Comments for BroadBlogs A broad blogs broadly on women’s & men's psychology: sex, relationships, equality Mon, 20 Jan 2020 03:36:45 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on I Love My Wife Because She’s Aging by Rebekah Romero Mon, 20 Jan 2020 03:36:45 +0000 Thank you for this wonderful post. When I read this I thought “Wow what an amazing thing to actually be telling his wife that her aging is actually beautiful and everything that comes with aging is beautifully natural” Now in today’s society everyone is obsessed with staying young and trying not to age one bit. So many women are made to think that wrinkle and lines are supposed to not be there and if they are that such and such beauty product will help take it away or make it less noticeable. What ever happened to being yourself and loving who you are? Well I say natural beauty is just that naturally aging developing wrinkles and lines and with that it makes a woman more beautiful because they are comfortable with who they are and what god intended them to look like .Sir you did an amazing job of that right here. Your wife must be an amazing woman and you seem to just love her for her natural self.

Comment on Betas Pushing Theory That Insults Them by BroadBlogs Tue, 07 Jan 2020 05:57:44 +0000 And the reason why women care a bit more about money seems to derive from our culture. Until more recent times women couldn’t make their own money so they had to be concerned with it in a mate. “Oh, you’re marrying a doctor that’s so great.” You’ll still hear that and so it affects status. More for women and for men. If a truck driver marries a doctor his status doesn’t rise as much as a waitress who marries a doctor, for cultural reasons. Whereas historically women didn’t have anything to offer men other than their looks, and that still carries in the culture even though men and women now both make money.

I think confidence is a huge draw for both women and men. In high school it’s often the mean girls that are both confident and desired, just like idiotic but confident men attract women. So I agree with your point about social skills but I think it applies to both genders.

Comment on Fetishes are Natural – Unless Desensitized? by BroadBlogs Tue, 07 Jan 2020 05:49:09 +0000 One of the way main Clues as to whether something is biological or a social construction is whether you find it in every culture. In some cultures women can drive, in some cultures they can’t. It is not genetic it is a social construction as to whether or not a woman can drive. There is no driving gene that has been found. Another factor that suggests social construction is whether it appears and disappears. It can’t be genetic if it appears and disappears within a single culture. For instance, you find the ankle or hair fetishized in some cultures but not others. It came and went. And the breast fetish also came and went in Europe circa 1980. I think it might be back again now that toplessness is less common. And you also find women learning the breast fetish in some cultures but not others. Was there a mass genetic mutation that came in went? Or is there something else that suggests it is cultural? Turns out, there is something that suggests it is cultural: in societies that cover or selectively cover and reveal parts of the female body you tend to find the body part Fetishized.

Humans lived as tribal peoples do today for most of the human experience, and tribal peoples don’t have a breast fetish. The fetish arose once women started covering up because of cold weather. The order suggests that the fetish is a social construction. I write about all this more in some of my blog posts than others. Look around.

Context also makes a difference. Some people will find breasts arousing except in a tribal context.

I’m not arguing that it’s unnatural to find breasts erotic but it’s not genetic. Humans are much more creatures of culture than biology, largely because humans are born before their brains are developed so that their lived experience actually affects their brains.

Comment on Men, Women Are Not From Mars, Venus by Tina Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:56:30 +0000 I have had discussions about this often. The fact that I personally have always had a hard time with a male partner has lead me to believe this is partially due to the fact that I have never fit into my social parameters of what is an American woman. And on the males end, the fact that he has been taught to not show emotion since childhood has had a huge psychologically negative impact on the general male population. And thus, at least for my personal relationships with males, effects it greatly.

I am naturally a boisterous, outgoing woman. And while men initially find it very attractive, in relationships it tends to be problematic. Men being raised with different expectations of their female partner end up feeling emasculated at times.

Once you are in an intimate long term relationship, there is supposed to be a much deeper connection. You end up finding out more about that person besides just what their favorite color is, their shoe size, their favorite food, etc. You learn their deepest fears/insecurities. And instead of being enamored by all the things you have been attracted to from the beginning you start to notice the things you don’t like about that person. They you, as well.

As the blog states we do not start off so differently initially. We have similar desires. But our difference in upbringing based on our gender, even between two siblings in the same household, has great effect on who we become as adults and what we come to expect in our relationships. Our early on taught “gender roles” wreak havoc on our intimate human relationships.

Comment on Fetishes are Natural – Unless Desensitized? by Gary Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:07:21 +0000 You wrote, “…you don’t find the breast fetish in every culture. For instance, you don’t find it in tribal societies. So it can’t be biological.” You make very similar claims in many of your other posts on this blog. Many of the arguments you make throughout your blog rely heavily on these claims. By relying on such claims, however, you significantly undermine the effectiveness of those arguments. This is because the inference from “you don’t find the breast fetish in every culture” to “the breast fetish can’t be biological” is logically invalid. The fact that a trait or behavior does not exist or does not appear in every culture does not imply that the trait or behavior cannot be biological. Some traits can be absent in many cultures and still be biological. For example, according to an article I will link to below, sixty-five percent of adult human beings in the world lack the ability to produce the lactase enzyme needed to digest lactose. This ability, known as lactase persistence (often referred to as “LP” in scientific literature), is biological, as is the lactase enzyme itself. Scientists have identified the genes associated with LP, which vary depending upon where the adults with LP live. LP is very prevalent in populations that regularly consume dairy products and participate in dairy farming (or did in the past) and is extremely rare or nonexistent in populations without such cultural practices. The genes associated with LP discovered thus far appeared relatively recently in human history, between two thousand to nine thousand years ago. See this site for more information:

LP does not exist in many cultures. It does not exist in more than half of the adult human population currently living in the world and did not exist at all in any population of adult humans until about nine thousand years ago. None of these facts preclude LP from being biological. Likewise, the absence of the breast fetish in many cultures does not, by itself, imply that the breast fetish is not biological. I am not attempting to argue that the breast fetish is biological. I am just pointing out that one of your reasons for thinking that it is not provides no support for that position.

I should also point out that, since the non-sexual response of tribal societies to nudity is not found in every culture, your position implies that it cannot be biological or natural. If your position is correct, then the lack of sexual arousal the men in those tribal societies display when they observe exposed breasts is just as unnatural and socially constructed as the breast fetish, for the same reason.

Before I end this comment, I’d like to make some remarks regarding the three factors you invoke to explain the fetishization of body parts. The first factor focuses on the sexual tension created by selectively hiding and revealing a body part. Even if selectively hiding and revealing a body does produce a fetish for that body part, that would not mean that the resulting fetish was socially constructed. There are reasons for selectively covering and exposing body parts that are not socially constructed. For example, millions of people live in areas that are very cold for substantial portions of the year. In such places, being nude or topless in public during the cold months would leave people susceptible to frostbite and hypothermia, neither of which are socially constructed. Covering one’s body is a biological necessity in such places – if any members of the tribal societies you mention visited these places, the temperature and climate would force them to cover their bodies as well, regardless of their attitudes toward nudity – so any sexual fetish that would result from such covering could not be explained solely in terms of social constructions.

The second factor you invoke to explain the fetishization of body parts – the sexual tension generated by declaring that a body part is sexy and then prohibiting anyone from looking at it – does not explain why that body part is deemed to be erotically appealing in the first place. The sexual tension to which you refer can only arise after that body part acquires sexual appeal because the sexual tension depends on that appeal. In the absence of such appeal, prohibiting the viewing of that body part would not produce sexual tension. The prohibition against looking at the body part would not be in tension with anything if the body part lacks the ability to arouse! Consequently, the type of sexual tension that you describe does not explain the origin of body part fetishes. Doing so requires an account of why people exhibit sexual interest in a body part before their society prohibits them from looking at that body part.

Similar remarks apply to the third factor you invoke to explain body part fetishes. Why is the fetishized body part “declared soooo sexy?” If you are correct that people “obsess over the body part” and “talk about it incessantly” and that “the camera zeros in on it” because of its declared sexiness, then that sexiness remains unexplained. Your position strongly suggests that the societal obsession with, incessant talk about, and camera emphasis on a body part are the effects of its declared sexiness, not its cause.

Comment on Betas Pushing Theory That Insults Them by kitchenmudge Sat, 04 Jan 2020 19:56:30 +0000 I think even whiny “betas” are well aware that men selecting women are noticeably pickier about looks alone than women selecting men. That’s no surprise.

You might be amused by this thread in Reddit’s AskMen sub:

Replies are no doubt self-selected for the bold, since replying anonymously is a lot of bother (making a throwaway account).

A good number of men freely admit to sex with women they wouldn’t want to be seen with, and whether they’d want to be seen with them is mostly about looks.

What I’d expect women to be pickier about in their selection is social status (oversimplified as “money” in my previous comment).

The third factor I mention in the makeup of a “Chad” is social skills, and I’d guess that that is roughly equal in importance between the sexes.

Women need to know how to appear available and inviting without seeming too “slutty” for the situation, while men need to bear the burden of taking the initiative and making feelgood smalltalk. Both are skills that take some time to develop. It’s probably what “betas” are most lacking. Think Holden Caulfield here. Social skills could also be called “phoniness”.

Porn, other media that aren’t much better, and hearing braggarts all have their effects,,but don’t discount a man’s own direct experience. To a young life that hasn’t known a lot of pain yet, watching a girl you really like fall for a line of feelgood bs while lacking the skills to compete with it can be pretty bad. A guy inclined to overthink it can come up with a lot of strange generalizations about women.

Comment on Why Do Flashers Flash? by BroadBlogs Tue, 31 Dec 2019 02:53:50 +0000 Sexual assault is sexual behavior without consent.


Comment on Men, Women Are Not From Mars, Venus by Nihar Pradhan Tue, 31 Dec 2019 02:50:52 +0000 Thank you and have a wonderful year ahead.

Comment on Men, Women Are Not From Mars, Venus by BroadBlogs Tue, 31 Dec 2019 02:50:04 +0000 No one can figure out the chicken and egg question on society socializing us and us changing society. Very complex. All you can do is compare different societies to see that things people often think are biological or actually sociological — because there would not be cultural differences if they were biological.

Comment on Betas Pushing Theory That Insults Them by BroadBlogs Tue, 31 Dec 2019 02:47:12 +0000 And yet if you look at studies of online dating women are much more open to a variety of looks compared with men. And some men have complained on my blog that the most attractive women aren’t interested in them, but I ask if these men have a double standard: are they only interested in the most attractive women themselves? Which online dating sites suggest is the case.

Whether it is frat boys or anyone else pornography portrays women as anxious to have sex with lots of men, and then believe what they see, even though it is a male fantasy and not reality. When other men who want to appear dominant make up stories/exaggerate about sexual exploits other men believe it.

If men want women to have sex more easily we definitely need to stop punishing and repressing women’s sexuality.

No study is perfect and there is a difference between qualitative and quantitative studies. Quantitative studies come closer to matching reality but even then many people don’t answer surveys. We are lucky if 50% answer them. And who answers and who doesn’t has a bias. So even your best case scenario is far from perfect.

Michael Kimmel used a qualitative method which does not attempt to survey random samples of the general population but to sample a smaller group and let the reader know what that group is. The data gets into the subjects lived experience. Logically it makes sense that when fraternity boys watch pornography and come to the conclusion that women want to have sex with everyone it makes sense that these men are the only ones who come to that sort of conclusion. I was actually talking with a man I know who is not a frat boy and that’s the conclusion he has come to.