Friend or foe?

Jules · 19-01-2008 10:57pm

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Women, however, seek the emotional attachment. A caring, loving relationship and an emotional attachment that perhaps, another woman can provide. Hence there hidden predisposition to seek intimacy with other women.

Hence why women are more likely to part-take in a threesome than men. And enjoy it.

DOUBLE STANDARD... why can't women have unemotional unloving uncaring relationships?

Tom Dunne · 19-01-2008 11:02pm

Jules wrote: »

DOUBLE STANDARD... why can't women have unemotional unloving uncaring relationships?

That's not double standard, that's nature. Women want an emotional, secure, caring relationship, it's in their biology. It's hard-wired into their brain.

Yes, there are occasions where they may want a fling, but deep down, they want something more.

Don't fight it, Jules, you know you want to.

Jules · 19-01-2008 11:04pm

At this time in my life yes that is what i want, but its not natural for a woman to just want what you stated.......

SO THERE!

Tom Dunne · 19-01-2008 11:33pm

Jules wrote: »

but its not natural for a woman to just want what you stated.......

The biological evidence states otherwise.

SO NA!

Jules · 19-01-2008 11:35pm

Tom Dunne wrote: »

The biological evidence states otherwise.

SO NA!

What evidence... ya big ninny!

jellie · 19-01-2008 11:40pm

whatever about "willingness to experiment" i could just never watch another girl near my bf.

Tom Dunne · 19-01-2008 11:40pm

Jules wrote: »

What evidence... ya big ninny!

The evidence I have already presented, your honour.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Women, however, seek the emotional attachment. A caring, loving relationship and an emotional attachment that perhaps, another woman can provide. Hence there hidden predisposition to seek intimacy with other women.

Hence why women are more likely to part-take in a threesome than men. And enjoy it.

DJ_Spider · 20-01-2008 1:15am

I know a lot of men fantasise about this, but realistically think about it. If another girl joins you and your BF, who is she going to be more interested in? OK if she plays for both sides then both of you, but if she is 'lesbian; she will only be interested in your GF. So you might as well just watch HBO!

I had a ex GF who wanted a 3some, never did it though cos I didn't want to have someone with a bigger piece than me! (Even though they wouldn't.....yeah right!)

Just my 2c!

WindSock · 20-01-2008 3:11am

Here come the worms

....this thread has the potential for gurlz r hot lezbos n shud perform for me type replies, so lets not go there please? Keep the replies civil, witty if you may. Or get thee to AH. Ta

Jesus Wept · 20-01-2008 3:24am

WindSock wrote:

gurlz r hot lezbos n shud perform for me

AND ME, OMG QFT+ELVENTY BILLIONZ :eek::D

Rattlehead_ie · 20-01-2008 3:26pm

There you go another one to add to the double standards thread.

So I just added it to my post why is it that guys get freaked out at thought of MMF threesomes while FFM is fine.

Tom Dunne · 20-01-2008 4:21pm

It's not double standards, it's nature.

Maple · 21-01-2008 11:21am

nope, couldn't watch another girl with a guy i was in love with.

maybe i could do it if it was for experimentation and i was feeling a bit wild but not with someone i'm emotionally involved with.

Carlito78 · 21-01-2008 12:07pm

I agree with ya Maple but you should try MMF... its pretty cool. Had a recent experience- the attention is great. Not many guys will agree to it tho!:mad:

Kazobel · 21-01-2008 1:39pm

I was the extra participent in a few of them in my younger, wilder days and it was pretty fun at the time. They were with friends and it never really had any bad effect on our friendships or their relationships. I wouldn't have been what any of them would have wanted as a full time partner so jealousy or paranoia of wether one or the other were checking me out afterwards was really never an issue. As for now if I was asked I honestly don't know if I'd do it again but if I was in a relationship I don't think I could bring someone else into it, in the end I know it would eat away at me on some level wether I knew them or not.

Slow Motion · 21-01-2008 2:31pm

I have to say, my other half is more than enough woman for me! I wouldn't have the energy for her + 1. 1 good woman is enough for anyone;)

Will · 21-01-2008 3:23pm

mff - no bother
fmm - i dont know, itd have to be a guy i know quite well and no shenanigans between us.
i think the main reason guys dont wanna do threesomes with other guys is because theyre afraid the other guy coming in will have a bigger tool.
threesomes are over-rated, someone always gets left out *sobs*

Rattlehead_ie · 21-01-2008 3:45pm

I dont know about most women but the women I have talked to about this before all are of the opinion that they would like to try MMF, but where the 2 guys are not with each other, more that the 2 guys JUST pay attention to the girl. So its not like the girls expect you too well......whatever you do in a threesome. Although Im sure there is exception.

Susannahmia · 21-01-2008 5:15pm

Tom Dunne wrote: »

We all know that women actually would enjoy the attention of another woman, but men would certainly not enjoy the attention of another man

That's not true the thought of being with another woman turns my stomach! Just because you want it to be true doesn't mean it is. Men:rolleyes:. Imo this thread has no place in the ladies lounge and is explicitly sexist.

Slow Motion · 21-01-2008 5:20pm

Susannahmia wrote: »

That's not true the thought of being with another woman turns my stomach! Just because you want it to be true doesn't mean it is. Men:rolleyes:.

It's in Toms head, and nothing, repeat nothing will ever get it out! Just play along and he will be happy!

Jaunte · 22-01-2008 12:09pm

Tom Dunne wrote: »

However, biologically, it is not the same for men. The number one goal for men is to sow their wild oats far and wide. That is why men can continue fathering children well into their latter years (assuming they can get it up). The primary goal is to set the little soldiers free to work their magic, with no emotion, no strings attached.

This is a common opinion, and I don't agree with it. It seems badly thought out.

For a species to survive, the trick (evolutionarily speaking) is not to have as many offspring as possible, but to ensure that the offspring you DO have survive long enough to produce the next generation- your grandkids. An unbroken chain of descent is required. If men were programmed to simply indiscriminately spread their genes as widely as possible, and then remain detached from the results, there's no guarantee any of the kids produced would survive; in terms of keeping your DNA alive, this is a really bad policy.

Logic would suggest that once a man did manage to get a woman pregnant, his best policy for evolutionary success is to do all he can to guarantee (a) the safety of the pregnant woman and child, and (b) that the child reaches maturity and has more kids. This would appear to be borne out by the fact that, as far as we know, we've lived in family units for the history of our species.

(There's a corresponding argument that it's advantageous for a woman to sleep around- if multiple men believe they've fathered a single child, that child enjoys multiple protectors.)

All this is just theory, but it makes more sense to me than the other.

I know I've gone wildly off-topic, but I do have a point! Maybe the reason men don't seem to dig MMF is that in that situation they're (subconsciously) in direct competition with another man to impregnate someone, Whereas with FFM they've quadrupled their chances. From a woman's point of view, they're almost just as likely to get pregnant either way, and any pregnancy will definitely involve their own DNA.

</pedant>

To get really back on topic- It'd have to be a disposable unknown. I'd get the heebie-jeebies otherwise!

Friend or foe?

Comments