Wednesday, April 6, 2005

Toast Tuesday!

---

---

... eh, sorry, I forgot that it's wednesday... O____o
___________________________________

News: Ari's computer died... sorry if I go a long time without posting... trying to get it fixed ASAP. Using Library computer right now...
___________________________________

Does anyone know what today is?!?!?!?! I'll give you a cookie if you're the first one to (guess) right!!
___________________________________

I got about 15/25 questions wrong on today's history test since my computer broke and I couldn't type my notes. TT_______TT
___________________________________

Ayame... I shall kill you now... you perv. *gets spatula*
___________________________________

Let me reiderate on what I was saying yesterday. I had come upon some research about the type of women men are normally attracted to. There are two different types of archetypical females. The "slut" and the "saint". The "slut" is the type of woman I guy would most likely sleep with and the "saint" is the type they would most likely marry. Then there's also the oppinion that a man's perfect woman would be both at the same time. A saint in public and a slut in the bedroom.

Psssshht, like that's gonna happen...

Here are some other's oppinions, and my own, and this is what I've got.

SAINT: soulful connection, attuned to subtle energies, loyal, faithful, visionary,
compassionate, empathic, unconditionally loving, modest, reserved, "cute" not "sexy", childish, personality.
Shadow: Overly spiritualising, righteously disgusted,
ashamed, deluded, overly moralising, judgmental.

SLUT: Sexually free, adventurous, assertive, experienced,
erotic, provocative, in tune with body, openly sexy.
Shadow: Sexual addictions, "sleeping around", secretive, promiscuous,
sexually using, betraying, dishonest, obsessive, immoral.

Meh, sorry that was so much typing...

And now, if you are still interrested... *pointing* can someone drag away all of those people who are sleeping?... I shall pull out a few quotes... pardon me if there are a few bad words, I shall try to omit them.

"...I was hanging out with my downstairs neighbor friend, dan, one night and we were talking. somehow we got to talking about girls and he mentioned that though he would not exactly bring someone like britney spears home to meet his mom, he would be all over the chance to f*** someone like her. that whole slut vs. saint thing. "

"it's interesting how there is often a marked difference between who men want to f*** and who they want to spend their lives with. who we perceive as our ultimate carnal fantasy and who we want to resonate deep within our hearts. the difference being, in a lot of contexts, the slut is someone men feel like they have to be morally superior to. they would be disgusted to be associated with them in social circles or polite company. they're dirty. below them. slut. skank. whore. easy. but there is some sort of allure to the taboo that exists because they are what men often want. perhaps they represent power to men. a mere nameless body and pretty face being the vehicle to elevate men's egos and perceptions of control, allowing the animal urges to take over."

"the ironic bit is found in the saint perception: the saint can never delve into what the slut does. to do so would mar the image of purity and wholesomeness that attracted the man to her in the first place. not that men prostrate themselves before her, but there is a sense of privilegedness that comes with knowing that she "belongs" to him. that she is a part of his life and he is better for it. that she holds him back for his own good. that he can in no way feel complete without her. this could quite possibly be that whole control thing again. instead of being the dominant party, the man desires to take on a more submissive (if equal) role." - - randir

"Well, well, well - I may enjoy a high cholesterol meal more than I enjoy a regular one. I may, at times, have a craving for chocolate that's stronger than anything I will ever feel towards any type of pasta. This does not mean, however, that I would like a lifetime of high cholesterol, nor that I would rather restrict my pasta eating than my partaking of chocolate.
The point is that they may be certain things you find sexually arousing in a woman, but - surprise-surprise! They don't make her the perfect mate.
I'm not trying to say that the Slut vs. Saint issue isn't major for many men - it certainly is, and can be given both Darwinian and cultural explanations. However, wanting to spear young ms. Spears and not wanting to marry her doesn't happen because she's not as saintly as you'd wish - she's just not your friend's kind of girl - too stupid, too annoying or just too implanted...
We choose our bedmates according to certain criteria, and we sometimes choose our soul mates differently. However, the choices are not mutually exclusive. " - - Geez

"randir: I think it's pretty funny that you think it's a guy thing. Surely you've noticed that nice girls always go for not-nice guys.

Fact: The best girls always go for horrible assholes. They never go for nice guys.

Someone Else's Theory #1: "Most women think that being with a real asshole is the best they can do."
Critique: That's funny. And maybe there's some truth to that, because that's often why neurotic and self-concsious fellas end up with girls who keep them down -- I know, because it happened to me. But when a really nice guy expresses active interest, he'll still be rejected. At that point, the girl knows full well that she could have him, and decides that she doesn't want him.

Someone Else's Theory #2: "You're such a nice guy that a girl wouldn't want to lose your friendship if she ended up ruining the relationship."
Critique: This is a brush-off, meant to make me feel better but laughably transparent. If I was such a great guy, there's no reason to expect it all to end so horribly; and even if there was the risk, wouldn't it be worth it?

Someone Else's Theory #3: "Man, you're too predictable."
Critique: Actually, there's something to this. Sometimes I wish I were a little more spontaneous. But this can't be the whole story, because I'm not always so predictable, and in any event it's a universal problem, not just for me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Own Theory: "Women believe, if only subconsciously, that nice guys are no good in bed."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Think about it. It explains everything. I read somewhere that more wives cheat than most studies would suggest, since most wives would not admit to cheating. It's said that the qualities that make a man a good mate make him a bad lay.

This is a horrible example of the dualism that has wrecked our culture. Just because a guy is stable, it means he isn't free. Just because a guy is thoughtful, it means he isn't spontaneous. Just because a guy isn't athletic, it means he has no endurance. Just because a guy doesn't have a girl with him every night, it means he doesn't know what he's doing." - - Cletus the Foetus


"Cletus: here's my theory on the question you posited-- nice girls (at least the nice girls who are also widely considered attractive) almost never date nice guys because they can afford to be picky in whom they romance. So naturally they gravitate to men who (Duh!) are widely considered attractive by females.
Now's where it gets tricky. (okay, not really) Since attractive men have much easier access to the cream of the femme crop, they tend to become arrogant assholes; the definition of "NOT nice". Let's be realistic here, how often is Fraternity Freddy or Star Quarterback a nice guy? Hell yes, I am sure some are Princes among Men, and kind to little old ladies, door-knocking Mormons and even Pauly Shore-- but the majority are those straight-teethed golden boys anyone sensible loves to hate.

So here you have your reason, devoid of any hypocritical pretenses, and touchy-feely BS. If you're pretty fugly like me, you can be nicer than Roy Rogers on Prozac and you still ain't gittin' no play." - - Atriol35

"This seemingly bizarre bit of human behavior, like most others, makes much more sense when you look at it from the perspective of evolutionary psychology. The basic thing to keep in mind is that both men and women want to have as many offspring as possible, and, just as importantly, they want offspring with traits that will allow the offspring to reproduce successfully. Now, men and women must employ rather different strategies, because of several fundamental biological differences:
A women can have only a very limited number of children in her lifetime; a woman has a limited number of ovaries, she can only bear one child every two to three years, and in pre-civilized times (which is the environment we're discussing when we're dicussing human evolution), women have a strong tendency to die in childbirth. Men, on the other hand, have an essentially limitless supply of sperm; a man can (to put it bluntly) impregnate as many women as he can get his dick into.
While pregnant with or rearing a child, a woman is essentially unable to provide for herself and the child.1 The best situation, then, is for a woman to have an unencumbered man to provide for her and for a child which he has an interest in supporting.
This is important: a woman can always be sure that a baby is hers; she's there when it pops out of her. A man can never be absolutely sure that a baby is his (pre-civilization, remember).2
So, the best strategy for a male to use is basically to sleep with anyone he can. On the other hand, a woman has to choose very carefully whom she lets impregnate her. A woman wants3 to have children with men who can impregnate lots of women (so her child, if male, will get genes which let him impregnate lots of women), but men who can impregnate lots of women tend not to stick around to support her and the child. So a woman wants a long-term relationship with one type of man, while sleeping with a different type of man. On the other hand, a man wants to make sure that he isn't supporting some other man's child, which is what is likely to happen if his woman sleeps around a lot.

See where this is going? Men like sluts becuase they can sleep with them, but they don't like sluts because they can't control them. And women like asshole guys because they have genes which allow them to reproduce a lot, but don't like assholes because they are less likely to support the woman and child. There you go.

Bear in mind that things get unbelievably more complicated when take people out of the savannah and put them in a complex society. However, I think that this framework still allows us to explain a lot of seemingly completely irrational behavior.

Also, I didn't really come up with all of this myself; I'm basically repeating arguments I saw on a Discovery Channel show on evolution and human sexual behavior a few years ago. If anyone knows the name of this show, it would be nice if they would /msg me so I can give credit where credit is due.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. No, I'm not saying that women are inferior to men or that women can't survive without men or that it's inherently wrong to raise a child out of wedlock or any of that crap. Civilization mov es at a much, much faster rate than biological evolution, and conditions have changed quite a bit since we as humans got the behavioral tendencies that we're stuck with. Time for more evolution.

2. Actually, there are a few mechanisms in place whereby a man can be a little certain of a child's paternity. Newborn babies, whether male or female, resemble their father more than their mother, and the maternal side of the family will tend to comment on this more than the paternal side, since they're the people with a stake in convincing the man that the kid is his. Watch for this the next t ime you have a baby.

3. In case you're confused, keep in mind that whenever I say that someone "wants" something, I don't mean that the person wants it in a conscious way; I mean that evolutionary pressures tend to cause people to act in such a way." - - tailchaser

"A psychological complex wherein a man (or lesbian, I suppose) is only able to regard women as a mother or a "whore", a good non-sexual woman or a desirable object of lust, but not both.

It's used in two contexts. The first refers to a man who regards a woman as beautiful and lovely until she has sex with him. Once she does, there's clearly something wrong with her morals (how could she give herself up that way?) or with her selection (i.e., he's got some serious self-esteem issues). Conversely, once their relationship is over, she suddenly becomes desirable for him again.

The second context is a man who becomes unable to be sexually involved with his wife once she becomes a mother. For one reason or another he now associates his wife with his own mother, the incest taboo kicks in, and he becomes unable to be intimate with her, pursuing other women or a mistress instead. The theories of Freudian psychology have a lot to say about the why and how of this. " - - mblase

"There is a lot to this. The polarization in male views of females is extreme, and often reflect the images of women in the media. Women are either virginal charity workers (newsreaders, BBC weather girls, childrens presenters, S Club 7) or sex kittens of some description (madonna, skimpily dressed models, weather girls from channels other than the BBC, it's late when I am writing this, use your imagination :-)
Anyway, it is likely to do with the "sex is bad" attitude that has been prevalent in christian societies for a long time, and in some Judao-Islamic cultures as well. There is a need to reconcile the physical reality of normalised sexual relations with the roles given to women by these cultures. Women are either dutiful mothers who "endure" sex for the reason of procreation, or they "enjoy" sex and are thus given over to their baser passions and to be despised. Note that in many cultures sweet, and refined women were expected to be chaste, and valued highly if this was the case. Only recently has this been removed, and the chaste thing is relegated to religion followers.

But, as we all know, attitudes take a lot of time to bedrock, and even longer to shift, especially when they are this deep. Women are still seen as lynch pins of the family, whether or not they wish to be, and as such the mother role is seen as incompatible with a free sex life. The compromise of intra-marital sex is probably what created the stable family home in the first place, with sex satisfied by both parties, and discretely hidden from the children, with constant guidance and supervision of all in the family to see that their ordinary needs were met as well. In short I do believe that women will have to suffer this particular paradox of male thinking for a while, at least until they learn to project themeselves in the media in the more rounded manner. The presence of comedy programs such as Frasier, and Mad About You did a lot to help this cause and I think we are on the right path.
" -- Jaez

Ari's theory?

Hmm, okay, I'll give it a shot.

I think that men would like women who are a slut and a saint at the same time. Especially if you look at popular anime, you'll find that the main women characters are geared to be both. I can't think of anyone for the moment being, but there are many who are scantily clad, sexy, etc. all of the "good" things about the "slut" and also very emotional, have lots of personality, etc., all of the good things about the "saint".

I'm sorry guys, but most (as in probably the lady you will marry, if you get married anyway...) real women aren't like that.I'd probably have to align myself more with the saint, although I'm not really pretty, loyal, and all of that stuff. I'm pretty much an fugly person, who has no chance of ever being loved. I subconciously figured this out when I was 10, which is probably why I declared myself asexual...

no, the third definition, as in "having no sexual preference" =___=

Another note: There seem to be strange differences in oppinion of a few of the slut and saint behaviors. Some say the slut would be the independant and more mature one and others say the exact opposite. I'd probably have to go with the former, just because it seems that way in a lot of "slutty" women on TV, in Anime, etc.

I dunno, I don't really feel like delving into the deep issues of that right now, since most of my ideas are already down, just scattered about.

What kind of men do women like you ask?

I'd say the general answer that's been beaten into many minds would be the "prince charming" type. You know, strong, silent, sensitive, attractive. A combonation of the two archetypical male types, the "asshole" and the "nice guy".

Meh, if you want to know what kinda guy I like, it's definitally not that, so it doesn't speak for all women.
___________________________________

Woooo, that was long. Sorry if I killed a few people...

O____________o

Well, I'm signin' off right about now.

Meh, this pretty much fits, except for the "worshiping you" part. I just hate humanity, we are cruel beings.


Darkness. You Truly Desire Darkness. You wish
everyone around you was either dead, or
worshipping you. To you, life is not a gift,
but a punishment. You have no consideration for
others and do as you please.

PLEASE RATE


What Do You Truly Desire? *PICS*
brought to you by Quizilla

- - Piggy Ari

---

---

... how should I know?



“Never pretend to love which you do not actually feel, for love is not ours to command.” - - Alan Watts

Comments (6)