[caster]

A while back we had a woman poster remarking that she had "more intense" orgasms by masturbating than with her partner. She seemed to "prefer" masturbation over intercourse. I note that she wasn't subjected to the same type of condemnation that seems to be happening here

Jim, You're not the first one to notice the double standard that's common here.

[SaharaJim]

A while back we had a woman poster remarking that she had "more intense" orgasms by masturbating than with her partner. She seemed to "prefer" masturbation over intercourse. I note that she wasn't subjected to the same type of condemnation that seems to be happening here. What I posted there and I will say again here is the OP is comparing Apples with Oranges. Sex with a loving partner is the "Banquet" of sex and masturbation is "fast food". Yes "fast food" is convienant, you can live on it if you "have to", and sometimes it is really good. BUT it really isn't the dining experience that the Banquet provides. Personally I love my Banquets; but that doesn't mean I won't grab a burger, taco or chili-cheese dog on a hurried afternoon. I just don't kill my appetite with "Junkfood" when I know the Banquet is "waiting" at home.

[ItsASecret]

If you've noticed, we really are not trying to hit on you just because we talk to you.

Context of talking is important. Walking up to a girl in a bar is not the opportune time for a guy to depict himself as an innocent "I just want to talk to you" type guy. No, the first thing that girl will be thinking, because the grand majority of the time it is true thanks to other guys, is that he is looking for sex. The nice guy needs to be the nice guy at the coffee shop, in the mall, the grocery store or anyplace innocent and not in any way shape or form sexual. If anything opens with "your dress looks good" again, it will be about image and hence the first thing she will be thinking is "great here we go again". If it is a hello how are you then it is different, any alluding to how she looks how she moves anything in the slightest way about sexuality or the slightest hint of sexual interest she will pick up on it and it is game over if she wants no part of that type of guy at first meeting. There are plenty of smooth talking nice guys that know how to get the job done, they are genuine and a woman can pick up on that genuine behavior.

I for one, can't imagine anything else than having sex with a Jessica Beil look-a-like over the Internet She doesn't cost me anything to date, she cannot break my heart, she cannot cheat on me and she cannot take 3/4 of what I earned over my lifetime.

I can certainly see the point a guy would make about the fantasy world of porn. I mean it is easier if he chooses to avoid real women. The porn provides better looking surgically perfected bodies that you will not see in real life, it provides the fantasy that all women from being in a movie theater to walking down the street are ready to get down and extremely dirty with a 10 person orgy and that again not at all present in real life, and it provides the fantasy of being with someone you would never have a chance with like Jessica Beil look-a-like (or Brad Pit for women like myself) lol. I can completely understand why a man, if he does choose to avoid a relationship, would take porn over real women. That fantasy of perfection and zero obligation would certainly be a temptation.

[CHANDLERS WISH]

Roger what an interesting read.

So you don't ever feel lonley because you date but you won't commit.. You go out with your friends so you still have the boy time, you masterbate, over and done with, no hard work, no one to please, when you want and you absolutely love life, it's fantastic the best it's ever been.

Seriously! Don't live life on your own...

maybe paying attention to guys like me in our prime years may have made a difference (although not realistic). But really, if your interested in those of us guys over 40, I suggest you look for alternatives.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree. In our "prime" years we are serious.. We are looking for someone mature, not a fool, not someone to wine and dine us but be our equal.. We are not nieve and we know exactly what we are looking for.

Some of what you describe I call "baggage".. When I went back out into the dating world at 43, there were so many guys that, held so much contempt agains women due to suposidly being robbed. Yet they did not sit back and ask why the marriage really failed and who they married?

If you married someone for instance who had decency then she more than likely would have been alot fairer on the financial part if alternatively she tried to throw the book at you and then you have to ask why women get this way that they want it all, "if" they were not gold diggers, what went wrong?

Lastly, make no mistake.. We women 'DO' want a partner that has no baggage, learnt from their mistakes, still believes in love and trust and is equal ..and I would hope you would / do as well.

I left mine with nothing, my choice.

I am engaged now and probably a tad older than you.

Don't beat yourself up and be so hard on yourself, we are not all gold diggers... Each person is different.

[RogerW]

I am a white male in my early 50s. During my "dating " years 15-49, I was rejected for a countless number of reasons that I won't go into here. Guys like us (the "too nice guys") sort of realized with the advent of the Internet that we can "get-off" without the complications of a real relationship. It's a win-win for us. I cannot relate to actually touching, or being touched by, another real human person. So I am happy being a "friend" to women and a buddy to my male friends. I leave the 90% of women who want to be with the 10% of men alone. It seems to make everyone happy. As for any woman who thinks otherwise, maybe paying attention to guys like me in our prime years may have made a difference (although not realistic). But really, if your interested in those of us guys over 40, I suggest you look for alternatives. I for one, can't imagine anything else than having sex with a Jessica Beil look-a-like over the Internet She doesn't cost me anything to date, she cannot break my heart, she cannot cheat on me and she cannot take 3/4 of what I earned over my lifetime.
I simply get off and close the window now. My only regret is that I've heard that most women cannot enjoy masturbation over getting near one of us "undesirables". Believe me, try it first. We are really not worth it. And I really hate being looked as being so creepy that I disgust you. If you've noticed, we really are not trying to hit on you just because we talk to you. I gtg, I have a porn site to visit.

thanks Wildchild, Little and CW. Very good points to note. Like I said, even when you have an open relationship with your g/f you can still appreciate other womens issues.
You're all very open and honest. I'm sure that I would like you if I knew you.
xxx to all of you.

[ItsASecret]

you would think it would already be done and approved by the FDA. So where's the hold up?

The thing that is holding everything up is what everyone simply states in other ways "science has a lot to learn". Not everything is known, not everything is found as soon as a grad student picks up a thesis topic, and not everything is a success.

Lots of birth control pills are made with different hormones and combinations thereof, so it's unfair to try to blame everything on ONE hormone.

Very true, which is also why it is difficult to blame it on the pill in the first place. Plenty of other things in the body with the actual hormones and not synthetic can be to blame.

I'm one of those women basically chained to a pack of pills because of gynecological problems that aren't worth enough cash money to the men in white lab coats to try to actually fix. They think that throwing hormones at my body will make it all better ... when it actually just covers up and slows down the problems.

That is really unfortunate that your stuck on one certain pack, I do not know if that happens often in the population as a whole. But if the doc says they found something that can be a physiological solution then I would imagine there is some science behind it to back it up. The thing with putting stuff into the body is that there will be side effects no matter how much you do not want it to happen. And just because something happens doesn't mean that everything is wrong and nothing is actually of benefit. If anything does not work for an individual then they have every right to go to their physician and ask to be taken off of it.

It bothers me more and more when I find out that I have 2-3 different problems with female-specific parts of my body but they can all be treated by birth control. Certainly, all those parts were created by estrogen in the first place, but it just seems like a cop-out, and like it was being made impossible for me to try to conceive.

Birth control is used for more than preventing pregnancy so yes there can be sound reason for a doctor to put you on it for whatever gynecological condition you have. Its not a cop-out if there is the scientific evidence to back it up.

[WildChild]

To follow up on Little's points, the negative attitude toward women's bodies and sexuality in health care, at least in the US, is reflected in our having the world's highest rates of c-sections and hysterectomies and one of the highest maternal/infant mortality rates in the developed world. Having seen my ex through testicular cancer I saw first hand how squeemish the medical world is about removing a testicle but women are routinely recommended to have their entire reproductive system removed because, "you don't need the baby factory anymore". And yet woman's ovaries do for her what a man's testicles do for him.

While there are been some movement toward less invasive surgery, I can't think of any done to men that is analogous to breast cancer treatment - just take em off. If one is cancerous, better have them both off just to be safe. There are women who've had their breast removed because they fear they will get breast cancer, not because they have it! What responsible practitioner would do that kind of elective surgery? Would they even consider removing a man's prostate just because he is afraid he might get prostate cancer? I doubt it very much.

I had trouble with continuous bleeding, was put on progesterine. What an awful expereince. It made an emotional and physical mess of me in short order. But since I don't think my doctors are gods, I just went in and said, "no, I'm not doing this to myself, find another solution." I did my research, spoke to other women and then I told her what I wanted and she agreed it was the best solution. But I had to go hunt up the info on my own...I got a D&C and ablation and have had no further problems. My menopause has been more like meno-blink. But if I had stayed on the drugs I'd be as messed up and miserable as thousands of other women. Our society and medical profession just doesn't put much value on women's expereince. It will take women and men rethinking and changing their attitudes and behaviors to insist that this changes.

[Little]

Sorry but I have to butt in, science does find it important because the word Money is delightful to the pharmaceutical companies...they want that 'arousal/orgasm' pill created and patented a.s.a.p. As for the hormone (p.s not actually hormones) birth control pill that "warps" the body...well it has become a necessity to many. The age ol' "it doesn't affect everyone in the same way" trumps a lot when it comes to explaining those particular matters. But I do understand what you mean when it comes to the rising problem that so many women are unfortunately experiencing with these drugs.

I should be fair, scientists are working on these arousal drugs for women ... there are probably quite a few pharmacy grad students getting their PhD's on it. But in today's world where you can farm out that work to thousands of grad students at a time just for a cheap fellowship, you would think it would already be done and approved by the FDA. So where's the hold up?
Lots of birth control pills are made with different hormones and combinations thereof, so it's unfair to try to blame everything on ONE hormone.
I'm one of those women basically chained to a pack of pills because of gynecological problems that aren't worth enough cash money to the men in white lab coats to try to actually fix. They think that throwing hormones at my body will make it all better ... when it actually just covers up and slows down the problems. It bothers me more and more when I find out that I have 2-3 different problems with female-specific parts of my body but they can all be treated by birth control. Certainly, all those parts were created by estrogen in the first place, but it just seems like a cop-out, and like it was being made impossible for me to try to conceive.

But back to the main topic, Thomas, it is probably more socially acceptable for a man to be "in control" of his sexual life because there's this crazy social agenda still being pushed that a man should be the boss, that a woman should be feeble and permissive and it pervades our sexual culture too. I know the frustration of being the one always "in charge" of the sexual part of a relationship because of somebody else's hang-ups. ("Please, can't we have sex? I'll be on top. What about just giving you a blow job? Come on. We haven't seen each other in 3 months, I'm not crazy or a nympho, I just want to have a healthy sexual relationship! No, don't go home, just forget about it, I won't bring it up again.") Nobody in a healthy relationship *should* get any kind of sadistic pleasure out of denying their partner anything they feel they need ... including sexual gratification. Some people do, and with others it's more that their partner's needs are more than they can compromise to. Calling it a male vs female issue just doesn't take the whole picture into account.
And as for the erection problems - there are still OB/GYNs out there who don't think the female orgasm exists or that female gratification is necessary. I fervently hope that they are relegated to the small town clinics of the world, as that's the only place I've found them ... but that's also the only place I've gone to an OB/GYN office, so I can't be sure. No, I don't imagine that the woman's response would be the first thing questioned, but I don't think that the man's ability should be the first thing questioned in a case where a woman can't achieve orgasm either ... that line of questioning isn't very well-thought-out. It's more likely that a woman has her own mental block put up, rather than a "plumbing problem" or her partner's ability. But that's just another way women are painted as victims in our society ... it can't be their own fault, always somebody else's.

[WildChild]

You know, the thing is, there are many ways to pleasure and too many people, male and female, never take the time, communicate or make the effort to learn or become really skilled in love making. It's about a whole lot more than penis in the vagina. In many ways its an entire lifestyle and thinking. It's self pleasuring and pleasuring the other every day in hundreds of little ways to bring both to a state of responsiveness and awareness and joy. I know some people who truly do this, consciously.

This doesn't mean they never disagree or get out of sorts but they have created such a strong, loving bond that everything in their lives follows a thread of sensuality and pleasure. There isn't all this score keeping of who has it harder (pun intended) or who puts the most effort into it. Each does things that they enjoy and each does things to add to the other's pleasure in all area of life. It cooperation, not competition.