I'm wondering what would you guys choose? Let's say between
(1) a girl who is more intellectual (but not that great, still caught in status quo modern illusion) who is a moral relativist and more sexualized. (2) a girl who is more plain in thinking, more into the spiritual/emotional thinking of the classical female type and with a strong moral backbone and who is a prude.
Specimen (1) has a background with lots of bad relationships and is a sexual masochist Specimen (2) had only one previous relationship and is, as I've stated, prudish.
My predicament is that I like both. Still thinking which should I go for. Right now I am favoring number 2. Would make a great long term relationship in my opinion. You guys have more experience, maybe you can give me some pointers.
Yep. My advice is to make sure you don't get them mixed up.
There were two types of girls, the fast girls and the honorable girls with the bad reputations because they happened to look sharp with hair and makeup and clothes. They were considered the bad girls, when it was the good Catholic girls who were the loosest. Appearances were deceptive then.
-Anton LaVey
apaosha Daeva
Gender : Posts : 1859 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 37 Location : Ireland
_________________ "I do not exhort you to work but to battle; I do not exhort you to peace but to victory. May your work be a battle; may your peace be a victory." -TSZ
And pardon how cynical this might sound but, the above is the only answer you could've gotten logically unless you were looking for some playful sarcasm...
All that I want is a warm body that is cute and aesthetically pleasing to which I can fuck.
I don't care about her personality. I really don't care or am all that much interested in anything about her.
I'm only concerned with what is between her legs and what I want to do to her physically.
I'm only concerned if she can keep up with me sexually.
I'm only concerned about hearing her moan like a pig where I get to listen to her sexual lamentations upon intercourse.
Afterwards when I'm done with her I could care less what happens to her in whether she get's hit by oncoming traffic and so on because I already got what I wanted in the act from her.
I don't even care about having a children or having a family anymore. Spreading the genetical line doesn't concern me.
Anymore for me women just exist to fuck only. I don't concern myself with relationships anymore.
Use, dispose, switch, and cycle repeat.
I'm not interested in relationship bonding in that they always anymore end up in betrayal.
For me women exist for my physical release, pleasure, and self indulgence only.
Last edited by TheJoker on Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:37 pm; edited 7 times in total
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
All that I want is a warm body that is cute to which I can fuck.
I don't care about her personality. I really don't care all that much about her.
Anymore for me women just exist to fuck. I don't concern myself with relationships anymore.
I am the exact opposite of that.
This is why I am celibate.
Yeah, I've had just about enough of this forced celibate lifestyle going on six years which is why I fantasize often about raping.
you are titter-tottering on Brian's path, my man. I suspect the reasons were not different.
Know why? You've yet to overcome the feminine in yourself. I acknowledge that your age and difference in libido is a factor, but the fact still remains:
To dominate the feminine, in any of its manifestations, you must first dominate it in yourself.
And what is the feminine, you might ask? Nature.
Female is the representation of nature. Sexuality being an aspect of it.
You hate her, because you hate nature...mostly your own. And what is hate? A product of fear.
You hate what you fear and you fear it because it is unknown or because you have little, or no, control over it. You despise your dependence, dreaming of independence. I would be surprised if a female uttered anything sensible.
When you understand something you are not surprised by it nor do you expect anything that goes beyond your understanding of it. If your understanding is good, you are rarely surprised. you are actually only surprised when it goes against the rule....constituting a rarity or an exception you must take account of.
For example, if you understand weather patterns you are rarely surprised by weather conditions. They do not trouble you nor anger you, because you understood them enough to predict them.
Now, I would suggest the possibility that it is the feminine in you which scares the shit out of you. It surprises you and makes you feel vulnerable to its force. Fucking a female for you has become a way of dominating an external representation of this innate force. It is symbolic, making the representation almost irrelevant, if it meets the basic criteria of attraction.
---------------------- This sounds like you are asking for a psychoanalysis.
TheJoker wrote:
I prefer caucasian, latin, and hispanic women only with the occasional middle eastern or Indian.
Asian and African women don't do much for me on the attraction list. I pay very little attention to both ethnic groups.
Occasionally every once in awhile I'll see a Asian that delights my fancy but it is very rare.
Some ethnically mixed women are alright.
almost every female under the sun except for the two types representing the extremes: one the extreme exotic intellectual, the other the extreme exotic physical.
The Oriental lacks those telltale signs of eroticism, compensating with her deferring girlish submissive attitude, which is attractive.
The Negro female lacks in elegance, sophistication and passivity but makes up for it with raw sexuality. She is the primal female before sexual specialization took over to create the more adolescent looking Caucasian and the even more so Oriental, inspiring in the male the protective instincts.
As such the Oriental female comes across as infantile, immature, in form and mind, whereas the Negro comes across as aggressive, primal and difficult to mange. The former has an almost prepubescent look, and the latter a more masculine one.
I think the "in the middle" is you playing it safe.
TheJoker wrote:
Typically I only like women between the ages of 16- 33.
Around your age group. This means that you are interested in reproducing.
All that I want is a warm body that is cute to which I can fuck.
I don't care about her personality. I really don't care all that much about her.
Anymore for me women just exist to fuck. I don't concern myself with relationships anymore.
I am the exact opposite of that.
This is why I am celibate.
Yeah, I've had just about enough of this forced celibate lifestyle going on six years which is why I fantasize often about raping.
you are titter-tottering on Brian's path, my man. I suspect the reasons were not different.
Know why? You've yet to overcome the feminine in yourself. I acknowledge that your age and difference in libido is a factor, but the fact still remains:
To dominate the feminine, in any of its manifestations, you must first dominate it in yourself.
And what is the feminine, you might ask? Nature.
Female is the representation of nature. Sexuality being an aspect of it.
You hate her, because you hate nature...mostly your own. And what is hate? A product of fear.
You hate what you fear and you fear it because it is unknown or because you have little, or no, control over it. You despise your dependence, dreaming of independence. I would be surprised if a female uttered anything sensible.
When you understand something you are not surprised by it nor do you expect anything that goes beyond your understanding of it. If your understanding is good, you are rarely surprised. you are actually only surprised when it goes against the rule....constituting a rarity or an exception you must take account of.
For example, if you understand weather patterns you are rarely surprised by weather conditions. They do not trouble you nor anger you, because you understood them enough to predict them.
Now, I would suggest the possibility that it is the feminine in you which scares the shit out of you. It surprises you and makes you feel vulnerable to its force. Fucking a female for you has become a way of dominating an external representation of this innate force. It is symbolic, making the representation almost irrelevant, if it meets the basic criteria of attraction.
---------------------- This sounds like you are asking for a psychoanalysis.
TheJoker wrote:
I prefer caucasian, latin, and hispanic women only with the occasional middle eastern or Indian.
Asian and African women don't do much for me on the attraction list. I pay very little attention to both ethnic groups.
Occasionally every once in awhile I'll see a Asian that delights my fancy but it is very rare.
Some ethnically mixed women are alright.
almost every female under the sun except for the two types representing the extremes: one the extreme exotic intellectual, the other the extreme exotic physical.
The Oriental lacks those telltale signs of eroticism, compensating with her deferring girlish submissive attitude, which is attractive.
The Negro female lacks in elegance, sophistication and passivity but makes up for it with raw sexuality. She is the primal female before sexual specialization took over to create the more adolescent looking Caucasian and the even more so Oriental, inspiring in the male the protective instincts.
As such the Oriental female comes across as infantile, immature, in form and mind, whereas the Negro comes across as aggressive, primal and difficult to mange. The former has an almost prepubescent look, and the latter a more masculine one.
I think the "in the middle" is you playing it safe.
TheJoker wrote:
Typically I only like women between the ages of 16- 33.
Around your age group. This means that you are interested in reproducing.
Quote :
you are titter-tottering on Brian's path, my man. I suspect the reasons were not different.
Not really. I won't make it a habit of ever getting caught if I was going to do somthing.
If I do somthing nobody will hear about it.
Quote :
Know why? You've yet to overcome the feminine in yourself. I acknowledge that your age and difference in libido is a factor, but the fact still remains:
What feminine?
Quote :
Nature.
Don't we all revolve around nature?
Quote :
Female is the representation of nature. Sexuality being an aspect of it.
Quote :
You hate her, because you hate nature...mostly your own. And what is hate? A product of fear.
Actually I have alot of contempt for women in this world anymore because of the limitations, restrictions, and constant hold ups that refuses me to act upon my own nature.
I blame it on the global matriarchal establishment and the suffocating conformance atmosphere of post modern living.
Quote :
You hate what you fear and you fear it because it is unknown or because you have little, or no, control over it. You despise your dependence, dreaming of independence. I would be surprised if a female uttered anything sensible.
While I dream of independence one day soon I will affirm it by whatever means necessary.
My dreams, aspirations, and so on soon enough will become reality.
Quote :
Now, I would suggest the possibility that it is the feminine in you which scares the shit out of you. It surprises you and makes you feel vulnerable to its force.
It doesn't scare me. I know women all too well. Infact I've mastered a understanding of the feminine.
I only despise the feminine because of women's defiance and constant rejection of me.
However slowly but surely that will also pass.
Quote :
Fucking a female for you has become a way of dominating an external representation of this innate force. It is symbolic, making the representation almost irrelevant, if it meets the basic criteria of attraction.
Indeed it does. It's man's natural place to dominate women as far as I'm concerned.
That domination is merely the natural form of men's masculinity.
Quote :
almost every female under the sun except for the two types representing the extremes: one the extreme exotic intellectual, the other the extreme exotic physical.
The Oriental lacks those telltale signs of eroticism, compensating with her deferring girlish submissive attitude, which is attractive.
The Negro female lacks in elegance, sophistication and passivity but makes up for it with raw sexuality. She is the primal female before sexual specialization took over to create the more adolescent looking Caucasian and the even more so Oriental, inspiring in the male the protective instincts.
As such the Oriental female comes across as infantile, immature, in form and mind, whereas the Negro comes across as aggressive, primal and difficult to mange. The former has an almost prepubescent look, and the latter a more masculine one.
I think the "in the middle" is you playing it safe.
I don't know about all that.
I just don't find Asian or African women all that aesthetically pleasing and beautiful. (Shrugs.)
Quote :
Around your age group. This means that you are interested in reproducing.
I'm not saying that I am not interested in reproducing.
I'm just saying that I don't care if I do or don't.
At the end of the day I'm only concerned about getting my rocks off.
Sexual intercourse is all that I care about. For me it's one of the most pleasurable experiences to which I make a sport.
Last edited by TheJoker on Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:07 pm; edited 3 times in total
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Not really. I won't make it a habit of ever getting caught if I was going to do somthing.
If I do somthing nobody will hear about it.
But you just did, my man.
TheJoker wrote:
What feminine?
Denial is such a terrible thing. You see slavery around you...can you see it in yourself?
TheJoker wrote:
Don't we all revolve around nature?
Yes. That's the point.
Now analyze nature. What is nature characterized by? This is what we deplore....it has to do with Nietzsche's resentiment.
TheJoker wrote:
Actually I have alot of contempt for women in this world anymore because of the limitations, restrictions, and constant hold ups that refuses me to act upon my own nature.
I blame it on the global matriarchy and the suffocating conformance atmosphere of post modern living.
The Feminization of Mankind....your contempt is misdirected. Females are automatons, blindly following their nature, as they are a pure manifestation of nature....sexuality to be more precise. They have about as much say in this as they did in every other male intervention upon nature.
They are agents of activity, with no consciousness, except an external one, to guide them. This is why a boy must overcome his father, to find his own voice, and a female must find a replacement for hers, to remain healthy.
TheJoker wrote:
While I dream of independence one day soon I will affirm it by whatever means.
Sometimes dreams should remain just that.
TheJoker wrote:
It doesn't scare me. I know women all too well. Infact I've mastered a understanding of the feminine.
I only despise the feminine because of women's defiance and constant rejection of me.
However slowly but surely that will also pass.
The text in bold is where you contradict your earlier statement.
To understand is to be unaffected.
If their rejection troubles you then it is a sign of your dependence. The dependence is not their fault, although they take advantage of it, as one should expect them to, but it is in you.
I've always felt a strong desire for a relationship, but I have yet to know a women who can keep herself from nagging and bitching over trivial bullshit to anyone that they've grown too comfortable with. The trait appears so universally among females that it must be encoded in their DNA.
Interestingly, this trait also seems common among many homosexual men. What is it with feminine dispositions and sweating the small stuff? They can't help but share the most insignificant frustrations and problems....making it an issue for everyone else.
The phenomenon you are describing has to do with the psychology of weakness.
The weak, lacking any confidence in themselves or feeling vulnerable due to their smaller stature or cowardice or delicate demeanor, will substitute force with attrition. nagging, bitching is a way of wearing the other down and imposing their will upon someone they cannot overpower physically nor mentally.
It is a derivative of the infant's method of crying to get fed or for attention. It is usually the product of sheltering, and of a stunted mind.
Not really. I won't make it a habit of ever getting caught if I was going to do somthing.
If I do somthing nobody will hear about it.
But you just did, my man.
TheJoker wrote:
What feminine?
Denial is such a terrible thing. You see slavery around you...can you see it in yourself?
TheJoker wrote:
Don't we all revolve around nature?
Yes. That's the point.
Now analyze nature. What is nature characterized by? This is what we deplore....it has to do with Nietzsche's resentiment.
TheJoker wrote:
Actually I have alot of contempt for women in this world anymore because of the limitations, restrictions, and constant hold ups that refuses me to act upon my own nature.
I blame it on the global matriarchy and the suffocating conformance atmosphere of post modern living.
The Feminization of Mankind....your contempt is misdirected. Females are automatons, blindly following their nature, as they are a pure manifestation of nature....sexuality to be more precise. They have about as much say in this as they did in every other male intervention upon nature.
They are agents of activity, with no consciousness, except an external one, to guide them. This is why a boy must overcome his father, to find his own voice, and a female must find a replacement for hers, to remain healthy.
TheJoker wrote:
While I dream of independence one day soon I will affirm it by whatever means.
Sometimes dreams should remain just that.
TheJoker wrote:
It doesn't scare me. I know women all too well. Infact I've mastered a understanding of the feminine.
I only despise the feminine because of women's defiance and constant rejection of me.
However slowly but surely that will also pass.
The text in bold is where you contradict your earlier statement.
To understand is to be unaffected.
If their rejection troubles you then it is a sign of your dependence. The dependence is not their fault, although they take advantage of it, as one should expect them to, but it is in you.
Quote :
But you just did, my man.
I meant in the act of something.
Quote :
You see slavery around you...can you see it in yourself?
See what?
Quote :
Yes. That's the point.
Quote :
Now analyze nature. What is nature characterized by? This is what we deplore....it has to do with Nietzsche's resentiment.
Perhaps our definitions of nature differ from one another.
Quote :
The Feminization of Mankind....your contempt is misdirected.
So we shouldn't deplore or hold contempt for the feminization of men with the destruction of masculinity?
Quote :
Females are automatons, blindly following their nature, as they are a pure manifestation of nature....sexuality to be more precise.
Agreed.
Quote :
They have about as much say in this as they did in every other male intervention upon nature.
Male intervention?
Quote :
They are agents of activity, with no consciousness, except an external one, to guide them.
Yeah.
Quote :
This is why a boy must overcome his father, to find his own voice, and a female must find a replacement for hers, to remain healthy.
I've always felt a strong desire for a relationship, but I have yet to know a women who can keep herself from nagging and bitching over trivial bullshit to anyone that they've grown too comfortable with. The trait appears so universally among females that it must be encoded in their DNA.
Interestingly, this trait also seems common among many homosexual men. What is it with feminine dispositions and sweating the small stuff? They can't help but share the most insignificant frustrations and problems....making it an issue for everyone else.
The phenomenon you are describing has to do with the psychology of weakness.
The weak, lacking any confidence in themselves or feeling vulnerable due to their smaller stature or cowardice or delicate demeanor, will substitute force with attrition. nagging, bitching is a way of wearing the other down and imposing their will upon someone they cannot overpower physically nor mentally.
It is a derivative of the infant's method of crying to get fed or for attention. It is usually the product of sheltering, and of a stunted mind.
More of it probably has to do with hormones and cattiness, though :p
I know my mother simply can't help her disposition. It's complete instinct to act how she does.
Women a lot of the time lack self-control...
and again, this is due to the actual excuse of hormones and cattiness....lol
I've always felt a strong desire for a relationship, but I have yet to know a women who can keep herself from nagging and bitching over trivial bullshit to anyone that they've grown too comfortable with. The trait appears so universally among females that it must be encoded in their DNA.
Interestingly, this trait also seems common among many homosexual men. What is it with feminine dispositions and sweating the small stuff? They can't help but share the most insignificant frustrations and problems....making it an issue for everyone else.
The phenomenon you are describing has to do with the psychology of weakness.
The weak, lacking any confidence in themselves or feeling vulnerable due to their smaller stature or cowardice or delicate demeanor, will substitute force with attrition. nagging, bitching is a way of wearing the other down and imposing their will upon someone they cannot overpower physically nor mentally.
It is a derivative of the infant's method of crying to get fed or for attention. It is usually the product of sheltering, and of a stunted mind.
More of it probably has to do with hormones and cattiness, though :p
I know my mother simply can't help her disposition. It's complete instinct to act how she does.
Women a lot of the time lack self-control...
and again, this is due to the actual excuse of hormones and cattiness....lol
Quote :
Women a lot of the time lack self-control...
In the future, will you allow me to take advantage of your lack of control sometime?
I think it could be a great experience between the two of us. What do you think?
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Series of facial images from clean-shaven to full beard ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.])
For the past thirty years, the tendency has been to study sexual attractiveness from the observer's standpoint, i.e., we choose mates on the basis of what's good for us. We therefore unconsciously look for cues that tell us how healthy or fertile a potential mate may be. But what about the standpoint of the person being observed? If you want to be noticed on the mate market, it's in your interest to manipulate any mental algorithm that will make you noticeable, including algorithms that have nothing to do with mating and exist only to keep track of unusual things in the observer's surroundings. If you're more brightly colored or more novel in appearance, you will stand out and thus increase your chances of finding a mate.
We see this with hair color. In one study, men were shown pictures of attractive women and asked to choose the one they most wanted to marry. One series had equal numbers of brunettes and blondes, a second series 1 brunette for every 5 blondes, and a third 1 brunette for every 11 blondes. It turned out that the scarcer the brunettes were in a series, the likelier any one brunette would be chosen (Thelen, 1983). Another study likewise found that Maxim cover girls were disproportionately light blonde or dark brown, and much less often the more usual dark blonde or light brown ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]). This novelty effect may be seen in sales of home interior colors over the past half-century: preference for one color rises until satiated, then falls and yields to preference for another (Stansfield & Whitfield, 2005).
The novelty effect seems to apply not only to colors but also to other visible features. In a recent study, participants were shown a series of faces with different degrees of beardedness. A clean-shaven face was preferred to the degree that it was rare, being most appreciated when the other faces had beards. Heavy stubble and full beards were likewise preferred to the degree that they were rare ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]).
The authors conclude:
Quote :
Concordant effects of frequency-dependent preferences among men and women might reflect a domain-general effect of novelty. Frost [20] suggested the variation in female blond, brown and red hair between European populations spread, geographically, from where they first arose, via negative frequency-dependent preferences for novelty. There is some evidence that men's preferences increase for brown hair when it is rare [21] and for unfamiliar (i.e. novel) female faces [22]. ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.])
The authors go on to suggest that the quest for novelty may drive the ups and downs of fashion trends. A new fashion will rise sharply in popularity when it is still unfamiliar to most people. As the novelty wears off, its popularity will peak and then decline, especially if it faces competition from a more recent fashion.
There are certainly limits to the novelty effect—something can be novel but also disgusting—but it seems to be more general than previously thought.
References
Anon. (2008). Maxim's audience prefers brunettes; distribution is bimodal. Gene Expression, July 6, 2008. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Frost P. (2006). European hair and eye color: a case of frequency-dependent sexual selection? Evolution & Human Behavior, 27, 85-103.
Frost, P. (2008). Sexual selection and human geographic variation, Special Issue: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Meeting of the NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society, Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4),169-191.[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Janif, Z.J., R.C. Brooks, and B.J. Dixson. (2014). Negative frequency-dependent preferences and variation in male facial hair,Biology Letters, 10, early view [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Little A.C., L.M. DeBruine, B.C. Jones. (2013). Sex differences in attraction to familiar and unfamiliar opposite-sex faces: men prefer novelty and women prefer familiarity, Archives of Sexual Behavior, early view
Stansfield, J., and Whitfield, T.W.A. (2005) Can future colour trends be predicted on the basis of past colour trends? An empirical investigation, Color Research & Application, 30(3), 235-242.
Thelen, T.H. (1983). Minority type human mate preference, Social Biology, 30, 162-180.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Bones and Behaviours said... Since home interior colours are unrelated to mate choice, is it possible that the novelty effect on mate choice is a spandrel? Given the novelty effect on bird song, maybe it is related to the evolution of speech.
But regarding variable visual signals of sexiness, I have two words: Philomachus pugnax. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]19 April 2014 12:43:00 GMT-5 [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Ben10 said... Sorry to go back to the previous post, but I gave it some further thought. As I said before, before we can look for the inheritability of a complex behavior, in this particular case the compliance to moral norms, we should define the mechanism responsible for the behavior. I thought about 3 mechanisms:
1)Compliance to moral norms could be the contingent result of a cognitive faculty to 'imagine the future consequences of our acts in short and long term' or said otherwise, a propensity to think ahead constantly. Thinking ahead too much, as we all know, can inhibit impulsive and fast reactions, perhaps increasing a 'wait and see' behavior that could be the root of an apparent compliance with the norm, and the opposite looking like foolish, selfish or stupid and indeed. Non-compliance is not due by malice here. Well, 'selfish and stupid' like 'laying your eggs in some other bird's nest'. A female bird 'thinking ahead' doing so, should think that her eggs are going to be eliminated by the rightful nest owners...until it actually worked and the owners didn't throw her eggs. This behavior could then be fixed in the form of 'parasitic behavior'. By extension in humans, non-compliance to moral norm could degenerate in a form of social parasitism. All of this taking source originally in an inability to think ahead, which could be a cognitive capability not shared equally by everybody (slight retardation) or all human 'groups'. If that was true, then you should see a lot more of these parasitic individuals (who do not comply to moral standards) among retarded individuals or wherever people are incapable of such cognitive projection in the future. i.e., more violence and criminality.
2) It could be the result of a gene/culture neoteny: with longer parental investment and longer childhood compliance to education that could persist in adulthood in the form of compliance to the moral norms. Here the issue becomes the inheritability of a neotenic behavior., but the end-result could be the same as in 1). People deprived of this trait would fall into a quasi-parasitic and later criminal behavior. These individuals may also display less neotenic facial cues.
3) A direct encoding in the brain of a 'compliant' behavior, inherited as an instinct via epigenetic, or via traditional genetic, but again with the same end-result for those who do not inherit the trait. Here however, the individuals do not lack the capability to think ahead, but they nonetheless don't follow the rules. It looks like a lot of white collar criminals and crooked politicians falls in that category: they know they gonna get caught, but they cheat anyways. In this case however, it is fit to look for hereditary background in family with known criminal members. It is possible that women transmit the trait of 'non-compliance' but do not express it themselves. Studies in criminology have looked at these issues. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]20 April 2014 12:26:00 GMT-5 [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Sean said... The novelty effect factor in mate choice would interfere with species recognition. Hence [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Some features can amplify or attenuate others. Dark hair frames white facial skin better than blonde. I wonder about blonde hair becoming common, not as novelty, but because it framed faces with dark skin. Could white skin have caused blonde hair to become less common? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]20 April 2014 12:40:00 GMT-5
"The puffing we reasoned was signaled to the females that the individuals had good genes as they were apparently functional despite imbibing toxins. On the other hand aurvasheyI argued that the typical female would simply not see handicap in smoking and that the handicap principle worked only for the guys who imbibed far more injurious substances such as “iodex” or kerosene. Instead, she hypothesized that smoking damaged the vocal cords and upon healing they were left with a lower pitch and that females were attracted towards males with low-pitched voices. Of course neither of us tested these hypothesis and at best continued to gather anecdotal observations. To be fair, kalashajA made an attempt with langurs about 3 years after that conversation during her month’s foray into some forest in Madhya Pradesh, but was unable to come up with statistically significant results beyond some evidence for sex differences pitch of vocalization. More recently, we revisited the issue of pitch in primate vocalizations: there have been several studies showing that the screeches of lion tailed monkeys and Japanese monkeys, the grunts of baboons, and the screams of chimpanzees and bonobos just like our own vocalizations are sexually dimorphic. For example, the vowel-like grunts of baboons, like human vowels are uttered at lower pitches by males than females. So the the lower pitch of male vocalizations probably go back to the common ancestor of catarrhines at which point the sexual dimorphism in size became pronounced. Coming to the issue of sexual dimorphism in pitch, it is clear that the male pitch responds to testosterone due to steroid receptors in the vocal folds initiating a distinct developmental program at puberty (thickening and lengthening) and the descent of the larynx is greater in males reaching its maximum depth at puberty. Thus, the pitch can theoretically convey the testosterone status of a male and thus be subject to selection by females because they are on the look out for males with higher testosterone.
On the other hand an alternative, though related, effect can occur: As voice pitch indicates testosterone status it might signal to other males the aggressiveness of a male (proxy for testosterone status) in the course of male-male conflicts. Secondly, as the descent of the larynx also decides the pitch and energy of the vocalization, bigger males are likely to have a longer vocal tract resulting in a lower pitch higher energy sounds; thus, pitch could also convey the size of males and thereby his threat potential to other males. Given these factors selection for lower pitch in males could be a consequence of the pressures from male-male conflict – indeed, low pitched high energy vocalization is a well-known contributor to dominance behavior. This leaves us with the question of did lower pitch in males evolve due to female driven sexual selection or did it arise as consequence of selection from male-male conflicts? In the latter case the females are merely cuing on to it because they are seeking indicators for males likely to be successful in male-male conflicts. Ethological studies in both western societies and the hunter-gatherers of the Hadza tribe in Africa suggest that males with lower pitched vocalization sire more children. Further, females who are breast-feeding infants tended to prefer higher-pitched men – suggesting that they perceive potential threat to their genes from high testosterone males in this period. Finally, low-pitch was found to be positively correlated with high testosterone, propensity for aggression and to some degree with size and in males. So the available data does strongly suggest that lower pitch is related to reproductive success and is a proxy for male fitness and conflict capability in humans, but this does not answer whether the difference evolved under female selection or male-male conflict. Given the evidence from vocalizations in dominance behavior in baboons and other monkeys, the phylogenetic argument would be that lower pitch primarily arose in the context of male-male conflicts, and female merely use it as an indicator to choose males who would emerge successful in such conflicts.
However, we further suspect that female use of voice pitch in mate selection in Homo sapiens might be placed under the framework of the theory of Gauri Pradhan and van Schaik. They postulate: “Females maximize their fitness when they can freely choose their mates, but males are expected to use sexually dimorphic weaponry not only to displace other males, but also to overcome female preferences and thus acquire matings by force whenever they can. Females should therefore avoid coercive males and avoid using weaponry as a criterion for male quality wherever possible, and rely on male viability indicators that cannot be used to coerce females (i.e. ornaments).” In catarrhine primates, like the baboon, the langur, orangutan, gorilla and chimpanzee, males possess formidable sexually dimorphic weaponry that can be used in coercing females. But apparently after the divergence of the chimpanzee from the line leading to Homo there appear to have been certain subtle changes in social organization and notable changes in morphology in the latter that resulted in greater female ability to prevent mating attempts by non-preferred males. This conferred fitness benefits to females in being able to more freely choose males and thereby set off a selection against choosing by weaponry and selection for choosing by ornaments. In this scenario male vocal pitch was used as an ornament that did not enable coercion (as against large canines) in mate choice by females, but at the same time had value in male-male conflicts for its dominance function. On the other hand, high vocal pitch in females signals greater femininity (higher estrogen) to males and increases near ovulation signaling reproductive capability to males. Thus, there has been a direct selection for higher pitch in females by males."
Cuckolding the European male is part of the process of deconstruction. Sacher Masoch's fetish, with watching his wife fornicate with the common brute, the rabble, has become a pornographic staple. Now, self-hating Europeans, can punish their women, and themselves through them, by watching them fornicate with the base.
"In numerous jawed vertebrates testosterone appears to play an important role in courtship, aggression, and territorial defense, particularly by males. It is very likely that last common ancestor of jawed vertebrates already used testosterone in such capacity. The jawless vertebrates do not seem to use testosterone as their primary male hormone but they might use related steroids like androstenedione in a similar capacity. However, there have been some suggestions that testosterone might act as a pheromone in some lampreys. Whatever the case, the fixation of this steroid and the basic behavioral pattern regulated by it appear to have emerged after the split of the jawed and jawless vertebrates from their common ancestor, though related steroids might have functioned in the vertebrate common ancestor itself in a similar capacity. The expression of male ornaments and behaviors targeted to elicit female interest are under the control of testosterone across vertebrates – horns, bright colors, songs are all induced by testosterone secreted from the testes. Given that sexual selection by female choosiness tends to act on these manifestations one question is would there be selection for males with increasing testosterone levels. Studies by Ketterson et al using the sparrow-like bird the junco have thrown light on various tradeoffs imposed by testosterone.
Testosterone, polygyny and cuckoldry A classic tactical fork faced by a male vertebrate like a junco with territorial behavior and parental care is whether to form a long term pairing with a single female or whether to attempt to inseminate many females. At first sight the latter tactic might seem the obvious winner. Among birds, species with persistently high levels of testosterone throughout the mating season tend to sing more and mate with multiple females. However, juncos, like other examples across the vertebrate tree, are nominally monogamous, with biparental care, though not without extra-pair copulations. It would hence, appear that some tradeoff might be involved. The effects of exogenous testosterone implantation in male juncos was used to assess the role of the possible tradeoffs involved. The males with testosterone implantation, as opposed to those with control null implantation, flew around a wider swath of territory, sang more and attempted courtships with more females. However, they unlike the controls did not provide much help in chick-rearing to their females. This responsibility landed mostly on the females unlike in natural situation were both parents are involved. However, measures of female fecundity showed no significant decreases from the non-participation of their males. This meant that the tradeoff in the case of juncos was not coming from any lowering of fitness from lack of paternal contribution to chick-rearing. It was also observed that the male with implanted testosterone tended more frequently to father chicks on females of males from adjacent territories. Thus, they were indeed accruing more fitness from extra-pair copulations than the control birds. However, it was also observed that they themselves were getting cuckolded more often by other males unlike the control birds. It was noted that the fitness gained from extra-pair copulations was balanced by the fitness lost due to cuckolding.
Testosterone and immunity Several experiments have shown that elevating testosterone by extrinsic administration tends to suppress the humoral and cell mediated acquired immune responses that are typical of jawed vertebrates. This relationship between testosterone and immunity is relevant to a widely studied and well-known hypothesis in animal biology known as the immunocompetence handicap hypothesis (IHH). This derives from the signaling theory that posits that signals, which are used by males to indicate their quality to females, should be costly to ensure honesty. If this were not the case they can also be displayed by low quality males, which lack the wherewithal for such signals, there by defeating their very purpose. Thus, the signals of the male have to come with an associated handicap that only a good quality male would have the wherewithal to overcome and still show the signal. As per the IHH the elevated testosterone levels that are need to express the sexual ornaments and behaviors come at the cost of lowering immunity. This could lead to increased susceptibility to infections – thus testosterone cuts both ways. Hence, a poor quality male would not be able to cheat by merely elevating testosterone because it will also knockdown his immunity, render him prone to infection, and thereby make him unable to sustain the higher grade ornaments or aggression displays. In contrast, only a genuinely good quality male will be able to tide over the testosterone immunity handicap and still show his ornaments or aggressive displays.
In another set of experiments using the junco model the levels of endogenous testosterone through the mating season were measured and compared with the endogenous concentration of complement and total immunoglobulin IgG concentration in blood. The latter two were seen as proxies of innate immunity, which represents the readily available immune capacity to neutralize pathogens. It was observed that there was a good negative correlation in the male birds between testosterone and the two proxies of innate immunity. Other experiments on the junco had also shown that injections of testosterone in males resulted in lowered humoral and cell-mediated acquired immunity suggesting that effect of testosterone probably affects all arms of the immune response. Thus, birds with higher testosterone had a lower immunity – given this situation only a male with really good quality would be able to sustain a high testosterone mating season because a lower quality male would succumb to the ravages of infection. Importantly, it was found that both the above measures of innate immunity were positively correlated with the mass of the male bird. Thus, lighter males had weaker immunity and elevation of testosterone on this background could weaken it even more, making it difficult for him to falsely signal his quality before falling to infection. Hence, in line with the IHH the immunity cost imposed by testosterone allows for honest signaling.
Testosterone and female choosiness When sexual selection operates on high testosterone induced traits there will be tendency for the genetics of female choosiness to get linked to the genetics to the sexually selected traits in the male. Given that the genetic control of testosterone levels might be generic, selection for its elevation in males of the species would hence lead to elevation in the females. This could potential constrain sexual selection for testosterone associated traits in the male if elevated testosterone starts having negative effects on the females. In the junco model it was observed that implantation of testosterone into the females to elevate their levels resulted in them becoming less choosy between males with elevated or normal testosterone level. Thus, if sexual selection of traits associated with elevated testosterone were to occur it would be nullified by the loss of female choosiness with increasing testosterone.
In conclusion the junco experiments suggest that the elevation of testosterone potentially comes with multiple tradeoffs – elevated risk of cuckoldry, lowered immunity, and unintended side-effect in the form of reduced female choosiness. Thus, the junco has probably converged to an optimum, elevation beyond which is deleterious. Given certain similarities in the mating system of the junco with modern humans, and the conservation of the testosterone system in jawed vertebrates, some these observations are indeed relevant to us. Of course we are a social ape with a long history of such sociality in the primate tree and breed throughout the year. This adds additional factors but some of basic responses remain very much the same. It is common to believe that tendencies towards monogamy in humans result from selection for shared parental care. This is not entirely supported because in most mammals the female provides the bulk of the parental care, with male, if involved at all, playing a primarily protective role against rival males who may kill his offspring.
The possibility that risk of cuckoldry as in the case of the junco could be a major factor favoring tendencies of monogamy in extant Homo should be considered. In this regard, one may also ponder over the effects of modern Anglospheric social engineering and the kind of males and females they are favoring."
Penis size, associated with testosterone levels, makes a woman's orgasm, more certain, and more pronounced. During orgasm, with the spasms, the woman cervix pulls the ejaculate up towards the Fallopian tubes, increasing the odds of her ovum being fertilized by the fresh ejaculate. The "nice guy", the stable guy, at home, may copulate and ejaculate in her three times a week, or more, and all she needs is to find that "alpha" during the most fertile period in her menstrual cycle to give her the orgasm, which will surpass her "nice, stable' guys sperm, and make it almost certain that her child will be the bad boys.
Penis size is a factor, it is not the only factor.
It is a way of fooling both the beta male and herself. She need not stray often, risking being caught. Once with a male that will inspire spasmodic orgasm is enough, to assure the desired result.
The preferences in the study are not surprising. The nice stable guy with the average penis, assures her that he will not stray. She then can sample a variety of sperm, and though he is having sex with her more often than that one guy, the orgasm makes sure that the one time is enough.
It is her body approving of his genes, and this may not require her conscious approval. her body reacts as it has evolved to react, and no ideal, in her mind, can change this.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Choosing a mate follows the same rules as choosing an object/objective. The individual choosing is crucial in determining what is being chosen, what is preferred.
First, how the individual understands world; how (s)he relates to otherness; how (s)he projects, conceptualizes the desired/wanted object/objective. An error in over'under-estimation, indicates poor judgment, and results in inevitable disappointment, or the selling of one's self short.
Second, the individual's particular organic essence, his/her internal organ structure/hierarchy and how this manifests as personality. This decides how particular wants/desires are arranged in importance, and how the object/objective is projected. A compromises is always necessary because organ hierarchy establishes which desires/wants dominate and which will fall to a lower level of importance. Because no object/objective can completely gratify all needs equally, the organism decides where to make compromises and live with some degree of dissatisfaction, and where it focuses seeking a higher degree of satisfaction.
When choosing a mate, the sexual satisfaction also includes the need to procreate, and the need to establish an emotional connection, and the need to find a partner in socioeconomic contexts...and so on. How the importance of needs are arranged is determined by the organisms particular organ hierarchies, and circumstantial accessibility. If what is desired/wanted is inaccessible the organism may place it on a lower level of importance to what is accessible.
Therefore, pertaining to the previous, a woman with a dominant brain will make concessions regarding sexual needs, whereas a female where other organs dominate the personality, may not be able to make such concessions - same applies for males. She may prefer to live with a certain degree of sexual dissatisfaction, or emotional disconnect, because she receives a higher degree of socioeconomic gratification.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
We can analyze the reasons for this discrepancy in brain and penis size between different races. The differences might be small, an inch or two, a few I.Q. points but these small divergences in presence expose a significant shift in past.
As always we are dealing with potentials, meaning that not all Caucasians will be more intelligent than all Negroes, but that a larger percentage, and a larger possibility, potential, of being so is present. the same goes for the penis size.
I think that the determining factor is stress. The Negro never having to leave the primordial human environments and adapt to more demanding, austere environments, followed the path of the bonobo, where the absence of threats evolved into a matriarchy using sexual intercourse to defuse internal conflicts. The Negro's larger potential of offering sexual pleasure can only be the result of less stressful environments demanding more focus on female gratification, and the settling of internal conflicts using orgasms.
The Caucasian and the Asian had to make genetic compromises. Sacrificing pleasure for efficiency.
And now, in modern environments where we are returning to more superfluous, less threatening circumstances, the return to hedonism is to be expected. The shift form patriarchy to matriarchy means that the male no longer has to prove himself as a creative, provider and defender, but, because the institution takes over these roles, he now must prove himself a gifted pleasure source. The woman now evaluates her potential mate by how happy she makes her, how many orgasms he gives her, how tolerant of her he is, how willing to give into her whims he is. Of course this shift is gradual, and the past cannot simply be erased, so latent drives, preferences, form those past more austere environments still participate in a female's psyche.
But the shift, the environmental effect, has started. What is being selected in ales, is a docile, large organed work horse; someone for a woman to ride on, to use, to find pleasure in - docile, dumb, disciplined, tolerant.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37337 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
To add.. A woman with a dominant brain, in her internal organ hierarchy, may be inspired by a male, stimulated intellectually, which may stimulate her sexually, indirectly, because all the organs are in constant (inter)action, they are communicating and affecting each other, belonging to the same organization.
A woman dominated by another organ, her sex organ, for example, may experience the reverse. Because the male stimulates her physically, vaginally, this may result in her brain, her intellect, experiencing this indirectly, as a positive opinion, sensation, towards him. Such a woman may not be stimulated by a male that gratifies her sexually, but she will experience the indirect effects, as a positive opinion of him, his wit, his mind etc., just as a woman who is stimulated by a male intellectually may experience a increased sexual gratification as an indirect effect.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
We can analyze the reasons for this discrepancy in brain and penis size between different races. The differences might be small, an inch or two, a few I.Q. points but these small divergences in presence expose a significant shift in past.
As always we are dealing with potentials, meaning that not all Caucasians will be more intelligent than all Negroes, but that a larger percentage, and a larger possibility, potential, of being so is present. the same goes for the penis size.
I think that the determining factor is stress. The Negro never having to leave the primordial human environments and adapt to more demanding, austere environments, followed the path of the bonobo, where the absence of threats evolved into a matriarchy using sexual intercourse to defuse internal conflicts. The Negro's larger potential of offering sexual pleasure can only be the result of less stressful environments demanding more focus on female gratification, and the settling of internal conflicts using orgasms.
The Caucasian and the Asian had to make genetic compromises. Sacrificing pleasure for efficiency.
And now, in modern environments where we are returning to more superfluous, less threatening circumstances, the return to hedonism is to be expected. The shift form patriarchy to matriarchy means that the male no longer has to prove himself as a creative, provider and defender, but, because the institution takes over these roles, he now must prove himself a gifted pleasure source. The woman now evaluates her potential mate by how happy she makes her, how many orgasms he gives her, how tolerant of her he is, how willing to give into her whims he is. Of course this shift is gradual, and the past cannot simply be erased, so latent drives, preferences, form those past more austere environments still participate in a female's psyche.
But the shift, the environmental effect, has started. What is being selected in ales, is a docile, large organed work horse; someone for a woman to ride on, to use, to find pleasure in - docile, dumb, disciplined, tolerant.
A commentor on that video wrote:
"There's A Correlation Between Penis Size And Brain Size. The Larger Your Penis, The Smaller Your Brain Tends To Be. Similarly, There's A Correlation Between Sexual Promiscuity And Penis Size. The More Sexually Promiscuous A Culture, The Greater The Tendency For Males In That Culture To Have Large Penises. Now Apply This To Africans And Blacks. They Come From An Ancestral Environment Where Sexual Promiscuity Was Rampant And Long-Term Pair-Bonding (Monogamy) Was Limited (It Was Minimally Practiced), Hence Little Time, Energy, And Mental Effort Was Placed In Relationships And Families By African Males. What Did This Result In? Large, More Attractive, And More Potent Primary And Secondary Sexual Characteristics In African Males (i.e. Large Penises Among Other Physical And Mental Features). In Other Words, More Sexual Promiscuity Led To More Competition Among Males To Evolve More Stimulating Sexual Characteristics And More Stimulating Sexual Characteristics Led To A Smaller Brain Size* (The Body Had To Compensate For Spending Much If Its Resources To Develop More Stimulating African Sexual Characteristics By Reducing African Brain Size).
*Everything Comes With A Cost. The Biological Resources To Develop A Large African Penis Diverted Biological Resources Away From Developing A Large African Brain!"
To add... The male does not face a woman's dilemmas, because he can separate mind from body, which explains why only a male brain could have imagined this mind/body split. For a woman mind and body are one, and she experiences the balances as a presence. for men the body and mind can be detached, making men more objective, but also able to gratify themselves physically while remaining totally dissatisfied intellectually. A male can seek physical gratification from one source and intellectual gratification form another, and not feel splintered by this. A woman must find gratification in the totality. Her entire body/brain is a sexual organ. She has one head, and man has two. He can feel agape and eros coming from two different sources. A woman needs for both to coincide, and when one is left dissatisfied the other is as well.
