• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Danielle Wosserface Thread

Katie price v Danielle Lloyd? whose worse? Well the only mitigating factor I could argue in favour of preference for Lloyd is that she came from Liverpool.
Ive been to Liverpool quite a few times and they do have a high majority of very attractive women, more than most cities. They are all competing with each other to bag that rich guy. Its a way out of the ghetto as most come from from impoverished backgrounds.
 
Lot's of young girls make dreadful decisions in the late teens and early twenties* but go on to be loving, faithful wives and mothers.


*I know, I sought them out and cajoled them when I could into making bad decisions.


Agreed.

Just look at Pat Butcher.
 
Katie price v Danielle Lloyd? whose worse? Well the only mitigating factor I could argue in favour of preference for Lloyd is that she came from Liverpool.
Ive been to Liverpool quite a few times and they do have a high majority of very attractive women, more than most cities. They are all competing with each other to bag that rich guy. Its a way out of the ghetto as most come from from impoverished backgrounds.

One of them slagged it up a bit, then (seemingly) settled into marriage and familiy life.

The other slagged it up, had a sex tape, did the footballer thing, exploited her child for fame, did playboy, had a marriage of convenience based on "Im a celebrity" fame, exploited that on TV, copied other 'slebs' and brought out a perfume, ripped off the XFactor format, exploited a second marriage on TV....

Im sure there is a whole lot besides.

Essentially, Danielle is a glamour model (who I dont think ever got her tits out!) who bagged a footballer and settled down. Jordan is a talentless fame hungry woman who is only famous because she is famous - epitomising what is wrong with the fame chasing xFactor/big brother generation.
 
Let's not forget that on any given night a girl can get laid. Even the larger ones manage to get poked by some drunk fella on a stag do. On the other hand, most men have to have some kind of craft to get sex on a night out - and rightly so.

This is why women who sleep around are regarded as slags and men that do the same are seen as 'lads'. Rightly or wrongly, that is.

This is a key point I think. As you say rightly or wrongly, but the reason girls get insulted while guys get high-fived is because it is the girl that chooses to do it. I've read something about this before - it said that in nature, the female chooses. And that's true for human's too. Obviously the man chooses to do what he wants, but basically it's the female's choice. You present yourself to a woman, and she chooses to accept. It doesn't usually work like the female presenting themselves to the male - it's rare.

So why is there not equality there? It's because the woman chooses. If you're easy as a woman, you aren't being natural to yourself, and that's why most people find it weird. If a girl decided to have sex with a different guy each night of the week, she could do it. 90% of guys would say yes to her if she offered it. A guy simply doesn't 'choose' to have sex. He chooses to try to have sex, but if he wanted to do it with a different girl every night of the week, it would take a lot more effort, a lot more 'skill', and 90% of women would probably say no.

I'm not saying guys should be high fived. But it's because there's more 'achievement' there. There's no achievement for the girl. There is for the guy, and that's just the way it is. They get the high fives if they are capable of sleeping with many attractive women because they can do something that the majority of men cannot do. But the majority of women could do it if they wanted. In nature, the male wants to procreate and spread his seed while the female wants a good protective partner.

But that's not to say guys should be doing it and girls shouldn't. I believe you can do whatever you want when you're single, but ultimately it will be unfulfilling if you can't be yourself enough to share yourself with a woman, and have a close relationship with her.

Lloyd seems to have turned her life around and has stayed out of the limelight for a good couple of years now, so fair play to her. On the discussion of whether leopard's can change their spots, I think in her case they can. And it seems like the kids especially helped her do that - plus meeting someone that accepted her for who she is rather than treating her as the next notch on the bedpost. She didn't have to accept being all of thiose notches, but if she was told she was loved then you could see why a young woman could do what she did.
 
Just out of interest - who is a bigger slut - Kristin Stewart (cheating on Roert Pattinson) or Danielle wosserface?

As far as im concerned what Kristin did was bang out of order, could have been a momentary lapse but I think it was on more than one occassion.

As for this whole stereotype that men are stallions and considered players if they sleep with a brick load of women well its not wrong to call them players but its been wrong to call girls slags or sluts or whatever terminology you wish to choose.

They have as much right to sleep and fudge whoever they want as they are young free and single HOWEVER if they cheat on you (same with men) then they deserve to be called whatever you want to call em.

Kristin Stewart for example, dont give a brick about either of them, was bang out of order - Danielle? No she was young, free and fudging single.

Definitely think Stewart is more out of order actually. What Lloyd did was hurting no-one but herself and her own self esteem. Stewart decides to hurt her boyfriend, the wife of the man she got with, and the kids. It's poor from her, and she's acting in her own self interest.

But this brings up another point of discussion that I've been thinking about a lot lately. How much should you forgive? Things I've read seem to suggest that males and females are bound to be attracted to members of the opposite sex and it's almost like saying cheating will occur at some point, and you have to forgive it. Is that really the case? Almost every film I watch seems to feature infidelity in one couple or another, and if there's a film with someone that has remained faithful, they seem to be the exception. Is that the case in actual society?

What is an acceptable excuse? How many chances do you give? Do you forgive your partner kissing someone else? Sex? How could you do it? Is alcohol an excuse? I like to think that most people deserve second chances, and if they look like they try and learn from the mistake, then that's all you can ask. We are all human and we are all capable of making mistakes. But then I think no, if you commit to a relationship, you take that trust every day because your partner believes in you and won't do anything with anyone else - so there is no excuse. You can't say it's only natural, you got caught up in the moment etc, because you've gone outside of your committment. Surely there is no excuse? If you fail in that, why should you be forgiven? But should you? Maybe you think that you have a connection with this person like no other, and despite what they have done you need to get past it because you won't have anything like it with anyone else.

I watched a couple of films over the last 2 days - The Women (Meg Ryan's husband cheats on her with Eva Mendes...just had it on in the background while having an FM sesh, honest!) and Indecent Proposal. Meg Ryan eventually decides to forgive her husband, and apparently her friend in the film was also forgiven by her husband when she herself cheated. But it wasn't just a momentarily indiscretion, the guy kept Mendes as a mistress.

Indecent Proposal is kind of a different thing, that's almost a different discussion all together. But I found myself thinking that I wouldn't accept anything, not in a million years, because I'd never be able to look at my woman in the same way again. But is there anything you guys would accept?

Good threat Gordinho, I'm glad you started it because there was interesting discussion in the LK thread that deserved to continue.
 
Indecent Proposal is kind of a different thing, that's almost a different discussion all together. But I found myself thinking that I wouldn't accept anything, not in a million years, because I'd never be able to look at my woman in the same way again. But is there anything you guys would accept?

Anal
 
Definitely think Stewart is more out of order actually. What Lloyd did was hurting no-one but herself and her own self esteem. Stewart decides to hurt her boyfriend, the wife of the man she got with, and the kids. It's poor from her, and she's acting in her own self interest.

But this brings up another point of discussion that I've been thinking about a lot lately. How much should you forgive? Things I've read seem to suggest that males and females are bound to be attracted to members of the opposite sex and it's almost like saying cheating will occur at some point, and you have to forgive it. Is that really the case? Almost every film I watch seems to feature infidelity in one couple or another, and if there's a film with someone that has remained faithful, they seem to be the exception. Is that the case in actual society?

What is an acceptable excuse? How many chances do you give? Do you forgive your partner kissing someone else? Sex? How could you do it? Is alcohol an excuse? I like to think that most people deserve second chances, and if they look like they try and learn from the mistake, then that's all you can ask. We are all human and we are all capable of making mistakes. But then I think no, if you commit to a relationship, you take that trust every day because your partner believes in you and won't do anything with anyone else - so there is no excuse. You can't say it's only natural, you got caught up in the moment etc, because you've gone outside of your committment. Surely there is no excuse? If you fail in that, why should you be forgiven? But should you? Maybe you think that you have a connection with this person like no other, and despite what they have done you need to get past it because you won't have anything like it with anyone else.

I watched a couple of films over the last 2 days - The Women (Meg Ryan's husband cheats on her with Eva Mendes...just had it on in the background while having an FM sesh, honest!) and Indecent Proposal. Meg Ryan eventually decides to forgive her husband, and apparently her friend in the film was also forgiven by her husband when she herself cheated. But it wasn't just a momentarily indiscretion, the guy kept Mendes as a mistress.

Indecent Proposal is kind of a different thing, that's almost a different discussion all together. But I found myself thinking that I wouldn't accept anything, not in a million years, because I'd never be able to look at my woman in the same way again. But is there anything you guys would accept?

Good threat Gordinho, I'm glad you started it because there was interesting discussion in the LK thread that deserved to continue.

I have never ever cheated on a girl but I have been cheated on, at University and I guess thats the reason why I would never cheat - it hurts too much and wouldnt cause that to someone else.

This girl who cheated on me, well she got married to him eventually but he cheated on her WITH HER SISTER. I have always been friends and to this day we still have feelings through history with each other. I have always forgiven her but never accepted her back as a girlfriend although we are still 'fudge buddies' but with a more deeper connection as it were.

I am her friend now and was able to forgive simply because when youre 18/19 you do silly things, I was at Uni and thank GHod I didnt waste it with having a girlfriend throughout and I guess she got married to him which made it a great deal easier.

Girls/Guys who cheat do cheat because there is something seriously wrong in the relationship and it wouldnt be down to just sex. It would be boredom with their partner, their partner taking advantage of them or not feelings special enough. Unfortunately unliek guys, girls CAN be seduced and can get caught up in the moment. You make them feel special etc and the chances are they will fall in your arms. I have a degree of understanding but not much.

I would however sell my wife for a million quid.
 
I have never ever cheated on a girl but I have been cheated on, at University and I guess thats the reason why I would never cheat - it hurts too much and wouldnt cause that to someone else.

This girl who cheated on me, well she got married to him eventually but he cheated on her WITH HER SISTER. I have always been friends and to this day we still have feelings through history with each other. I have always forgiven her but never accepted her back as a girlfriend although we are still 'fudge buddies' but with a more deeper connection as it were.

I am her friend now and was able to forgive simply because when youre 18/19 you do silly things, I was at Uni and thank GHod I didnt waste it with having a girlfriend throughout and I guess she got married to him which made it a great deal easier.

Girls/Guys who cheat do cheat because there is something seriously wrong in the relationship and it wouldnt be down to just sex. It would be boredom with their partner, their partner taking advantage of them or not feelings special enough. Unfortunately unliek guys, girls CAN be seduced and can get caught up in the moment. You make them feel special etc and the chances are they will fall in your arms. I have a degree of understanding but not much.

I would however sell my wife for a million quid.

Wow, fair play mate. Good on you not taking her back properly. That's class.

Is it really girls that can be excused getting caught up in the moment though as opposed to guys? I mean, this is like the 'Girls who sleep around are sluts/guys are not' thing, if a guy cheats, it's because he can't keep it in his pants and is a randy lothario while his woman stays at home. But if a girl cheats, it's because she was caught up in the moment, made to feel special and didn't really have a choice? I'm not sure if that's what you're saying exactly, and you acknowledge yourself that you've had issues with cheating, but are you saying that a girl has more of an excuse?

If an attractive woman comes up to a man and propositions him, he can say no. And if an attractive man comes up to a woman, she can say no too. Surely there isn't a difference there - just how much either of them value the relationship they have committed to?

I could never sell my woman for a million quid and look at her the same way again. I'd be exactly like the guy in the film, wouldn't be able to get it out of my head.
 
Wow, fair play mate. Good on you not taking her back properly. That's class.

Is it really girls that can be excused getting caught up in the moment though as opposed to guys? I mean, this is like the 'Girls who sleep around are sluts/guys are not' thing, if a guy cheats, it's because he can't keep it in his pants and is a randy lothario while his woman stays at home. But if a girl cheats, it's because she was caught up in the moment, made to feel special and didn't really have a choice? I'm not sure if that's what you're saying exactly, and you acknowledge yourself that you've had issues with cheating, but are you saying that a girl has more of an excuse?

If an attractive woman comes up to a man and propositions him, he can say no. And if an attractive man comes up to a woman, she can say no too. Surely there isn't a difference there - just how much either of them value the relationship they have committed to?

I could never sell my woman for a million quid and look at her the same way again. I'd be exactly like the guy in the film, wouldn't be able to get it out of my head.

Men are logical women are emotional - its true. A guy says no where as a girl will say yes to a drink then get chatting and before you know it the guy has 'seduced' her emotions. Yeah women can think too but ultimately theyre more emotional so they get caught in the emotions of the whole situation, one guy makes her feel all girly and special and the other i.e. her husband makes her feel like an employee (cook, clean, iron etc) and women hate that.

I am not saying girls have more of an excuse but I can comprehend why and actually it is a guys job to make a woman feel like a woman make her feel special etc and if you are treating her like an employee and all she does is sit around the house cooking and cleaning then she will look elsewhere for that thrill and fun and her being made to feel special.

I laugh when people say guys cheat more than girls because I dont think thats the case. Its just that girls are way more promiscuous about it than guys. Guys will shout it on the rooftops, girls not so much.

My ex cheated on me when she went to Paris for a couple of months and before she left I was always treating her like brick I wouldnt take her out with me I would be discrete about things etc. Rather than break up she cheated on me then broke up with me. Why did she cheat on me first? Because girls dont like being alone, they need that buffer they need someone waiting in the wings before they do break up with you. Which I guess brings me back to the point about being unhappy in the first instance.
 
Men are logical women are emotional - its true. A guy says no where as a girl will say yes to a drink then get chatting and before you know it the guy has 'seduced' her emotions. Yeah women can think too but ultimately theyre more emotional so they get caught in the emotions of the whole situation, one guy makes her feel all girly and special and the other i.e. her husband makes her feel like an employee (cook, clean, iron etc) and women hate that.

I am not saying girls have more of an excuse but I can comprehend why and actually it is a guys job to make a woman feel like a woman make her feel special etc and if you are treating her like an employee and all she does is sit around the house cooking and cleaning then she will look elsewhere for that thrill and fun and her being made to feel special.

I laugh when people say guys cheat more than girls because I dont think thats the case. Its just that girls are way more promiscuous about it than guys. Guys will shout it on the rooftops, girls not so much.

My ex cheated on me when she went to Paris for a couple of months and before she left I was always treating her like brick I wouldnt take her out with me I would be discrete about things etc. Rather than break up she cheated on me then broke up with me. Why did she cheat on me first? Because girls dont like being alone, they need that buffer they need someone waiting in the wings before they do break up with you. Which I guess brings me back to the point about being unhappy in the first instance.

Err, no it's not.
Never in my life have I read such a load of simplistic, misogynistic and condescending tosh.
 
Err, no it's not.
Never in my life have I read such a load of simplistic, misogynistic and condescending tosh.

I am talking from experience. It could be mysogynistic and simplistic (I dont mean to be condescending to women). I agree I may have generalised a bit so for that I apologise. I guess im talking through experience not only because of what happened in the past but what females also tell me. I could very well stand corrected and girls are all different from one another.

But girls are more emotional and men are more logical - that is well known even women would agree. Thats not to say women are illogical because im not saying that at all just that theyre emotions will overrule their logic AT TIMES.

But you have only picked on that specific bit. What about the rest? You dont think girls will always want that buffer so to speak? I think the majority of it is true and like I say its speaking from my bad experience in the past and what my close friends have experienced and what my close female friends will have also experienced.
 
I don't really get the hate for d.lloyd - had several high profile partners and all of a sudden she's a slag.

As for the jordan/lloyd debate - jordan is much worse as she has actually made herself a role model for young girls, lloyd is just a small time IT girl who hasn't really actively tried to market herself to young teens (or lower) well as far as i am aware anyway
 
I am talking from experience. It could be mysogynistic and simplistic (I dont mean to be condescending to women). I agree I may have generalised a bit so for that I apologise. I guess im talking through experience not only because of what happened in the past but what females also tell me. I could very well stand corrected and girls are all different from one another.

But girls are more emotional and men are more logical - that is well known even women would agree. Thats not to say women are illogical because im not saying that at all just that theyre emotions will overrule their logic AT TIMES.

But you have only picked on that specific bit. What about the rest? You dont think girls will always want that buffer so to speak? I think the majority of it is true and like I say its speaking from my bad experience in the past and what my close friends have experienced and what my close female friends will have also experienced.

I agree that in general women are more emotional than logical, but I still can't accept it as an excuse. What if you make every effort to tell your woman she is special, that you love her, that she is gorgeous, and make every effort to keep the relationship fun and exciting and involve her in your life? If you do all that, is it still ok for your girl to then fall for her 'emotions' just because a guy gets her talking, buys her a drink and tells her she's pretty? It would make me wonder why I bother. Even if the guy went about it in a different way, tried talking to her and having a more normal conversation before amping up the temperature, if it was my woman I'd still expect her to say 'Thanks for the attention but I'm in a relationship, I'm happy with it and I don't want to lead you on.' Why couldn't she do that? Unless you were only saying it was understandable if you haven't shown them enough attention?
 
I don't really get the hate for d.lloyd - had several high profile partners and all of a sudden she's a slag.

As for the jordan/lloyd debate - jordan is much worse as she has actually made herself a role model for young girls, lloyd is just a small time IT girl who hasn't really actively tried to market herself to young teens (or lower) well as far as i am aware anyway
I don't hate her tbh. I simply think she is/was a raging slag with no morals with a detestable character if her little stint on Big Brother is anything to go by. IMO only a man with equally low self esteem would marry someone like her.
 
I was on a night out a little while ago with a group of mates, one of them asked a general question to the group "what's your number?" i.e. how many girls have you slept with. I don't know why most guys see it as some great achievement if they've shagged loads of girls. I'm not againt men or women enjoying being single, but I don't see the need to brag about it. I've got a sister so I've seen first hand what arseholes some guys can be! But then again I've come across lots of girls who sleep around too.

Girls always moan that they aren't any decent guys out there, but most of them will go for the pricks, and then act surprised when the guy is out of order to them.
 
I agree that in general women are more emotional than logical, but I still can't accept it as an excuse. What if you make every effort to tell your woman she is special, that you love her, that she is gorgeous, and make every effort to keep the relationship fun and exciting and involve her in your life? If you do all that, is it still ok for your girl to then fall for her 'emotions' just because a guy gets her talking, buys her a drink and tells her she's pretty? It would make me wonder why I bother. Even if the guy went about it in a different way, tried talking to her and having a more normal conversation before amping up the temperature, if it was my woman I'd still expect her to say 'Thanks for the attention but I'm in a relationship, I'm happy with it and I don't want to lead you on.' Why couldn't she do that? Unless you were only saying it was understandable if you haven't shown them enough attention?


When people are not happy they will do whatever they can to be happy. For example you are not happy in your job - what do you do? you go look for another job BUT you dont quit first then look. You look whilst still being in your current job no mater how bad it gets (unless youre getting beaten the hell up by your boss). Why do you not quit first? because you need the money, you dont want to harm your future prospects etc. i guess relationship but in particular women think like that. Men in general will dump the girl then go looking but men like that time out of a relationship. Girls in the main dont like being alone.

Thats why that period when they do cheat they dont really see it as cheating or they fool themselves into not thinking that. Why do girls say 'lets take a time out I need some space'? they dont need space its code for 'I wanna break up' but wanan keep you lingering around whilst I go searching. Im no psychologist so I cant say im right but from MY EXPERIENCES from most of the girls I have been with, been friends with and have worked with.

My work analogy isnt exactly the same as we are dealing with emotions but the principle is the same. People will and may have differing viewpoints and I accept that.


Kristin Stewart cheated on Pattinson for one of two reasons - not enough attention from him (due to the nature of their work etc) or she was totally unhappy whilst the other guy made her feel like a princess for a short period of time and now she regrets it because she knows what she has/had was and is great. it also is the same for guys but not seen much of it from a guys perspective - seen a great deal of girls do what I just described (in the past that is they have all grown up now)
 
This is a key point I think. As you say rightly or wrongly, but the reason girls get insulted while guys get high-fived is because it is the girl that chooses to do it. I've read something about this before - it said that in nature, the female chooses. And that's true for human's too. Obviously the man chooses to do what he wants, but basically it's the female's choice. You present yourself to a woman, and she chooses to accept. It doesn't usually work like the female presenting themselves to the male - it's rare.

So why is there not equality there? It's because the woman chooses. If you're easy as a woman, you aren't being natural to yourself, and that's why most people find it weird. If a girl decided to have sex with a different guy each night of the week, she could do it. 90% of guys would say yes to her if she offered it. A guy simply doesn't 'choose' to have sex. He chooses to try to have sex, but if he wanted to do it with a different girl every night of the week, it would take a lot more effort, a lot more 'skill', and 90% of women would probably say no.

I'm not saying guys should be high fived. But it's because there's more 'achievement' there. There's no achievement for the girl. There is for the guy, and that's just the way it is. They get the high fives if they are capable of sleeping with many attractive women because they can do something that the majority of men cannot do. But the majority of women could do it if they wanted. In nature, the male wants to procreate and spread his seed while the female wants a good protective partner.

But that's not to say guys should be doing it and girls shouldn't. I believe you can do whatever you want when you're single, but ultimately it will be unfulfilling if you can't be yourself enough to share yourself with a woman, and have a close relationship with her.

Lloyd seems to have turned her life around and has stayed out of the limelight for a good couple of years now, so fair play to her. On the discussion of whether leopard's can change their spots, I think in her case they can. And it seems like the kids especially helped her do that - plus meeting someone that accepted her for who she is rather than treating her as the next notch on the bedpost. She didn't have to accept being all of thiose notches, but if she was told she was loved then you could see why a young woman could do what she did.

I think that there are a lot of glib sexist generalisations in that post.

The point that you make about sexual choices in nature is nonsense. Sexuality in nature (as in humans) is gloriously diverse with every possible combination present somewhere. And when it comes to choice, off the top of my head I can tell you tht gang rape is very common in ducks, so there certainly isn't much choice on the female's part there.

With regard to there being no achievement for a woman to sleep with a man. I think that this is again a generalisation. I've known girls who slept around. Chased fellas that they fancied but didn't always want a relationship. They didn't get everyone that they chased. Had fun. In time settled into a long term relationship and settled down. I cannot see anything wrong with that.

The opportunities available for women to sleep with men are the same that there are for men to sleep with women. If there aren't there are a lot of people lying about who they go home with at the end of the night.

The truth is that both men and women lie about their sexual history because of pressure put on them by society. Men bump their figures up a bit because they want to impress their peers. Women forget to count a few one night stands and relationships that they would rather didn't happen because they don't want to be judged and labelled in the way that some of you are women that you don't know and have never met in this thread.

It is hypocrisy of the highest order for a man to have slept around but to expect that a perspective partner be as pure as the driven snow.
 
I think that there are a lot of glib sexist generalisations in that post.

The point that you make about sexual choices in nature is nonsense. Sexuality in nature (as in humans) is gloriously diverse with every possible combination present somewhere. And when it comes to choice, off the top of my head I can tell you tht gang rape is very common in ducks, so there certainly isn't much choice on the female's part there.

The opportunities available for women to sleep with men are the same that there are for men to sleep with women. If there aren't there are a lot of people lying about who they go home with at the end of the night.

The truth is that both men and women lie about their sexual history because of pressure put on them by society. Men bump their figures up a bit because they want to impress their peers. Women forget to count a few one night stands and relationships that they would rather didn't happen because they don't want to be judged and labelled in the way that some of you are women that you don't know and have never met in this thread.

It is hypocrisy of the highest order for a man to have slept around but to expect that a perspective partner be as pure as the driven snow.

I'm sorry Milo but reading your reply, it's like you weren't referring to my post at all? I mean using an example of gang-rape in ducks as a reason why not example doesn't hold up is a bit extreme.

You haven't really disputed what I've said. I think it's clear a woman going up to a man has more of a chance than a man going up to a woman. Broadly, I'd say that's true. Sure, you can get guys, or groups of guys, that are generally 'good' with women and would be able to get sex out of them, and you can get women that would accept a lot of guys advances rather than rejecting them. That brings in loads of reasons such as self-esteem, up-bringing or attitudes in their environment, but broadly, I don't think it's equal at all. Excluding rape, the female chooses and the man goes for it when given the opportunity. The man doesn't 'choose' because normally it isn't the woman initiating sexual advances on the man. So that's why it's looked upon worse for women. Maybe achievement isn't the right word, but it's kind of what I mean. There's no achievement for the woman, but there is for a man. I'm not saying that men should be praised for sleeping around while expecting women to be 'pure', I'm just saying that's why it is. It's not just hypocracy, there is a reason for it. I'd wager that if it was as tough for women to 'get sex' as it is for men, then there wouldn't be the issue of men being high fived while women get called slags.

And this isn't talking about fully grown up, mid 30s adults. In that case, the man has usually grown up, is fully confident in himself and that's what's attractive to a woman. He knows how to be around them and make them feel comfortable. And similarly a woman of that age is more likely to want to settle down. But from say 18-25, young women will be promiscuous if they want to be while a lot of young men are still finding themselves, wishing they knew how to talk to women and counting themselves lucky if they are able to find one that's willing to have sex with them. It's tough for a young man. Again, I'm not saying I agree with women getting called slags while men get let off. I think if you're single you should be able to do whatever you want, but there is a bit of a limit. Going around more than 2 or 3 of the same group of friends would probably be it IMO.

But anyway as I said, I don't mind women doing it. I'm just saying - the opportunities for men and women to have sex broadly aren't equal. You have men that are better at getting it, and women that are better at not 'giving' it, but broadly, women choose and men go with it. The man approaches, initiates and tries his luck and the woman chooses whether she likes what she sees.
 
I'm sorry Milo but reading your reply, it's like you weren't referring to my post at all? I mean using an example of gang-rape in ducks as a reason why not example doesn't hold up is a bit extreme.

You haven't really disputed what I've said. I think it's clear a woman going up to a man has more of a chance than a man going up to a woman. Broadly, I'd say that's true. Sure, you can get guys, or groups of guys, that are generally 'good' with women and would be able to get sex out of them, and you can get women that would accept a lot of guys advances rather than rejecting them. That brings in loads of reasons such as self-esteem, up-bringing or attitudes in their environment, but broadly, I don't think it's equal at all. Excluding rape, the female chooses and the man goes for it when given the opportunity. The man doesn't 'choose' because normally it isn't the woman initiating sexual advances on the man. So that's why it's looked upon worse for women. Maybe achievement isn't the right word, but it's kind of what I mean. There's no achievement for the woman, but there is for a man. I'm not saying that men should be praised for sleeping around while expecting women to be 'pure', I'm just saying that's why it is. It's not just hypocracy, there is a reason for it. I'd wager that if it was as tough for women to 'get sex' as it is for men, then there wouldn't be the issue of men being high fived while women get called slags.

And this isn't talking about fully grown up, mid 30s adults. In that case, the man has usually grown up, is fully confident in himself and that's what's attractive to a woman. He knows how to be around them and make them feel comfortable. And similarly a woman of that age is more likely to want to settle down. But from say 18-25, young women will be promiscuous if they want to be while a lot of young men are still finding themselves, wishing they knew how to talk to women and counting themselves lucky if they are able to find one that's willing to have sex with them. It's tough for a young man. Again, I'm not saying I agree with women getting called slags while men get let off. I think if you're single you should be able to do whatever you want, but there is a bit of a limit. Going around more than 2 or 3 of the same group of friends would probably be it IMO.

But anyway as I said, I don't mind women doing it. I'm just saying - the opportunities for men and women to have sex broadly aren't equal. You have men that are better at getting it, and women that are better at not 'giving' it, but broadly, women choose and men go with it. The man approaches, initiates and tries his luck and the woman chooses whether she likes what she sees.

The reason I used the, admittedly, rather extreme example of duck sexual habits (I saved you from homosexual necrophilia in ducks) is because you said that "in nature, the female chooses" that is clearly not true and there are many other examples that I can find to back this up.

With regards to the chance of success of men going up to women as opposed to women going up to men, we are not comparing a level playing field. Society has expectations of how people behave and most people comply with that most of the time. The example that you give rarely happens, there is more than one way to get a partner and it frequently doesn't involve going up to a stranger with a bad chat up line.

We need to go back to the point that if the average man has more partners than the average woman, who are these men sleeping with?
 
Back