one word: "testosterone"

We've 'had' homosexuals since the beginning of time. Anyway, if you doubt that american culture indoctrinates an ideal of 'beauty' that is feminine, I suggest you pay closer attention to any media you come across: ads, movies, talk-shows, &c.

If you mean, 'if everyone is told what to see as beautiful, then how come there are homosexuals?' then you can look at a couple ways: not everyone does what their told; there is a strong subcurrent of homosexual energy running through the entire western tradition, more than enough to show people the way to homosexual pleasures. This is neither a good or a bad thing. It simply is.

I don't know exactly what you mean by this in relation to what I said. Perhaps that the reason we developed sexual pleasure as a species is to spur us to procreate? I am simply stating that procreation is not necessary for this pleasure, so to argue against homosexual intercourse on a basis of 'natural selection' is as absurd as arguing against masturbation, oral sex, &c. If all that we should use to select out behaviors is that which conduces evolution, then all we ought to do is eat and fuck. If that's all that's necessary, there's no point in further arguing this rather extraneous point.

Without it there would be no human history ;)

Now as for the shamed into controlling ones sexuality, the trick of course is to marry well (or never marry hehe).

It doesn't bother my wife if I look, hell she will look with me, and in the right circumstances it doesn't matter if I touch either.

Our jealousies and social structure are part of our evolution the same as our eye color. They serve a purpose in reproduction which may not always be good for the species but is good for the individual. If you get jealous when your mate has sex with another it increases your chance that your children will be your own and your genes will move on. If everyone else didn't care and only you did, in the long run your children may well outbreed the others (you are having sex with their women but only you have sex with yours, therefore you may have more children in each generation, as will your children if they have the gene).

Women can have the same jealousies (to a lesser extent though) as the more children you have with other women, the less there is for her children, and the less chance they will survive (don't forget we are talking old school here :).

Humans have not 'evolved' for a modern society, yet, we are still basically hunter gatherers at the basic levels.

Perhaps in some distant future, in some time where birth control was 100% effective and STD's are a thing of the past the benefits of 'social sex' will outweigh the old genetic jealousies and everything will be different. Some people are already there (swingers anyone) but as a whole, we are not there yet.

Ustwo:
"Without it there would be no human history"

Understood.
To me, that is the eternal paradox of our eros/thanatos-driven psyches.

Hmmm when I first read this thread, I thought that he meant, "Are men shamed into being heterosexual even if they may not be"

If that's what this is about, yes, I think you have to be a strong individual to outly be gay.



If it's about the bologna of being a hunter/sex driven/violent/beer drinker... then No. It's not that hard to be who you want to be.

This is almost a "What's wrong with Polygamy or Polyamory" thread. From the larger perspective: What's wrong with having sexual intercourse with someone other that the "one you're with"?

Why must this action be viewed as a sign of "disrespect" or someone not having the "good judgement" not to be a "slave to their hormones"?

Can anyone pose some substantial arguments against this without using moral or religious grounds?