SEX

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by tld221

can i just mini-rant and go OFF about how annoying and obnoxious (and borderline embarrassing) it is to be catcalled? its like, great, you think im hot but does the whole world need to know what you'd do to me if you had the chance?

does "being visual" mean being a vulgar ass? i mean really. its flattering, but then its really not. theres a difference in being straightforward about your intentions but another to scream out "yo, we f***ing tonight?"

It sho don't.

And you'll notice that men who are truly secure in their masculinity and their accomplishments are least likely to do the cat calling. Unless they are succumbing to peer pressure, perhaps.

I can think of instances where females have done catcalling as a joke to tease men and let them know how stupid it is. And I can also think of the "types of men" that I can expect catcalling from versus "the types of men" who are more likely to express my hotness in a smarter way.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

HEY BABAY!!!! WASSUP WITCHO' PHOINE @SS SELF!!!

LOL

That sounds like the kind of man whose sociodemographics probably don't match with mine, anyway.

[tld221]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

HEY BABAY!!!! WASSUP WITCHO' PHOINE @SS SELF!!!

but still

[DaemonSeid]

you know what I always hate out of the young guys...the spray can approach...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

you know what I always hate out of the young guys...the spray can approach...

tans?
beard dyes?

What?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

tans?
beard dyes?

What?

hey...hey....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSTTTTT...hey shorty....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSttttttt

[Dionysus]

I've never been turned on by looking at a man, even if he was really attractive, I guess I fit into PrettyBoy's stereotype.

[tld221]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

hey...hey....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSTTTTT...hey shorty....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSttttttt

bwhahaha that IS the worst. im like, are you tryna tell me a secret?

[Ronnie B]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

hey...hey....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSTTTTT...hey shorty....PPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSttttttt

That's me all the way. That's how I got with my girl. What's wrong with this approach?

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I have not read THAT much on pheromones in humans in the top tier science journals. Of course, I am not pubmeding that subject, that much anyways. Last I read, was that humans have too high of complex thought and socialization to really have the need to use pheromones. Of course, I guess these scientists never used aphrodisiacs or gotten pissy drunk that said these things? But, the folks at Pfizer with Viagra, and the others beg to differ on the pheromones in humans concept...

So the question remains, are the rules of attraction in humans controlled in part by genetics? Perhaps. However, we are socialized and learned as to how we attract individuals or attention to us. We use a variety of techniques. Are they different in humans from animals? Somewhat. I think in 1997 Science put an entire issue about that and how to study it.

I found this statement from Wiki... A jump off point.

Humans

A few well-controlled scientific studies have been published suggesting the possibility of pheromones in humans. The best-studied case involves the synchronization of menstrual cycles among women based on unconscious odor cues (the McClintock effect, named after the primary investigator, Martha McClintock, of the University of Chicago).[5][6] This study proposes that there are two types of pheromone involved: "One, produced prior to ovulation, shortens the ovarian cycle; and the second, produced just at ovulation, lengthens the cycle". This is analogous to the Whitten effect,[7][8] a male pheromone mediated modulation of estrus observed in mice.

Other studies have suggested that people might be using odor cues associated with the immune system to select mates who are not closely related to themselves. Using a brain imaging technique, Swedish researchers have shown that homosexual and heterosexual males' brains respond differently to two odors that may be involved in sexual arousal, and that the homosexual men respond in the same way as heterosexual women. The study was expanded to include homosexual women; the results were consistent with previous findings meaning that homosexual women were not as responsive to male identified odors, but their response to female cues was similar to heterosexual males.[9] According to the researchers, this research suggests a possible role for human pheromones in the biological basis of sexual orientation.[10]

Another study demonstrated that the smell of androstadienone, a chemical component of male sweat, maintains higher levels of cortisol in females. The scientists suggest that the ability of this compound to influence the endocrine balance of the opposite sex makes it a human pheromonal chemosignal.[11] In 2002 a study published in the quarterly journal Physiology and Behavior showed an unnamed synthetic chemical in women's perfume appeared to increase intimate contact with men. The authors hypothesize, but do not demonstrate, that the observed behavioural differences are olfactory mediated. [12]

In 2006 it was shown that a second mouse receptor sub-class is found in the olfactory epithelium. Called the trace amine-associated receptors (TAAR), some are activated by volatile amines found in mouse urine, including one putative mouse pheromone.[13] Orthologous receptors exist in humans providing, the authors propose, evidence for a mechanism of human pheromone detection.[14]

Some body spray advertisers claim that their products contain human sexual pheromones which act as an aphrodisiac. In the 1970's "copulins" were patented as products which release human pheromones, based on research on rhesus monkeys.[15] Subsequently, androstenone, axillary sweat, and "vomodors" have been claimed to act as human pheromones.[16] Despite these claims, no pheromonal substance has ever been demonstrated to directly influence human behavior in a peer reviewed study.[15][17][16]

[cheerfulgreek]

^^^^This is really good. AKA_Monet thanks for this.

Also, I'm not sure if any of you heard of this experimental compound called bremelanotide, it's like a peptide which is currently still under development. What it does is, it blocks certain receptors in the brain that are involved in regulating basic drives such as eating and sex. So I'm guessing that it has an effect on boosting sexual arousal and desire in men and women. Pretty cool drug.

Hey, did you guys know that researchers at MIT are developing phone tech to make it easier to meet people? Serendipidy is a mobile phone application that uses Bluetooth to alert users when people with well matched profiles walk past them on the street. lol

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

That isn't about being more visual than women, though.

I do think the ingredients of desire may differ for men and women, but there are some similarities. While I did say that men are a bit more visual than women, (depending on the person) I do think that visual stimuli spur sexual stirrings in some women as they do in some men. I just think that men are more drawn to visual erotica, which explains the lure of magazines such as Playboy. I think most female desire is fueled by a richer cognitive emotional kind of thing. Kind of what PB said, but just not as one sided. I think a lot of women tend to experience desire as a result of feeling comfortable with themselves and the partner, or feeling safe and perceiving a true bond with the partner, yet the sexual imagery devoid of emotional connections can arouse some women just as it can in men. So like I said earlier to Daemon, it really altogether depends on the person. Like Dionysus said, for me too, it's so much for to it than just looks.

[Coramoor]

If by richer cognitive emotional thing you mean financial health, social status, and masculinity then I agree.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I do think the ingredients of desire may differ for men and women, but there are some similarities. While I did say that men are a bit more visual than women, (depending on the person) I do think that visual stimuli spur sexual stirrings in some women as they do in some men. I just think that men are more drawn to visual erotica, which explains the lure of magazines such as Playboy. I think most female desire is fueled by a richer cognitive emotional kind of thing. Kind of what PB said, but just not as one sided. I think a lot of women tend to experience desire as a result of feeling comfortable with themselves and the partner, or feeling safe and perceiving a true bond with the partner, yet the sexual imagery devoid of emotional connections can arouse some women just as it can in men. So like I said earlier to Daemon, it really altogether depends on the person. Like Dionysus said, for me too, it's so much for to it than just looks.

You've got me goin' in circlesssssss....

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

You've got me goin' in circlesssssss....

Huh? What now, I'm generalizing again?