Naturally unfaithful women.

Macha

The Corinthian wrote: »

And again, if that is what you meant, that is certainly not was written. What you wrote, was pretty unambiguous - I've said this before - and incredibly condensing. I find it astonishing that you can come out with an argument that dilutes the wrong that is done to men in paternity fraud, then concludes with the words "be glad you're male" and then claim you were not trying to undermine what happens to men in these situations.

I find it astonishing what a hypocrite you are. You say that what I wrote was unclear yet you're happy to claim that in terms of reproduction men have it tough, without even bothering to qualify the statement?? I, however, have gone on to clarify what I said but you still keep harping on and it's really time to put your feigned outrage to bed. You're right - you have said it before, so move on. I haven't taken things off topic and I didn't come up with any argument that diluted the wrongs done to men in paternity fraud.

And for the absolute last time the "be glad you're male" comment was in relation to the biology of reproduction. If you'd like to explain to us all how that statement is:
a) false
b) dilutes the wrongs done to men in paternity fraud

Please! go ahead, instead of just throwing out lazy, unfounded and unjustified accusations that I'm really starting to get annoyed with.

The Corinthian wrote: »

However, this discussion is about paternity fraud, where women are not the victim. Men are, as are the children in the middle. It seems obvious that you simply did not like the idea of men being seen as victims, and so had to turn the discussion towards other situations where women could be the victims. But this discussion is not about all forms of infidelity, it is about the infidelity surrounding paternity fraud. Nothing else.

Newsflash: this is a discussion about female infidelity. You've turned it into a discussion ONLY about paternity fraud in your head because then you can espouse long and loud how terrible things are for men.

I don't have a problem discussing men as victims, as long as the discussion is balanced and placed within an appropriate context, just the same as any discussion about where women are maligned. Very often in these discussions here and in the LL, men post in order to put accross the male point of view. The women in the thread don't start complaining about them taking it off topic! They appreciate their input.

Discussions of other aspects of infidelity and their impacts on both genders are perfectly acceptable tangents and I don't see any mod ready to throw me out for my earlier contributions. This silly side argument, however is another story and a complete distraction.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Why do you find it so hard to accept that men can be victims without feeling the need to chime in that women are bigger victims?

Er..I don't. You just keep seeing it that way because if the conversation at all steers away from the problems that men face or qualify them in any way, you throw a hissy fit.

The Corinthian wrote: »

This is a discussion about something that happens only to men and thus relates to their reaction, why it happens and, naturally, their rights surrounding the issue. It's not a discussion about how women have it tough because they have periods, or worse still that men should be "glad" that we don't.

This thread is about infidelity and its repercussions, marriage, women, men, modesty, sluts and more. You want to hijack this thread for your own aims - it's so seethrough. And you're not even the OP in this thread! Who are you to decide what is relevant and irrelevant?! I'd leave the modding to the mods if I were you.

The Corinthian wrote: »

You asked if I could "find a source that shows that men would have to pay for an illegitimate child in Ireland", not "find a source that shows that men would have to continue paying for a child has been shown not to be theirs in Ireland". I pointed out that perhaps you phrased that wrong, as what you said is well documented to be the case.

Jesus, are you happy there with your split hairs? If it's so well documented, you'll be able to provide a source no problem?

scanlas - I have heard that women are more likely to be unfaithful when they're at their most fertile. It may not be a conscious thing - I'll try and find a link.

Bottle_of_Smoke

scanlas wrote: »

10% of people have fathers who are different than the one who they think is their father, this is due to female infidelity. It has been scientifically proven around the world. 10% of people in the western world too are also the result of a cheating woman, I said that just in case you think poorer countries are skewing the results.

Study debunks illegitimacy 'myth'
By Paul Rincon
Science reporter, BBC News, Wednesday, 11 February 2009

The rate of illegitimate births in the British population is much lower than many people believe, a study says.

It suggests an oft-quoted figure of one in 10 for the number of children fathered illegitimately is a myth.

The real number is more likely to be less than one in 25, researchers say.

The analysis looked at the connection between surnames and unique signatures on the male, or Y, chromosome in a sample of 1,678 British men.

The study by Mark Jobling and Turi King at the University of Leicester, UK, was funded by the Wellcome Trust and is published in the journal Molecular Biology & Evolution.

Referring to the one in 10 figure, Professor Jobling told BBC News: "I think it is an urban myth. But it is very often said," Professor Jobling told BBC News.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7881652.stm

I did find a lot the rest of your post interesting however. Especially on the slut topic

scanlas

Who knows, maybe it is 1 in 25. There have been lots of studies that show it is ten percent and some showing that it's more than 10%.

One thing is for sure, whatever the number is now it would be significantly higher if it weren't for contraception. Supposedly the pill affects a woman's hormones in such a way that they don't experience estrus as strongly.

Also, I wouldn't discount fake studies completely. The effects of widespread female infidelity being mainstream knowledge could have disastrous effects on society and the economy.

Macha

scanlas wrote: »

The effects of widespread female infidelity being mainstream knowledge could have disastrous effects on society and the economy.

How so? Society hasn't collapsed with the acceptance that men cheat. In fact I'd say that men's propensity to cheat is overstated in our society.

Here's a study on the link between fertility and infidelity in women:

"The study offers further evidence that physiological mechanisms continue to play a major role in guiding women's sexual motivations and behavior," Durante said.

Durante and Li investigated the relationship between oestradiol, an ovarian hormone linked to fertility, and sexual motivation in a study of 52 female undergraduates not using contraception. Participants' ages ranged from 17 to 30 years old.

The researchers measured the participants' hormone levels at two points during each woman's ovulatory cycle and then asked them to rate their own physical attractiveness. Independent observers also rated the participants' physical attractiveness.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127133113.htm

scanlas

If all men knew that 10% of children have a different father it would probably affect the number of men entering so called monogomous relationships. We would also see I suspect a dramatic increase in the number of men who get paternity tests done. If the figure of 10% is correct that would have terrble psychological effects on men. Many would just breakdown and lose motivation. The reason we are competitive with each other comes down to sex. Many men might stop trying to impress women altogether, not buy as much stuff, not be as motivated to obtain a high flying job. That would surely be bad for the economy. Maybe as a result of this, more information would become mainstream. Maybe it would become common knowledge that having money doesn't get you laid by lots of women, it merely puts you in the provider role for attractive women.

There's alot of ifs, buts and maybes above, but nevertheless, we don't know what the ramifications could be.

Macha

Ok firstly, you're yet to provide decent proof that the figure is as high as 10%. Another person has provided a study that shows it's closer to 1 in 25 (which is still incredibly high and shocking..!).

And there is so much conjecture in your post. For example and using your logic, I could just as easily argue that the increase in paternity tests will lead to a boost in jobs in the pharmaceutical sector and therefore would be good for the economy.

scanlas

That's exactly what it is, conjecture, but it's similar to the conjecture governments around the world would have, who knows, this knowledge being mainstream could turn out to be a positive. But I surmise governments around the world wouldn't want that sort of knowledge to be mainstream because there is the risk it could damage socitey and/or the economy.

The Corinthian

taconnol wrote: »

I find it astonishing what a hypocrite you are. You say that what I wrote was unclear yet you're happy to claim that in terms of reproduction men have it tough, without even bothering to qualify the statement??

I suppose that the disparity in rights regarding choice to be a father post-conception, guardianship and custody make it all a wonderful experience. Women go through pregnancy, however pregnancy is nine months, while those aforementioned disparities will last a lifetime.

I, however, have gone on to clarify what I said but you still keep harping on and it's really time to put your feigned outrage to bed.

With respects, I have already pointed out that I do not accept your clarifications as they contradict what you actually wrote. In short, I think you wrote something from your gut and are now backtracking on it because you realized how dumb it was.

I don't have a problem discussing men as victims, as long as the discussion is balanced and placed within an appropriate context

Ahh, you mean when we can talk about women being victims too. Maybe that they are bigger victims? Is that balanced enough for you?

Jesus, are you happy there with your split hairs? If it's so well documented, you'll be able to provide a source no problem?

There you go.

taconnol wrote: »

Ok firstly, you're yet to provide decent proof that the figure is as high as 10%. Another person has provided a study that shows it's closer to 1 in 25 (which is still incredibly high and shocking..!).

The link to the earlier article I posted also showed a 4% average. However, and this is where figures such as 10% may be appearing, I would suspect that social demographics may be a factor, and studies in low income areas could return much higher rates, similarly studies in other demographic groups may return much lower incidence rates.

Macha

The Corinthian wrote: »

I suppose that the disparity in rights regarding choice to be a father post-conception, guardianship and custody make it all a wonderful experience. Women go through pregnancy, however pregnancy is nine months, while those aforementioned disparities will last a lifetime.

The biology of reproduction does not justaffect a woman for 9 months and to claim this is just farcical. Many social/legal etc repercussions can be lifelong, as they can be for men.

As I said before, I'm not going to argue about the inequalities in family law that discriminate against fathers. It's a truly disgraceful situation and needs to be changed.

The Corinthian wrote: »

With respects, I have already pointed out that I do not accept your clarifications as they contradict what you actually wrote. In short, I think you wrote something from your gut and are now backtracking on it because you realized how dumb it was.

I don't care if you accept my clarifications. I know what I meant and I know what I wrote and I stand by it. You can continue to be offended, or indeed obsessed by it (given that you have now made reference to it close to 10 times): I'm really not bothered if you choose to take it the wrong way. I see you decided not to answer my two questions and have quoted me quite selectively. How convenient.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Ahh, you mean when we can talk about women being victims too. Maybe that they are bigger victims? Is that balanced enough for you?

No. I meant balance and context - nothing more, nothing less. Is that so difficult a concept to grasp?

The Corinthian wrote: »

There you go.

Thankyou very much, I appreciate it. A very sobering document..

The Corinthian wrote: »

The link to the earlier article I posted also showed a 4% average. However, and this is where figures such as 10% may be appearing, I would suspect that social demographics may be a factor, and studies in low income areas could return much higher rates, similarly studies in other demographic groups may return much lower incidence rates.

True. I imagine this topic, by its very nature, is a very difficult one to research.

scanlas

What percentage of men would choose to be in a monogomous relationship with the ability to pull women like her every day?

scanlas

scanlas wrote: »

Who knows, maybe it is 1 in 25. There have been lots of studies that show it is ten percent and some showing that it's more than 10%.

One thing is for sure, whatever the number is now it would be significantly higher if it weren't for contraception. Supposedly the pill affects a woman's hormones in such a way that they don't experience estrus as strongly.

Personally its sounds rubbish. I always look at these studies and wonder where the results come from, when looking at the people i know, and from my own experience. There are at least 10 people posting to this thread... how many of you have fathered children outside of a relationship? I certainly haven't.

As for contraception, that's certainly true, however its not about possibilities but rather the reality.

Also, I wouldn't discount fake studies completely. The effects of widespread female infidelity being mainstream knowledge could have disastrous effects on society and the economy.

Err, somehow i doubt that. People are people. Men or women. It just suits us to believe that women are less likely to jump around like men, but i'm sure they do. However, as with men, I believe its a small group of people that actually do this.

And i would discount fake studies, otherwise we might have to believe all those UFO studies, and that the Virgin Mary does appear to travelers in certain places.... Real evidence please...

scanlas

scanlas wrote: »

What percentage of men would choose to be in a monogomous relationship with the ability to pull women like her every day?

I'd prefer to be in a monogamous relationship with this woman
http://www.oneinchpunch.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/michelle-zen.jpg

than the one you threw out. I'd much prefer one woman, than moving around all the time, which is precisely what I'm doing right now... And the reason I'm doing it right now, is that i haven't met a woman i want to marry or have a strong relationship with in Ireland. But saying that I've never cheated on a woman in my life..

scanlas

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally its sounds rubbish. I always look at these studies and wonder where the results come from, when looking at the people i know, and from my own experience. There are at least 10 people posting to this thread... how many of you have fathered children outside of a relationship? I certainly haven't.

Men who have fathered children by having sex with a woman in a relationship with another man may not even know that the woman is in a relationship and may have no idea that the woman gets pregant.

I wouldn't expect one of 10 people on a forum to have fathered another man's child. Your logic is flawed. For argument's sake let's assume the 10% figure is correct. This does not imply 10% of men have fathered another man's child. Remember that a minorty of men have sex with a majority of women. More women are having sex than men. It's just that some men have sex with many women. There are men who have sex with 100's of women including a couple of people I know personally.

Macha

scanlas wrote: »

Remember that a minorty of men have sex with a majority of women. More women are having sex than men. It's just that some men have sex with many women. There are men who have sex with 100's of women including a couple of people I know personally.

Where are you getting this from? Genuine question

scanlas

scanlas wrote: »

Men who have fathered children by having sex with a woman in a relationship with another man may not even know that the woman is in a relationship and may have no idea that the woman gets pregant.

that sounds very convenient for your argument... But I still think it sounds unlikely. I know the type of women that I have sex with. I don't screw everything that moves, and since generally these days i keep in contact afterwards with those i have sex with, then i'm likely to know if they get pregnant within a few months of us doing it.

I wouldn't expect one of 10 people on a forum to have fathered another man's child. Your logic is flawed. For argument's sake let's assume the 10% figure is correct. This does not imply 10% of men have fathered another man's child. Remember that a minorty of men have sex with a majority of women. More women are having sex than men. It's just that some men have sex with many women. There are men who have sex with 100's of women including a couple of people I know personally.

So the 1 in 10 rate is irrelevant as is the 1 in 25 rate, since its dependent on the numbers of women that a man has had sex with rather than the fact that they are men at all. I guess that would apply to women aswell.

So rather than painting all men and women with this brush, its in fact only a very small number of people in the world that are like this, and they are spread thinly across the world...

The Corinthian

scanlas wrote: »

I wouldn't expect one of 10 people on a forum to have fathered another man's child.

Why not?

Remember that a minorty of men have sex with a majority of women.

Where did you get that 'fact'?

Wibbs

taconnol wrote: »

Where are you getting this from? Genuine question

I would partially agree with him on this, though not to the degree. I have read a couple of studies that went along with this. Google give me bugger all of much merit sadly. I would reckon that there are far more male 30 year old virgins than 30 year old female virgins in the western freer society anyway. In my own life(obviously a tiny group) I would certainly say that holds true. There would be a few men that have had a lot of sex partners, but most would have had less than they would admit and some none at all. All the women I've known have had more and some a fair few more. I can think of about 5 men who were virgins when they hit 30. I can't think of a single woman who was.

I would also say that women in general have had more sex partners by the time they hit say 30. Opportunity to get it in a sellers market would be an obvious reason. "Most" women should they choose can get sex tonight. Pretty much. Most men could not. So you could extrapolate there are sections of men that are having more sex with these women than other men who are not. Seems reasonable enough. Figuring the numbers would be more problematic though.

The Corinthian

Wibbs wrote: »

I would reckon that there are far more male 30 year old virgins than 30 year old female virgins in the western freer society anyway.

The tendency has always been one of younger women go for older men and if you want to create a cut-off point of 30, then the claim that "a minority of men have sex with a majority of women" could well be correct. After that, there is a dramatic change.

Wibbs

I would agree that men do catch up after say 30, but I would still say there are more male virgins even at 40, than female.

I've just come back from living in Asia, where I found that most women don't have sex at the younger ages like Western women do. Sure, some do, but the majority follow their cultural norms which prevent them from being "common". I found both from my own experiences in China, and from female friends, many many women might only have had one partner by the time they were 30. A fair few of these women, might only have had sex a few times. [Since everyone is watched by "society", they try not to lose respect for their families by going crazy. Besides the stigma of having children out of wedlock (civil marriage) is huge there]

The thing is that the largest populations of people reside in Asia. India has fairly strict guidelines regarding "free" sex, Korea has somewhat weird idea's from a cultural/governmental area dating back 20 years, the Philippines has a religious background against it and China has only turned a cultural corner.. the stereotype of asian sex would be the Thai and Japanese, and yet they're relatively small populations compared to that of the other asian countries.

If the OP is only talking about western nations, then possibly he might have a point. But if we're talking worldwide, the populations and culture of Asia would skew any results against his statements.

scanlas

Evolution of human mate choice

Journal of Sex Research , Feb, 2004 by David C. Geary, Jacob Vigil, Jennifer Byrd-Craven

• Email
• Print

In contexts in which most men are unable or unwilling to make a long-term investment in women and their children, or in contexts in which investment in children comes largely from the woman's resources and those of her kin, women's sexual and reproductive options may be largely based on choice of short-term mates. Women's choices in these contexts have not been systematically studied, but are predicted to be strongly influenced by the physical and pheromonal traits of men (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000) for reasons described earlier (e.g., immunocompetence).
Extra-pair sex. Extra-pair sex is common even in socially monogamous species. Extra-pair copulations (EPC) and cuckoldry of the social partner (the male providing parental care to the offspring of another male) is in fact much more common than once believed. Birkhead and Moller (1996; see also Jennions & Petrie, 2000) estimated that for bird species in which male provisioning improved offspring survival rates but was not absolutely essential, about 15% of nestlings were sired by extra-pair males. In these species, female mate choice involves a trade-off between obtaining higher quality genes for offspring and thus lower mortality rates versus the risk of being abandoned by their social partner if an EPC is detected.
A definitive study of human cuckoldry rates has not been conducted, although it clearly happens (Potthoff & Whittinghill, 1965). Essock-Vitale and McGuire (1988) found that about 20% of American women reported engaging in at least one extra-marital affair and that some of these relationships resulted in pregnancy. Bellis and Baker (1990) found that when women initiated an infidelity it often occurred around the time of ovulation. For this sample, 7% of the copulations during the time of ovulation were with an extra-pair man, and these relationships were less likely to involve the use of contraceptives than were copulations with their social partner. Although definitive conclusions cannot be reached at this time, it appears that men are deceived by their partners into raising the children of another man, that is, cuckolded, about 10% of the time (Bellis & Baker, 1990; Flinn, 1988a; Gaulin, McBurney, & Brakeman-Wartell, 1997; McBurney, Simon, Ganlin, & Geliebter, 2002). The issues are complex, however, as the rate varies significantly across cultural settings and socioeconomic status. Sasse, Muller, Chakraborty, and Ott (1994) reported that nonpaternity rates were 1% in Switzerland, but others have reported rates greater than 20% in low socioeconomic settings (Cerda-Flores, Barton, Marty-Gonzalez, Rivas, & Chakraborty, 1999; Potthoff & Whittinghill, 1965). It is also possible that some of these men are aware of the nonpaternity of the children they are raising and thus have not been technically cuckolded.
The dynamics of women's EPCs appear to be influenced by hormonal fluctuations. In particular, women as a group show systematic changes in sexual fantasy and attractiveness to extra-pair men, among other sex-related traits, around the time of ovulation (Bellis & Baker, 1990; Gangestad & Thornhill 1998; Gangestad, Thornhill, & Garver, 2002; Geary, DeSoto, Hoard, Sheldon, & Cooper, 2001; Macrae, Alnwick, Milne, & Schloerscheidt, 2002; Penton-Voak & Perrett, 2000; Penton-Voak et al., 1999; Thornhill & Gangestad, 1999). Women are not only more likely to fantasize about (Gangestad et al., 2002) and sometimes engage in an affair during this time (Bellis & Baker, 1990), but they are also more sensitive to and attracted by male pheromones. Gangestad and Thornhill (1998; Thornhill & Gangestad, 1999) found that the scent of facially symmetric men was rated as more attractive and sexy than was the scent of less symmetric men but only during this fertile time frame. Penton-Voak and colleagues found that women rated masculine faces--those with a more prominent jaw--as especially attractive around the time of ovulation (Penton-Voak & Perrett, 2000; Penton-Voak et al., 1999). As noted above, scent, facial symmetry, and a masculine jaw bone may be proximate cues to a man's genetic fitness (Shackelford & Larsen, 1997).

TMoreno

scanlas wrote: »

10% of people have fathers who are different than the one who they think is their father, this is due to female infidelity. It has been scientifically proven around the world. 10% of people in the western world too are also the result of a cheating woman, I said that just in case you think poorer countries are skewing the results.

Women naturally find a male who will support them and their family and have sex with them when they aren't in estrus ( the five days around ovulation). When a woman is in estrus " in heat" she seeks to mate with as many sexworthy men (alpha types) as possible to allow sperm competition amongst worthy suitors.

Religion and marriage was originally created by men as a means of keeping women faithful and for a man to know his woman's child was his own.
Two of the ten commandments are: Thou shalt not commit adultery. This one was aimed at the women. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife.
After the ice age early man discovered that he could tend and farm crops and live a life much more succesfully than hunting alone. This is when the concept of property was born. The men began to view women as property for life, so they invented marriage and religion for this to work.

But as stated in the first paragraph, this isn't natural for women. Women intuitively know that when they get emotional during estrus that they would throw logic out the window and have sex with anyone deemed worthy, even if it's her best friend or sister's husband. Women know this, that's why women are suspicious of women and act bitchy. A woman knows that she can't trust herself when she gets emotional and so knows that she couldn't trust other women when they get emotional.

This paragraph will be on the topic of the word "slut". Womem hate to be considered a slut and will condemn a woman for being a "slut" if she is seen to be displaying her natural sexual behavour. This reason for this is women need to give the image that they are nice and faithful, otherwise a quality man would not marry them. A woman gets a lifetime of resources and help bringing up her family in exchange for sex. If the word gets out what women are really like that would be terrible. No one would marry them. So it's very important for women to give the impression that they are nice and faithful. When a woman is seen to be slutty she is vilified and looked down upon because she is giving away their secret. So women must accuse them of being slutty and demonise them to make sure she is seen as nice and faithful and different to the "anomaly" slut. When really she's the same as the rest of them.

In today's culture it is said that a woman does not respect herself if she has sex with lots of guys. This is ridiculous. How can someone not respect themself for doing what they want to do and making their own choices.

Now, I look forward to reading responses to this. This is an emotional topic so I suspect it will make some people angry/emotional because it puts some peoples core beliefs on the line. But try and stick to the facts and keep this discussion civil.

It seems that only men are interested in this subject.

cherrypicker555

scanlas wrote: »

10% of people have fathers who are different than the one who they think is their father, this is due to female infidelity. It has been scientifically proven around the world. 10% of people in the western world too are also the result of a cheating woman, I said that just in case you think poorer countries are skewing the results.

Women naturally find a male who will support them and their family and have sex with them when they aren't in estrus ( the five days around ovulation). When a woman is in estrus " in heat" she seeks to mate with as many sexworthy men (alpha types) as possible to allow sperm competition amongst worthy suitors.

Religion and marriage was originally created by men as a means of keeping women faithful and for a man to know his woman's child was his own.
Two of the ten commandments are: Thou shalt not commit adultery. This one was aimed at the women. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife.
After the ice age early man discovered that he could tend and farm crops and live a life much more succesfully than hunting alone. This is when the concept of property was born. The men began to view women as property for life, so they invented marriage and religion for this to work.

But as stated in the first paragraph, this isn't natural for women. Women intuitively know that when they get emotional during estrus that they would throw logic out the window and have sex with anyone deemed worthy, even if it's her best friend or sister's husband. Women know this, that's why women are suspicious of women and act bitchy. A woman knows that she can't trust herself when she gets emotional and so knows that she couldn't trust other women when they get emotional.

This paragraph will be on the topic of the word "slut". Womem hate to be considered a slut and will condemn a woman for being a "slut" if she is seen to be displaying her natural sexual behavour. This reason for this is women need to give the image that they are nice and faithful, otherwise a quality man would not marry them. A woman gets a lifetime of resources and help bringing up her family in exchange for sex. If the word gets out what women are really like that would be terrible. No one would marry them. So it's very important for women to give the impression that they are nice and faithful. When a woman is seen to be slutty she is vilified and looked down upon because she is giving away their secret. So women must accuse them of being slutty and demonise them to make sure she is seen as nice and faithful and different to the "anomaly" slut. When really she's the same as the rest of them.

In today's culture it is said that a woman does not respect herself if she has sex with lots of guys. This is ridiculous. How can someone not respect themself for doing what they want to do and making their own choices.

Now, I look forward to reading responses to this. This is an emotional topic so I suspect it will make some people angry/emotional because it puts some peoples core beliefs on the line. But try and stick to the facts and keep this discussion civil.

Intresting points, but if you find the right one the physical and mental side are transended and the relationship almost becomes spirtual where you would actually do nearly anything for each other and the psychological trust is total.

Hence why you can get couples into swinging etc, yet still solid because their relationship has deeper levels beyond just the physical, and the energy created through lust/desire/jealousy etc can make their own sex even more exotic/individual etc, thats the paradox.

Hope I dont appear to know to much about this

scanlas

I think before you can feel ok with your partner having sex with someone else you need to get rid of your ego, it's the only way to get rid of petty things like jealousy.

Kimia

scanlas wrote: »

Women intuitively know that when they get emotional during estrus that they would throw logic out the window and have sex with anyone deemed worthy, even if it's her best friend or sister's husband. .

Really don't agree with this. Personally, when I'm during 'estrus' I don't throw logic out the window and have sex with anyone deemed worthy.

Wagon

Kimia wrote: »

Really don't agree with this. Personally, when I'm during 'estrus' I don't throw logic out the window and have sex with anyone deemed worthy.

I dont know, ive seen plenty of my own mates go for complete ****ing arseholes after they swore they wouldn't.

Kimia

Meh. This thread is ridiculous and I agree with the above poster who said that the only people who are interested in debating this are men. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to sh*g this highly unsuitable man who is married to my best friend, who I just picked up because I'm in 'estrus'. I can't argue with myself or tell myself that this is wrong because I'm emotional. But thanks for pointing out that I'm not a slut, because, it's natural right?

994

Kimia wrote: »

Meh. This thread is ridiculous and I agree with the above poster who said that the only people who are interested in debating this are men. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to sh*g this highly unsuitable man who is married to my best friend, who I just picked up because I'm in 'estrus'. I can't argue with myself or tell myself that this is wrong because I'm emotional. But thanks for pointing out that I'm not a slut, because, it's natural right?

Maybe men are the ones interested in debating it because it affects them? Something like 5-10% of fathers aren't the real father. And the cultural view of adultery is that if a man does it, it's because he's a pig who thinks with his penis; if a woman does it, it's because she's "unfulfilled".

The Corinthian

Has it become taboo to discuss paternity fraud?

Maybe it doesn't exist, like marital rape.

scanlas

Kimia wrote: »

Meh. This thread is ridiculous and I agree with the above poster who said that the only people who are interested in debating this are men. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to sh*g this highly unsuitable man who is married to my best friend, who I just picked up because I'm in 'estrus'. I can't argue with myself or tell myself that this is wrong because I'm emotional. But thanks for pointing out that I'm not a slut, because, it's natural right?

I fail to see how this thread is ridiculous. This is the problem when discussing any topic where words like "sluts" are involved. People get defensive. How does one otherwise explain why it's so common across cultures for women to consistently bitch about "sluts". What's wrong with a woman having sex for her own pleasure and not needing something in return like wining and dining etc.

It's seems plausible to me that it's because these so called "sluts" are tampering with the market price for sex, that being commitment.

Feel free to post alternative suggestions.....