This post has been ranked 10.00 out of 10 with 1 votes.
Natural vs Social programming, is beyond a point a pua-manufactured red herring, i think. Society is a result of the biology of our species interacting with itself. I was banging a French chick in India sometime ago, and she used to stay in a hostel full of indian girls, and she told me that she wouldn't be surprised if some (many?) of those Indian girls truly and genuinely were asexual. I believe her. Such is the power of social programming. It can blur reality.
Originally Posted by Jack Gignac
I have a what-is and what-is-not view on female behavior, not so much about whether that behavior is natural or socially programmed. (Except some when it is useful for frame control)
Men-vs-women's sexuality is an interesting topic and i dont agree they are the same. Here are some differences: Needy guys turn off women exponentially more than needy women turn off dudes (at least for ONS and bail). Also, variety in their partners is a motivation in itself for guys, but its often such a low-level challenge for women. Note that im not saying women can't be promiscuous, but their prime-mover seems different. MM works on women, to the point of creating an addiction in them, but i have a hard time imagining that roles reversed, it would work on me even remotely as well. Some bits, yes, but not to the extent and degree. (lack of) validation is a huge ingredient of female sexuality, but not for men, i dont think. Also i think on an average sex is better for guys than women, but when a woman finally gets fucked by a guy that she craves getting fucked by, her experience of sex is way more intense than that of any guys'. I think chicks are okay with being cheated on more than guys are. That makes evolutionary sense to me, and most of my girls turn a blind eye to my horndog ways, because i am nice to them and fuck them ok.