SEX

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

CG...I agree with you...there is a science to it but moreso, just plain and simple, like attracts like be it scent or visual.


I do think that when you see someone, initially you already have an idea if you are physically attracted to them.

I do however have a question...

Something someone said to me a long time ago and I think there is a bit of truth to it and I would like to know what you think.

True or false:

Once a woman sees a man (especially if he is interested in her), she already knows from what she sees whether or not she will have sex with him.

Daemon, when you say like attracts like, my question is why? What causes the attraction?

I think for men it's visual, but for women it's for more reasons than that. At least it is for me. I mean, at 1st sight of course that would drive me to want to know more about him, but I wouldn't have sex with him just based appearance alone.

I think there is some truth to what you said about sex for some women. I think it's all about certain personality criteria though. Women are attracted to the tribal leader, someone who exhibits those characteristics of status. I do think that a lot of women that do the speed dating thing pretty much have made their minds up about a guy within 30 seconds of meeting him. For me and for some women, a simple smile can sometimes be enough to attract me to a guy.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Daemon, when you say like attracts like, my question is why? What causes the attraction?

I think for men it's visual, but for women it's for more reasons than that. At least it is for me. I mean, at 1st sight of course that would drive me to want to know more about him, but I wouldn't have sex with him just based appearance alone.

I think there is some truth to what you said about sex for some women. I think it's all about certain personality criteria though. Women are attracted to the tribal leader, someone who exhibits those characteristics of status. I do think that a lot of women that do the speed dating thing pretty much have made their minds up about a guy within 30 seconds of meeting him. For me and for some women, a simple smile can sometimes be enough to attract me to a guy.

CG...luv ya like a play cousin...but that last part is bullcrap ....nah just playing but really we are talking about the base level of sex.....before the convo really starts

See....some women have been conditioned to repress that id which gives them that urge to jump the guy's bones...LOL.

Thus, they 'want to get to know us better...'

I mean come on...you see 3 guys across the room...which one is gonna stand out?

Remember this too, women tend (not all let me say that now!!) to be more emotional than men when it comes to sex.

Yes, men may want more than just visual...but we are simply isolating one thing...sex...physical urges...putting everything else aside, we have to like what what we SEE first and then it goes from there.

What causes attraction...I dunno...I have an abstract theory that geometry has a role in it...hehehe!

Well anyway on an offside, has anyone ever noticed the dating patterns of some people? For instance a person may have 4 different women they may have dated and they may all be similar in height shape or weight?


Oh yeah....ps...I wasn't saying that women would have sex with men just based on appearance alone, what I should say is, that his chances are increased by the what she sees and his chances either go up or down from the first time he opens his mouth.


Hmmm....sounds like someone needs to channel Samatha from Sex and the City and find out if what I am saying is true!

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

CG...luv ya like a play cousin...but that last part is bullcrap ....nah just playing but really we are talking about the base level of sex.....before the convo really starts

Oh yeah....ps...I wasn't saying that women would have sex with men just based on appearance alone, what I should say is, that his chances are increased by the what she sees and his chances either go up or down from the first time he opens his mouth.

Oh, don't give me that. You were so serious. Liar.

Yes. This is right on. The minute he opens his mouth is what does it for me. If he's a hottie that's one thing, but if he's hot, but not very smart, romantic and can't hold a conversation with me then....uhhgg.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Oh, don't give me that. You were so serious. Liar.

Yes. This is right on. The minute he opens his mouth is what does it for me. If he's a hottie that's one thing, but if he's hot, but not very smart, romantic and can't hold a conversation with me then....uhhgg.

The spin of it is...from your approach tho....we aren't talking about convo wise right? we are talking about that first look....or few looks....like what turns one on that would MAKE them go over and talk to see what chances they have of hopping in the sack....correct?

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Men are more visual than women. I wasn't slapping them in the face, it's the truth.

to a point she is NOT lying.....but let's just say that women are better at covering up than we are...HA!

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

The spin of it is...from your approach tho....we aren't talking about convo wise right? we are talking about that first look....or few looks....like what turns one on that would MAKE them go over and talk to see what chances they have of hopping in the sack....correct?


to a point she is NOT lying.....but let's just say that women are better at covering up than we are...HA!

Daemon, I honestly think it depends on the person. Some women look at guys and approach them and possibly would want to sleep with them the same night. Some wouldn't. I'll just speak for myself here. Yes, the physical is the 1st thing I see. Don't we all? But I don't approach guys to see what my sexual chances are with them. I want to see if we're compatible with each other 1st. He could be hot, but if he's a jerk, I wouldn't want to sleep with him. That would be a major turn off. I wait a long time before I hop in the bed with a guy. If he waits then he may really be into me, not just the sex. If he just wants sex, then everything he said from the beginning were all lies and he won't hang around, he'll look for an easier woman. I'm not easy.

I agree with the 2nd part of your post. lol

Seriously, it's more than just physical attraction for me.

[Drolefille]

The bad science hurts my brain.

[AKA_Monet]

Too many comments to choose from: CG and KC you are both right.

Having published now 5 science articles using genetically modified mouse models, mice are used to correlated the evolutionary genetic relationships across all "representative" model organisms used in research.

Humans cannot be used for strict genetic research due to practical and ethical applications. However, with the advent of microarray, translation state arrays and other tests, it might be possible to organize some ontology and ontogeny for molecular pathways.

There is the area of Behavioral Genetics that is coming out with all this advent of technology. Disease states show different expression of millions of microRNAs and proteo/metabolomics profiles. Almost a predictive states that possibly wil be used for diagnosis at the earliest. However, this is 10 years down the line. Think the movie GATTACA after the "natural born" child was born and the rattling off of predictive diseases.

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.

How we understand human love connections takes several levels of study. Biology/genetics only gives us the starter materials and cannot answer this question completely. I do think technology in pharma might assist some people who feel they need it.

[Ronnie B]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

The spin of it is...from your approach tho....we aren't talking about convo wise right? we are talking about that first look....or few looks....like what turns one on that would MAKE them go over and talk to see what chances they have of hopping in the sack....correct?


to a point she is NOT lying.....but let's just say that women are better at covering up than we are...HA!

Hell, my girl didn't cover up a damn thing. She let me know up front what she wanted.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Daemon, when you say like attracts like, my question is why? What causes the attraction?

I think the question here is flawed. It sounds like you're looking for ONE cause; as if it isn't possible for attraction to have several "causes". One plus one plus one equals three, but one isn't a "cause" of three.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I think for men it's visual, but for women it's for more reasons than that.

Ouch. There's a slap in men's faces.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Women are attracted to the tribal leader, someone who exhibits those characteristics of status.

Again with the generalizations.

Look, I see where you're going with the whole mice/human comparison thing. Lots of scientists have gained lots of information through testing mice (and other animals). Studying one thing can often be an avenue to understanding something else, but when you're talking about something as complex as human sexual attraction, then the comparison is way off.

We have no way of knowing whether the ugly boy mice have better communication skills than the hottie boy mice. And since this seems to play a role in human attraction, well, surely you can see how the comparison doesn't quite work.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

I think the question here is flawed. It sounds like you're looking for ONE cause; as if it isn't possible for attraction to have several "causes".

It can be several causes, but then again it can be ONE cause. It depends on the person. Men are more visual than women. I wasn't slapping them in the face, it's the truth.

Knowing sexual behavioral patterns in humans is not really well known, but I was comparing them to the study in animals to see what other greekchat members thoughts were on this subject. In the animal kingdom it's all about status. Like in wolves the Alpha males gets 1st pick for everything. What woman wants to be with a whimpy guy without any confidence in himself?

I'm not saying that this is at all accurate, I just wanted to see other opinions on the subject. That's all.

[Ronnie B]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

I think the question here is flawed. It sounds like you're looking for ONE cause; as if it isn't possible for attraction to have several "causes". One plus one plus one equals three, but one isn't a "cause" of three.



Ouch. There's a slap in men's faces.



Again with the generalizations.

Look, I see where you're going with the whole mice/human comparison thing. Lots of scientists have gained lots of information through testing mice (and other animals). Studying one thing can often be an avenue to understanding something else, but when you're talking about something as complex as human sexual attraction, then the comparison is way off.

We have no way of knowing whether the ugly boy mice have better communication skills than the hottie boy mice. And since this seems to play a role in human attraction, well, surely you can see how the comparison doesn't quite work.

I don't know man. I'm straight up visual. I don't know about you, but a woman with a nice body makes me hard as hell.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I think for men it's visual, but for women it's for more reasons than that.

This statement implies that for men, attraction is strictly visual. Why else specify that there's more involved for women?

If your statement doesn't mean that there's more involved for men, then don't single out the women and say we're the only ones who consider more than visual cues.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

This statement implies that for men, attraction is strictly visual. Why else specify that there's more involved for women?

If your statement doesn't mean that there's more involved for men, then don't single out the women and say we're the only ones who consider more than visual cues.

see...you missed the first two words...and that is what I was trying to tell you BEFORE.


"I THINK..."

If she had omitted that out from the beginning then the whole statement on BOTH sides would become more concrete....do you see the logic of that yet??

[SydneyK]

ALL of this is clouded with an "I think". None of us know. It's all opinion. Her opinion (as I've gathered from her own posts) is that men are strictly visual. I even said that her words SUGGEST that men are strictly visual (no where in this whole mess of a thread did I ever say she came right out and said it - it's suggested, or implied).

I think she's wrong.

And I think this thread's a hellamess, so I'm bowing out.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

ALL of this is clouded with an "I think". None of us know. It's all opinion. Her opinion (as I've gathered from her own posts) is that men are strictly visual. I even said that her words SUGGEST that men are strictly visual (no where in this whole mess of a thread did I ever say she came right out and said it - it's suggested, or implied).

I think she's wrong.

And I think this thread's a hellamess, so I'm bowing out.

I know that actually may be a good idea right now...