Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
boslabs1
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
monster210x65
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
DeFiant
UGFREAK-banner-PM
STADAPM
yms-GIF-210x65-SB
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
wuhan2
dpharma
marathon
zzsttmy
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
crewguru
advertise1x
advertise1x
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Sex, behavior, and whatever...

OuchThatHurts

Moderator / Psy, Ret.
Staff member
Moderator
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Verified Customer
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
10,566
Since we hijacked LittleMack’s thread, I though I’d start one just to discuss all the things we touched on in that thread. I’ll give you some observations and we can all discuss them and have a little fun doing it. Okay, I’ll start.

Let’s look at survival and reproduction. These are part of a human's most basic operating system. Sort of like a computer's BIOS. The BIOS of a computer is the computer’s basic software program. More software, called an operating system, operates on top of that. Still even more software called applications run on the operating system. The brain is not much different. It starts out with a few basic laws, then reasoning and emotion run on top of that, and so forth until finally, you have behavior. In a computer, an application cannot exist without the operating system and the operating system cannot exist without the BIOS. It's a very crude analogy since behaviors can float around relatively independent of their possible underlying reasons and sometimes it's very difficult to understand where a particular behavior stems from at all. I could go off on a tangent describing our lack of understanding but that intro should be sufficient for now.

Now you might be able to see where some extremely irrational behaviors and complex rituals appear and begin to evolve here. It's not so irrational when you look into the basic driving mechanisms in humans. Marriage, courtship (engagement), girlfriends, boyfriends, dating, etc. are all emotions, behaviors, and complex rituals that exist, at the root, to accomplish one simple thing. That thing is to pass on DNA. If you already saw and read what I posted earlier about jealousy you’ll see what I mean. So far, we’ve only looked at the male’s side of things. What shall we say about women then? If a female should encounter a male that would likely produce healthier offspring than her current mate, why wouldn’t she consider mating with the healthier, stronger male? Not only should she consider it, but she will consider it (sorry gentlemen). She may not even think it consciously but she will perceive it. Try to imagine a woman looking through a portfolio of sperm donors. What sort of donor do you think she's going to decide on? Let me tell you who. She’s going to pick a man who is successful and possibly wealthy, intelligent, well proportioned, and attractive. He may have been, or might be, a complete asshole but if it doesn’t mention it, I doubt she’ll ask.

Fortunately for the male, what evolved was a complex and concrete set of rules as to how a woman should carry out her desire to reproduce and through the power of society, force her to behave in a manner that allows her continuous access to the tribe’s resources rather than being deprived of affection or abandoned as being a person that nobody will have anything to do with. Did you ever wonder why women who have several mates are looked at very unfavorably and ostracized (called names, etc.)? Certainly men don’t have to obey the same criteria. Look at the words "slut", "whore", etc. - all derogatory terms describing a woman who has not followed the rules. Are men called these derogatory terms with the same disgust when carrying out their reproductive duties? No. Why? Because these same rules don’t exist for males. Why? Because a females DNA will be passed on no matter how many males she mates with. A male’s DNA will be much less likely to be passed on if she takes many mates during a given cycle. In fact, the ability to service many females is a good indication as to his desirability, virility, and adequacy as a mate - completely the opposite of what is considered proper for women. Women may show contempt for these males, these “players”, but it’s not uncommon for her to date him anyway. Often I’ve heard a female say “I knew he was a player when I met him but I just thought”. It reminds me of a funny line I once read that says:

“Women marry men expecting they will change but they don’t. Men marry women expecting they will never change but they do.”

Both sexes carry a different workload. For the female, she has to attract the most desirable male possible and hopefully become fertilized. A male has to do a little more work as he has to find a female with the trademarks of fertility and then try to mate often with her so that fertilization occurs and at the same time, ensure that his DNA reaches her first by fending off other males. Is it possible that men visually inspect the female for signs of fertility? For example - full breasts, shapely hips, smooth skin and hair, etc.? Oh it’s possible. In fact, it’s a reality (sorry ladies). The female is well aware of it as well. Take a look at the make-up and cosmetics industries and even cosmetic surgery and you see it clear enough. She will go under the knife and risk her life (after all, it’s a small risk right?) to obtain attributes that will attract the most suitable male. Throughout history, women have worn clothing and other items that accentuate all these features. Cinching their wastes to make hips appear more shapely, push-up bras, skin creams, make-up, you get the idea. Men have similarly used clothing to broaden the shoulders to appear larger (among other things).

I'm just scratching the surface here and I want to stress above all that even those most basic desires can be overridden by the power of the will as this is where I’m really going with all of this. A person can choose to not eat. A person can even choose to die. A person can will to be celibate. The most important thing I want to stress is the power you have to choose what you will and will not do. That power is one of the many things that separate us from other animals. A human can choose to lie on a bed of nails but no other animal can choose that. If a man or woman wants to walk across hot coals they can. Any other animal is prevented from doing such a thing because their behavior is entirely instinctual and not willful. Though don’t forget how easy it is to lose control. All animals (humans included) will also kill to reproduce and to survive. With enough mastery though, humans can even will to contradict these basic needs, although it’s very difficult since the needs are obviously so deeply rooted - difficult yes, but not impossible.

This is where I think we are having problems today. There was a time when the art of self-mastery was looked highly upon. People were trained in the arts, and history, and etiquette as a requirement. They took pride in their work. Bad manners and vulgar behavior were considered an indication of ignorance and completely unbecoming to a lady or a gentleman. Much of that self-mastery has disappeared today and maybe some for good reasons but nonetheless, what disappeared with it was the desire to master oneself. To overcome your instinctual urges and strengthen and hone your power of will so that in all things you can be free. Free to do the things that you choose and to not governed by your instincts and become slave to them like other animals.

Even though we have instincts, we also have the ability to master them - to be free and not be slave to them. All the virtues that people look to have: integrity, honesty, respectfulness, humility, and on and on, are all attainable. You can be free yet mindful of others at the same time. The ultimate application of your operating system is self-mastery.
 
Last edited:
I remember watching a video in college, might have been recorded from a discovery episode or science channel that the maority of humans go through 3 phases of intimate monogamous relationships throughout life. I thought it explained things well fundamentally.

The first was basically for sexual exploration. Second was to procreate, wheather the couple was married or not differed. The third was for a companion as a person reached late adulthood.

It was later explained monogamy in relationships is usually capable of most idividuals for a period of 3-5 years. So someone can be in the sexual exploration stage with maybe 3- partnersthat they were monogamous to. So that means they were in that stage 9-15 years. They the may have then found the partner or decided it was to procreate and moved to the next stage. Same thing with marriage. Many people get divoced and they end up remarring once their children get older and find a significant other(companion)
for later adulthood.
 
dragonfire101 said:
I remember watching a video in college, might have been recorded from a discovery episode or science channel that the maority of humans go through 3 phases of intimate monogamous relationships throughout life. I thought it explained things well fundamentally.

The first was basically for sexual exploration. Second was to procreate, wheather the couple was married or not differed. The third was for a companion as a person reached late adulthood.

It was later explained monogamy in relationships is usually capable of most idividuals for a period of 3-5 years. So someone can be in the sexual exploration stage with maybe 3- partnersthat they were monogamous to. So that means they were in that stage 9-15 years. They the may have then found the partner or decided it was to procreate and moved to the next stage. Same thing with marriage. Many people get divoced and they end up remarring once their children get older and find a significant other(companion)
for later adulthood.
Interesting. Why wouldn't you consider the notion of going through all the above phases with one person? I can clearly see the different stages of sexual development: explorative, procreative, and companionship but these could be all at once, one at a time, and in no particular order right?
 
Why wouldn't you consider the notion of going through all the above phases with one person?

I not saying I wouldn't or that its not possible. Many people go through procreative, and companionship stages together. People stay together their whole lives since they were married. I hope i would also as i am getting married in August. Explorative I would persume to be a little tricky if a couple were having intercourse for the fisrt time became pregnant, got married etc. Some people I know never get married or pregnant and are comitted to a significant other laetr in life into late adulthood with that same person. So they would have skipped procreative etc., but went through the explorative stage most likely.
I believe the video i watched was more of a possible explanation or theory for divorce which has become almost a norm in are society.


There are many theories. One can say that physical attraction(chemical makeup) is what draws us to another of the opposite sex initially, but once that runs out if secure attachments are not made other than just the physical that the relationship will not move to the next stage or last.

I forget if that idea came from Scott Peck,but it seems standard in alot of therioes. I like that concept though as I have learned through experience for this to be true.
 
Last edited:
dragonfire101 said:
I not saying I wouldn't or that its not possible. Many people go through procreative, and companionship stages together. People stay together their whole lives since they were married. I hope i would also as i am getting married in August. Explorative I would persume to be a little tricky if a couple were having intercourse for the fisrt time became pregnant, got married etc. Some people I know never get married or pregnant and are comitted to a significant other laetr in life into late adulthood with that same person. So they would have skipped procreative etc., but went through the explorative stage most likely.
I believe the video i watched was more of a possible explanation or theory for divorce which has become almost a norm in are society.


There are many theories. One can say that physical attraction(chemical makeup) is what draws us to another of the opposite sex initially, but once that runs out if secure attachments are not made other than just the physical that the relationship will not move to the next stage or last.

I forget if that idea came from Scott Peck,but it seems standard in alot of therioes. I like that concept though as I have learned through experience for this to be true.
Peck. Yeah I could see that. I think The Road Less Traveled is almost required reading. It's very interesting though huh? At time it seems we think we are making concious decisions but it's all based on base or what you might call primal urges, and other times you think you're acting implusively and those times you've actually made a decision. Life is strange. Wonderful, but strange.
 
OTH,, many good points.... not really sure what to say here..:)
 
Ok, I was thinking, scary I know, anyways I figure that it may be hard for someone to see the path of being with one person if they havent yet found the right person in which they could invision it with. Maybe this is not a revelation but it came to me as I was contemplating why I feel the need to oogle over other girls wondering what each one might be like, while it doesnt even matter because I have the perfect one within reach. Maybe not everybody is seeking a life partner or wife, but many are even if they do not realize it. You think?
 
Philips said:
Ok, I was thinking, scary I know, anyways I figure that it may be hard for someone to see the path of being with one person if they havent yet found the right person in which they could invision it with. Maybe this is not a revelation but it came to me as I was contemplating why I feel the need to oogle over other girls wondering what each one might be like, while it doesnt even matter because I have the perfect one within reach. Maybe not everybody is seeking a life partner or wife, but many are even if they do not realize it. You think?
Well remember, the female has evolved many characteristics that we can visually inspect and appreciate on several levels - for instance, like art or even sexually... or both. In other words, you are designed to look at girls, and girls are designed with traits that intentionally attract your intention. I think, on some level, we are all seeking a life partner but we don't always behave that way. Remember, I'm just offering opinions because nobody can really know for certain. I suspect that there were lifetime bonds long before marriage entered the picture. This throws out the conventional wisdom that marriage is a societal way of forcing someone to go against what they really want. I'm certain there were lifetime bonds even before society. What do you think about that?
 
This throws out the conventional wisdom that marriage is a societal way of forcing someone to go against what they really want. I'm certain there were lifetime bonds even before society. What do you think about that?

I found this on the net that explains there are different subcategories of monogamy.


Social monogamy refers to a male and female's social living arrangement (e.g., shared use of a territory, behaviour indicative of a social pair, and/or proximity between a male and female) without inferring any sexual interactions or reproductive patterns. In humans, social monogamy equals monogamous marriage. Sexual monogamy is defined as an exclusive sexual relationship between a female and a male based on observations of sexual interactions. Finally, the term genetic monogamy is used when DNA analyses can confirm that a female-male pair reproduce exclusively with each other. A combination of terms indicates examples where levels of relationships coincide, e.g., sociosexual and sociogenetic monogamy describe corresponding social and sexual, and social and genetic monogamous relationships, respectively." (Reichard, U.H. (2003). Monogamy: Past and present. In U.H. Reichard and C. Boesch (Eds.), Monogamy: Mating strategies and parnternships in birds, humans, and other mammals (pp.3-25).


Other ideas from anthropological evidence

"Some scientists have even placed Homo sapiens in this category by citing studies of human culture in which four in five societies practice polygyny. Thus, the most common feature of mammalian monogamy is that it evolved where females were solitary and occupied small, exclusive ranges, enabling males to monopolize them." "(From and article citing Dr. Stephen T. Emlen of Cornell University that monogamy is actually rare)
 
Last edited:
Man OTH...this is one of the most insightful things I have read in a long...long...time... Thank you for taking the time to write that up! There is a lot I can learn from it...
 
dragonfire101 said:
"Some scientists have even placed Homo sapiens in this category by citing studies of human culture in which four in five societies practice polygyny. Thus, the most common feature of mammalian monogamy is that it evolved where females were solitary and occupied small, exclusive ranges, enabling males to monopolize them." "(From and article citing Dr. Stephen T. Emlen of Cornell University that monogamy is actually rare)
Seems to be the conventional wisdom these days huh? It's very hard to find the fine line. On one hand you have the biological aspects of relationships and then there seems to be the human side. It's easy to look at people and observe their behavior as animals. But clearly, we are much more. It's as if we have both feet stuck in the mud - the left is on the animal side and the right is on the human side. We constantly struggle to rise above our animal nature yet at the same time, we would die without our animal instincts. One phrase I've always disliked is "I'm only human." I hear that a lot. What does it mean to be "only" human? Only an animal?

Here's an example. Take a husband who is cheating on his wife. Is he doing because of an instinctual desire or is he doing because of a human desire? That would be the desire to enjoy or possess that which you couldn't or shouldn't. If he's caught, can he rely on "It's in my nature" or even worse, "I'm only human"??? I would suspect the wife to feel betrayed, saddened, and even humiliated.

Plus we're talking about multiple things now. Let's look through the glass from the other side and go back to our cheating husband. Let's say he gets to the motel room and unpon entering say "I just can't do this", and runs to his car. What do you think is was in him that brought him to that decision to leave? Was it instinctual? What do you think it was?
 
What do you think it was?

I would say it was that he was only human. jok


A biological aspect would be that it was the fight-or-flight response, due to the stress of the situation. I would like to think it was more than that.
 
So why do we cheat and why do we feel guilty for cheating? Hmmm....have you ever wondered why every other creature on Earth lives in perfect balance with nature yet humans don't? Why is it that every single other creature on the planet is kept in check by natural balancers, but not humans? The cheetah developed great speed to keep up with the gazelle's agility, this creates balance between the species. The rabbit reproduces rapidly to balance out the fact that it is the favorite meal of many animals. Every creature on the planet is kept in check by some form of natural balancer that keeps things in perfect order on the planet. But, then there's humans. Absolutely nothing on this planet keeps us in check. We continue to multiply eventhough we're overpopulated. We do as we wish with every other creature on the planet. Nothing can stop us except ourselves. Why is this? Why do we not fit in with the rest of the living things on our world? How can it be that in a world where everything else is so perfectly balanced, WE are the ONE being that is kept unchecked?

Now you might wonder how this would pertain to sexual bahavior of humans. Well, I don't really know:D . It's strange though. We compare our behavior to other animals when it comes to sex. Yes, our sexual desire may stem from an innate unconsious desire to procreate. Yet, we have the intelligence that seperates us from all other creatures on this planet. We have the consious ability to choose what we THINK is right or wrong. I think the real question is, who decides what's right or wrong? Honestly, who decides that it's wrong for a married man to have an unlimited amount of sexual partners? Is it our society? If so, who created that way of thinking? Religion? Or, is it wrong because it emotionally hurts the person who is being cheated on? But, if we are still only animals, who cares? Do we care because we have a conscience? Where does the conscience come from? What makes us feel guilty, sad, upset, hurt when we do something wrong? Is our conscience simply an internal reminder that makes us feel bad when we do something that we were TAUGHT is wrong? If so, why should we not learn to override those feelings and do as we wish, no matter what anyone else's imposed moral standards imply we should do?

Actually, the questions we should all ask are; where does guilt come from? Is our conscience just our mind making us feel guilty for doing things that someone else said is wrong, or is it something deeper? Do animals have a conscience? Is a conscience a result of intelligence? If a person has no religious beliefs, and no one is really being hurt by your actions, why would he ever feel any guilt or sadness for his actions? If a man cheats on his wife and isn't caught, why should he feel bad? Is it because it was implanted in his mind since birth that it's wrong to cheat, or is it because our consience is something more than our own social values pounded into us throughout life? Think hard about this. Who decides what is acceptable behavior and what isn't?
 
BigBoyJ said:
So why do we cheat and why do we feel guilty for cheating? Hmmm....have you ever wondered why every other creature on Earth lives in perfect balance with nature yet humans don't? Why is it that every single other creature on the planet is kept in check by natural balancers, but not humans? The cheetah developed great speed to keep up with the gazelle's agility, this creates balance between the species. The rabbit reproduces rapidly to balance out the fact that it is the favorite meal of many animals. Every creature on the planet is kept in check by some form of natural balancer that keeps things in perfect order on the planet. But, then there's humans. Absolutely nothing on this planet keeps us in check. We continue to multiply eventhough we're overpopulated. We do as we wish with every other creature on the planet. Nothing can stop us except ourselves. Why is this? Why do we not fit in with the rest of the living things on our world? How can it be that in a world where everything else is so perfectly balanced, WE are the ONE being that is kept unchecked?

Now you might wonder how this would pertain to sexual bahavior of humans. Well, I don't really know:D . It's strange though. We compare our behavior to other animals when it comes to sex. Yes, our sexual desire may stem from an innate unconsious desire to procreate. Yet, we have the intelligence that seperates us from all other creatures on this planet. We have the consious ability to choose what we THINK is right or wrong. I think the real question is, who decides what's right or wrong? Honestly, who decides that it's wrong for a married man to have an unlimited amount of sexual partners? Is it our society? If so, who created that way of thinking? Religion? Or, is it wrong because it emotionally hurts the person who is being cheated on? But, if we are still only animals, who cares? Do we care because we have a conscience? Where does the conscience come from? What makes us feel guilty, sad, upset, hurt when we do something wrong? Is our conscience simply an internal reminder that makes us feel bad when we do something that we were TAUGHT is wrong? If so, why should we not learn to override those feelings and do as we wish, no matter what anyone else's imposed moral standards imply we should do?

Actually, the questions we should all ask are; where does guilt come from? Is our conscience just our mind making us feel guilty for doing things that someone else said is wrong, or is it something deeper? Do animals have a conscience? Is a conscience a result of intelligence? If a person has no religious beliefs, and no one is really being hurt by your actions, why would he ever feel any guilt or sadness for his actions? If a man cheats on his wife and isn't caught, why should he feel bad? Is it because it was implanted in his mind since birth that it's wrong to cheat, or is it because our consience is something more than our own social values pounded into us throughout life? Think hard about this. Who decides what is acceptable behavior and what isn't?
Awesome. I'm going to wait to see what others think of your questions...

again... awesome.
 
"We can be guilty, yet not feel anything. We can feel guilty, but not be in a state of guilt"
 
Who decides what is acceptable behavior and what isn't.

Well, one may think they have the ability to decide on their own what is and isn't , but I believe it is really society, although what is accepatable behavior will vary in each particular society or culture through the behaviors they have learned.

OTH, your looking jacked in your aviator.
 
Last edited:
OTH,

Happy new year and great post. I feel I am too young to chime in (mid 20's) but I love reading your stuff. This piece was very nice. I am a people watcher and as of late I have really been trying to disect relationships among younger couples that I meet. I would love to read more about how over powering woman choose mates.

For example- for New years eve one of the girls I have been seeing invited me to this get together at an Italian joint with a bunch of her old college friends. One of the couples I met was this bitch of a girl that needed to be in control of every little thing. She was a very good looking girl but she had to order her and her bf and she was a bitch while doing it. She even ordered his drink for him. She walked all over this sap all night it was sad.
NOW get a load of the guy she is with- I remind you she is a classy looking chic that I check out on the street- this dude was a poster boy for TRT/HRT.

He is 25 and doesnt shave because he has peach fuzz on his face, very pale and frail looking AND ALL HIS GF DID WAS MOCK HIM ABOUT HOW SHE WISHED HER BOOBS WERE AS BIG AS HIS, he did everything she asked with a yes honey,.....very sad I think he very imberessed and he looked on the verge of tears as she tore him down all night. At one point she mentioned how she thinks he should work out and gave me a look that he saw. If I ever see this guy again Im going to tell him to get his levels checked.

This girl seeked out a dude that would let her walk all over him , looks only go so far and I think she knew it, any MAN I know would never put up with that garbage..

oh well
 
dragonfire101 said:
A biological aspect would be that it was the fight-or-flight response, due to the stress of the situation. I would like to think it was more than that.
In this particular case, if it were a fight or flight response, what was he so afraid of? Situational ethics is a slippery slope and we could come at this from a thousand angles but in the end, he knew it was wrong. He knew he shouldn't be there. And he most assuredly knew he'd feel guilt if he went through with it. I'm confident that there are some out there that could go through with it and not directly feel guilt but that's isn't because it isn't there, it's only because he's suppressed his feeling of guilt. That's not the same thing.
 
dragonfire101 said:
"We can be guilty, yet not feel anything. We can feel guilty, but not be in a state of guilt"
Precisely!
 
donveto said:
This girl seeked out a dude that would let her walk all over him , looks only go so far and I think she knew it, any MAN I know would never put up with that garbage..

oh well
Hers is a behavior pattern as much as it is him. Very unhealthy for both of them. Her insecurities demand that she have control of and demean someone and much as his insecurities demand that he should be trampled on. If they split, they'd likely find themselves in similiar relationships. Yes, they'll continue to blame each other for things not working but in the end, they both have issues though they don't know it.

You know, you should keep observing just as you have. You'd be surprised at what you can see that's right in front of most peoples' faces. Thanks!
 

Forum statistics

Total page views
575,923,135
Threads
138,421
Messages
2,856,319
Members
161,433
Latest member
TheTruth777
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
yourdailyvitamins
Prowrist straps store banner
yourrawmaterials
3
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
yms-GIF-210x131-Banne-B
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
thc
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top