Is love a myth? The objectification of men!
Discussion
Whilst enjoying a legful of Guinness last night with fellow bachelor Dave, I gained some curious insight into nature of women. Dave is an intelligent thoughtful chap, what he had to say seemed to make quite a lot of sense.
It was a rationalisation of the model which all of us fit into the picture, one way or another. After you have stripped away the motives for sex, love is a myth. In light of this, I wasn't really sure what to think.
So, do you remember when you got together with your last partner? Probably lots of rutting involved and heady passion. Well folks, this is merely a tool! It is a mans perogative to rut to a greater or lesser degree (determined by his testosterone levels) and a womans, to gain a nest by whatever means necessary and fill it with pups. It happens that appealing to a mans penis is an excellent way of doing such a thing AND it works too. If the method appears to not be achieveing the said ends, the woman will withdraw the privilage and the relationship will come to a crossroads.
From my psychology books, I have only read one which hints at sex as a tool and that was "Games people play" (Eric Berne), a good read indeed. But even Mr.Berne failed to admit the full scale of it. Perhaps it's like Professor Hawking telling everyone that there REALLY is no god.
It seems to rationalise my experiences and what I see going wrong/right with others.
So, back on course..... You have succumbed to being a tool at the hands of a womans biological desires, due to being a slave to your own. As long as you keep her happy, she will pay you with sex. When you are not doing what it says on your tin, she will play "Frigid Woman" which is a well documented relationship tool, although blunts with frequent use.
So, when I go out and hope to meet that special someone, having a meaningful, beautiful, unquantifiable soul connection, it is merely my "dick" following its desires, a means that a nest can be built and filled, the womans will. Historically, the chap being objectified like the host of a parasite, to be treated like a little boy and managed by this dreadful thing, which deals you out sex, as and when is totally necessary
and only then.
Even in my depths of cynicism, I find it hard to contemplate such a thing. For me, it is like being a christian and being told that there might NOT really a god......
What do the pistonheads bunch think?
It was a rationalisation of the model which all of us fit into the picture, one way or another. After you have stripped away the motives for sex, love is a myth. In light of this, I wasn't really sure what to think.
So, do you remember when you got together with your last partner? Probably lots of rutting involved and heady passion. Well folks, this is merely a tool! It is a mans perogative to rut to a greater or lesser degree (determined by his testosterone levels) and a womans, to gain a nest by whatever means necessary and fill it with pups. It happens that appealing to a mans penis is an excellent way of doing such a thing AND it works too. If the method appears to not be achieveing the said ends, the woman will withdraw the privilage and the relationship will come to a crossroads.
From my psychology books, I have only read one which hints at sex as a tool and that was "Games people play" (Eric Berne), a good read indeed. But even Mr.Berne failed to admit the full scale of it. Perhaps it's like Professor Hawking telling everyone that there REALLY is no god.
It seems to rationalise my experiences and what I see going wrong/right with others.
So, back on course..... You have succumbed to being a tool at the hands of a womans biological desires, due to being a slave to your own. As long as you keep her happy, she will pay you with sex. When you are not doing what it says on your tin, she will play "Frigid Woman" which is a well documented relationship tool, although blunts with frequent use.
So, when I go out and hope to meet that special someone, having a meaningful, beautiful, unquantifiable soul connection, it is merely my "dick" following its desires, a means that a nest can be built and filled, the womans will. Historically, the chap being objectified like the host of a parasite, to be treated like a little boy and managed by this dreadful thing, which deals you out sex, as and when is totally necessary
and only then. Even in my depths of cynicism, I find it hard to contemplate such a thing. For me, it is like being a christian and being told that there might NOT really a god......
What do the pistonheads bunch think?
them? 
The irony is that refusal seems to work.
I have a mate who refuses to move in with his girlfriend and it partially explains her enormous sex drive. Guaranteed, as soon as he succumbs, she will withdraw some of that privilage.
This sort of crystallises my bachelor feelings. I think I'm going to stay my own man and play them at their own game.
Dave's show stopping line was "If women didn't have vaginas, would you bother with them at all?"
Of course, it was a massive shock for me, I hadn't really considered it at all.
I have a mate who refuses to move in with his girlfriend and it partially explains her enormous sex drive. Guaranteed, as soon as he succumbs, she will withdraw some of that privilage.
This sort of crystallises my bachelor feelings. I think I'm going to stay my own man and play them at their own game.
Dave's show stopping line was "If women didn't have vaginas, would you bother with them at all?"
Of course, it was a massive shock for me, I hadn't really considered it at all.
Lois, I'm a romantic idiot myself, but it does make make me question what our true motives are.
If it was as simple as sex, we would hire prostitutes.
But then again, can you achieve the sexless relationship with the same level of "intensity".
If rotting in a marriage and being objectified is an ultimate result, I would rather opt out.
What do you think?
If it was as simple as sex, we would hire prostitutes.
But then again, can you achieve the sexless relationship with the same level of "intensity".
If rotting in a marriage and being objectified is an ultimate result, I would rather opt out.
What do you think?
People who, for whatever reason, cant have sex still fall in love though.
So love isnt a mechanism of evolution per se.
Its a bloody good question this.
Perhaps it started out as a mechanism of evolution but the evolution of the brain specifically has perhaps attached a weight to that particular emotion and collectively society has added to that weight...
So love isnt a mechanism of evolution per se.
Its a bloody good question this.
Perhaps it started out as a mechanism of evolution but the evolution of the brain specifically has perhaps attached a weight to that particular emotion and collectively society has added to that weight...
groucho said:
It is in it's evolutionary sense.
Grouch.
Is it heck. Evolution doesn't involve love like that. You can be totally in love and not have to have sex.
Think about a really old couple who are 110% in love, they probably havent had sex in years but are still totally in love with eachother.
Love is when your man's penis doesn't work anymore and your nest is barren and you still want to be with that person. An amalgamation of comradeship, need and something that makes you happy about just staying with that person.
Up till that stage, any other new relationship is always started by the rule of hormonal desire. Saying no to that hormonal desire because you want to stay with x person instead of the hormone bomb that is calling you is another proof that love exists, or that at least, you can make it exist. Call it whatever.
Lois beat me to it
>> Edited by Iria on Saturday 15th January 12:03
Up till that stage, any other new relationship is always started by the rule of hormonal desire. Saying no to that hormonal desire because you want to stay with x person instead of the hormone bomb that is calling you is another proof that love exists, or that at least, you can make it exist. Call it whatever.
Lois beat me to it
>> Edited by Iria on Saturday 15th January 12:03
Evolution created the feeling of love within us for the sole purpose of breeding along with jealousy and all the other traits that go with being 'in love'.
Without them the human race wouldn't have got very far.
We are a product of evoultion and it's sole goal is for propagation of the species.
You can dress it up all you like.
Grouch.
Without them the human race wouldn't have got very far.
We are a product of evoultion and it's sole goal is for propagation of the species.
You can dress it up all you like.
Grouch.
Ok, does anyone remember the "Top Gear" where Clarkson went to France and the tailor woman made a comment about mistresses.
French bird said:- "I should be flattered if my husband would take a mistress, it says to me that he is still sexy, and he chooses me to live with".
It is taboo in this country but happens nevertheless. Blatantly practiced by good looking gold diggers and blokes with loads of cash.
Without a doubt, this sort of behaviour I find distasteful (from my personal set of standards) but perhaps it is the extension of a principle which is at the core of every relationship.
Without a doubt, understanding the cause and reasons for a rainbow doesn't make it any less beautiful. Having said, human relationships are within our control and to deny the essence of them is to ignore the underlying structure, which hinges on behaviour transactions and that's it.
French bird said:- "I should be flattered if my husband would take a mistress, it says to me that he is still sexy, and he chooses me to live with".
It is taboo in this country but happens nevertheless. Blatantly practiced by good looking gold diggers and blokes with loads of cash.
Without a doubt, this sort of behaviour I find distasteful (from my personal set of standards) but perhaps it is the extension of a principle which is at the core of every relationship.
Without a doubt, understanding the cause and reasons for a rainbow doesn't make it any less beautiful. Having said, human relationships are within our control and to deny the essence of them is to ignore the underlying structure, which hinges on behaviour transactions and that's it.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff