Signs of Female Arousal (And some myths)

[KimGordon67]

He's so conservative, he's still arguing with feminist talking points from a quarter of a century ago.

The porn industry has changed. Now we have erotic sites, where women can get involved in producing it. If you look around the internet, you might even be able to find one.

To bully women into stopping. because Feminism. It's fairly obvious that you're here, to remind us exactly why we need feminism. So, thanks for that, as if we had forgotten.

I honestly don't know what he's saying half the time. He has a habit of rambling but using words to make it sound coherent, and then supporting the ramble with random things pulled from the internet, or stuff he's 'heard'.
I do get fed up with people who have obviously never actually thought about feminism telling me (and others) what 'feminism' is. And using Greer, Dworkin et al to support any argument made in 2018 about feminism is just ... well, lazy.

 

[psiberzerker]

I do get fed up with people who have obviously never actually thought about feminism telling me (and others) what 'feminism' is. And using Greer, Dworkin et al to support any argument made in 2018 about feminism is just ... well, lazy.

Conservatives are known for their work ethic, and earning their privilege. If you ask them, why would anyone listen to a feminist when the good old boys can tell us what they said? It's almost as if we don't even need the feminists in the conversation, as long as we have men to argue both sides.

 

[thør]

It does make it hard to focus on other things, believe me.

Yupper.

 

[psiberzerker]

The smell of sex? Yeah, it's hardwired into our instincts. It's not even the scents we can consciously smell, it's the pheromones that basically trigger us back to mate-state.

Structured thought, like math, and language were basically written over these instincts. Hunger, fear, and even nursing (A child) can impair these function during the act.

They tried to use the Nursing to force maternity leave for government positions, including the senate, on the grounds that a nursing mother is irrational, and incapable of making decisions. (Based on the same cognitive studies, but cherry-picking statistics from the real data sets.) Rather than just having more trouble concentrating, while actually nursing at the same time, but juggling a baby in your arm makes it just as hard to turn a page on a briefing, and there's no talk on the Senate floor about taking breaks to masturbate, because an Erection has an identical cognitive affect.

 

[Saint Peter]

Woof!

 

[DMBFFF]

Yes, from Episode 341 of Hark a Vagrant.

Sorry, as my computer is still a bit slow, so is the download of your link: I'll check it later.

I got it d/l-ed.
Cute.

Maybe a generational thing although I hate to paint with a broad brush.

...


They can't understand masturbation either. Ew, ew, ew. Who would want to do that?

This is why I have pretty much given up on talking about sex with women. I do have a friend who owns a sex shop. So I do talk about it with her but it's not quite the same as she's a lesbian and I'm not so we don't necessarily do the same things in bed.

They might be envying you for your freedom.

I think even for long time partners, good communication is priceless.

Agreed.

I thought lovecraft68 was a guy?

The website link in her (his?) profile seems to indicate otherwise.

I have to point out that Andrea Dworkin was talking about the porn industry in 1979. I can't believe I actually have to point this out, but you remember the porn from the late 70s, to early 80s? Behind the Green Door, anyone?

Barely (to your first question); but I doubt she'd be less unhappy about porn today.

Good grief ... *eyeroll*. What are you actually trying to say?

About what?

We live in a racist cisheterosexist patriarchal phallicentric culture of rape. This affects all of us—my desire (somewhat) to sexually dominate women (and the odd gyneminic who appeals to ephebophiles), and many women, including feminists (the nominal, the partial, and/or self-identified), to be dominated—to eroticize their pain—perhaps also to self-abnegate in their enculturated self-hatred.

(This what can happen when one reads NOW magazine (a Toronto alt-weekly I occasionally scan through) and listens to CBC Radio.)

'Straw feminism' because you're setting up a myth of what feminism is/says so you can argue against it. The vast majority of actual feminists are all for women enjoying sex. Don't think that Greer speaks for all, or even most, of us.

I'm pretty sure Lovecraft is a bloke.

How dare you slag off feminist icon Germaine Greer!

Next you'll be disagreeing with Gloria Steinem when she says: (and perhaps my changing the subject of this thread a bit more)

I’ve only ever met one woman who actually was a prostitute of her own free will. She didn’t have a pimp. She could pick and choose her customers. That’s so rare. So we have to look at the reality and not romanticize it. We have to be clear that you have the right to sell your own body but nobody has the right to sell anybody else’s body. No one has that right.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem
The Humanist interview (2012)

He's so conservative, he's still arguing with feminist talking points from a quarter of a century ago.

As if at least some strands of today's feminism aren't as anti-sexual, at least anti-PIV-and-the-like sex.

The porn industry has changed. Now we have erotic sites, where women can get involved in producing it. If you look around the internet, you might even be able to find one.

Candida Royale or whatever her name was 25 years ago: "feminist porn." If I remember correctly, I read little about her from feminists, mostly alt-porn 'zines and TV shows on sex—pink washing?

To bully women into stopping. because Feminism. It's fairly obvious that you're here, to remind us exactly why we need feminism.

Not here to bully, more teasing.

I have a fair amount of respect for feminists, including the aforementioned. Our society is sexist, a few seem to have taken the brunt of it and they're reacting. They make mistakes—who doesn't?—and some of them are ideological. I'm simply pointing them out in a humourous way—or attempting to.

So, thanks for that, as if we had forgotten.

I hope no one's getting pissed at me, as it's not my intention. It's also emotional energy wasted. I'm just a schmuck posting on the internet. (Folks, don't let my avatar fool you, I don't have naked ladies sitting on my lap in CMNF scenes.)

Describe it? To me it does not smell like bananas or used motor oil. It is primal, it appeals to the caveman in me. The fish that will fight its way upstream to plant seed and die. Nature is cruel, perfect, and puzzling.

For me it is the breathing. Her and I. The breath is not forced out, is slips out of the lungs moist and hot. There is a silent moan hidden inside, possible a low growl. Her neck goes back. I desire skin.

I know I have jammed together female and male arousal. The horny salmon without a river is nothing.

Saint Peter, I've yet to check your Literotica contributions, but that should be made into a frickin' poem.

What are you, Ferengi? You do know that saying "Females" like Golum says "Precious" is creepy, right?

"Fee-males."

"Baby, when it comes to females, Cosmo ain't got nothing on you!"

I already quoted Rule #16 of the Internet. We covered that, and if you'd done the reading, you'd know that.

Where? Wazat?

I honestly don't know what he's saying half the time. He has a habit of rambling but using words to make it sound coherent, and then supporting the ramble with random things pulled from the internet, or stuff he's 'heard'.
I do get fed up with people who have obviously never actually thought about feminism telling me (and others) what 'feminism' is. And using Greer, Dworkin et al to support any argument made in 2018 about feminism is just ... well, lazy.

Your ally, adrina, God bless her, did a decent amount of linking in our tête-à-tête.

You can no longer get an abortion as of week 20
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1461814

If people think it's bad here, they should check out our abortion debate—and I'm mostly pro-choice!

"and then supporting the ramble with random things pulled from the internet, or stuff he's 'heard'."

Yeah, like I'm frickin' FeNomm. I believe my sources tended to be WP and I quoted them at times for easier reading.

I'm not sure. I'll have to give that debate a decent analysis and then perhaps post my hopefully concluding posts.


As for feminism, my definition is simple:

A feminist is someone who thinks what is good for women is good.

(An environmentalist is someone who thinks that what is good for the environment is good.
An liberal is someone who thinks that freedom is good.
An conservative is someone who thinks that conserving the status quo or something in the recent past is good.)

Now as there are over 3 billion women on this planet, there will be various forms of feminism.

You guys post as if the icons are irrelevant. They are still alive. Their ideas still matter. Their ideologies probably aren't that much different than a few prominent strands of feminism today.


Though to be fair, I've gotten enough annoyed and tired at times in thinking of their stuff, I thus have less interest in today's feminists, hence my ignorance; though there is that MariannaShutUp-or-whatever on YouTube going on about cultural appropriation. (More than today's Christians, these PC feminists are killing Halloween.)






[size=+1]and finally...,[/size]

I remember watching a porn video where a naked woman was standing and the camera was going from up to down. Her mons publis was quite swollen. I figured there was a decent chance that she was aroused by something.

 

[psiberzerker]

Okay, since you replied to the entire thread, I'll just have you clarify 1 point:

Today's porn. Care to narrow that down? Tubgirl, Goatse, "In front of my salad!?" Girls out West? A lesbian chasing her girlfriend around the Hacienda in a Trex suit on hoverboards?

IDFK, I can't speak for her, she's a dead feminist. You can watch whatever you want. Kai Lan hentia? A photochop of Ruth Ginsberg in a dog collar? (Don't search those last two) Yes, there's porn of it, no exceptions.

I call that equality.

 

[DMBFFF]

Okay, since you replied to the entire thread, I'll just have you clarify 1 point:

Today's porn. Care to narrow that down? Tubgirl, Goatse, "In front of my salad!?" Girls out West? A lesbian chasing her girlfriend around the Hacienda in a Trex suit on hoverboards?

IDFK, I can't speak for her, she's a dead feminist. You can watch whatever you want. Kai Lan hentia? A photochop of Ruth Ginsberg in a dog collar? (Don't search those last two) Yes, there's porn of it, no exceptions.

I call that equality.

Sorry, I never heard of any of them—save maybe that "Goatse"—the guy with the stretched anus?

Yes, there is quite the variety. Even Dworkin referred to "erotica."

I figure most porn consumed today are sexual intercourse, fellatio, men anally fucking women, and lipstick lesbians having sex.

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

Woof!

Her BF has this look on his face like: I can't believe I spent some much time on this chick and the dog is the one scoring points!

*notice the orgasm she's trying to down play for the camera*

 

[psiberzerker]

Okay, then at least search the keywords Lesbian, TREX (All caps) and Hoverboard on Pornohub. Would Gloria Steinem approve? Fuck her, live a little!

 

[DMBFFF]

Okay, then at least search the keywords Lesbian, TREX (All caps) and Hoverboard on Pornohub. Would Gloria Steinem approve? Fuck her, live a little!

She might be kinder to the above. I also read that she likes female bodybuilding, and given how it affects female bodybuilders physically that it might be a unique form of birth control.

My computer is slow—even YouTube videos are next to impossible, but I'll check them out later—and maybe stuff related, or more related, to this thread—such as looking for that video I saw with the presumed arousal.

Your thread is a good one and with my silliness and going off-topic it also deserves worthier posts.

Kim will likely be back. She's probably breaking my post into easier-to-deal-with pieces. May Allah find favour with her and adrina.

 

[psiberzerker]

I also read that she likes female bodybuilding.

I know.

 

[KimGordon67]

I got it d/l-ed.
Cute.






They might be envying you for your freedom.





Agreed.





The website link in her (his?) profile seems to indicate otherwise.






Barely (to your first question); but I doubt she'd be less unhappy about porn today.






About what?

We live in a racist cisheterosexist patriarchal phallicentric culture of rape. This affects all of us—my desire (somewhat) to sexually dominate women (and the odd gyneminic who appeals to ephebophiles), and many women, including feminists (the nominal, the partial, and/or self-identified), to be dominated—to eroticize their pain—perhaps also to self-abnegate in their enculturated self-hatred.

(This what can happen when one reads NOW magazine (a Toronto alt-weekly I occasionally scan through) and listens to CBC Radio.)








How dare you slag off feminist icon Germaine Greer!

Next you'll be disagreeing with Gloria Steinem when she says: (and perhaps my changing the subject of this thread a bit more)


https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem
The Humanist interview (2012)







As if at least some strands of today's feminism aren't as anti-sexual, at least anti-PIV-and-the-like sex.


Candida Royale or whatever her name was 25 years ago: "feminist porn." If I remember correctly, I read little about her from feminists, mostly alt-porn 'zines and TV shows on sex—pink washing?


Not here to bully, more teasing.

I have a fair amount of respect for feminists, including the aforementioned. Our society is sexist, a few seem to have taken the brunt of it and they're reacting. They make mistakes—who doesn't?—and some of them are ideological. I'm simply pointing them out in a humourous way—or attempting to.


I hope no one's getting pissed at me, as it's not my intention. It's also emotional energy wasted. I'm just a schmuck posting on the internet. (Folks, don't let my avatar fool you, I don't have naked ladies sitting on my lap in CMNF scenes.)







Saint Peter, I've yet to check your Literotica contributions, but that should be made into a frickin' poem.







"Fee-males."

"Baby, when it comes to females, Cosmo ain't got nothing on you!"





Where? Wazat?








Your ally, adrina, God bless her, did a decent amount of linking in our tête-à-tête.

You can no longer get an abortion as of week 20
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1461814

If people think it's bad here, they should check out our abortion debate—and I'm mostly pro-choice!

"and then supporting the ramble with random things pulled from the internet, or stuff he's 'heard'."

Yeah, like I'm frickin' FeNomm. I believe my sources tended to be WP and I quoted them at times for easier reading.

I'm not sure. I'll have to give that debate a decent analysis and then perhaps post my hopefully concluding posts.


As for feminism, my definition is simple:

A feminist is someone who thinks what is good for women is good.

(An environmentalist is someone who thinks that what is good for the environment is good.
An liberal is someone who thinks that freedom is good.
An conservative is someone who thinks that conserving the status quo or something in the recent past is good.)

Now as there are over 3 billion women on this planet, there will be various forms of feminism.

You guys post as if the icons are irrelevant. They are still alive. Their ideas still matter. Their ideologies probably aren't that much different than a few prominent strands of feminism today.


Though to be fair, I've gotten enough annoyed and tired at times in thinking of their stuff, I thus have less interest in today's feminists, hence my ignorance; though there is that MariannaShutUp-or-whatever on YouTube going on about cultural appropriation. (More than today's Christians, these PC feminists are killing Halloween.)






[size=+1]and finally...,[/size]

I remember watching a porn video where a naked woman was standing and the camera was going from up to down. Her mons publis was quite swollen. I figured there was a decent chance that she was aroused by something.

You're trying to sound like you know what feminism is but refusing to actually engage with it. Basically, you're explaining feminism to actual feminists. Surely there's a word for that sort of thing ...

 

[KimGordon67]

I got it d/l-ed.
Cute.






They might be envying you for your freedom.





Agreed.





The website link in her (his?) profile seems to indicate otherwise.






Barely (to your first question); but I doubt she'd be less unhappy about porn today.






About what?

We live in a racist cisheterosexist patriarchal phallicentric culture of rape. This affects all of us—my desire (somewhat) to sexually dominate women (and the odd gyneminic who appeals to ephebophiles), and many women, including feminists (the nominal, the partial, and/or self-identified), to be dominated—to eroticize their pain—perhaps also to self-abnegate in their enculturated self-hatred.

(This what can happen when one reads NOW magazine (a Toronto alt-weekly I occasionally scan through) and listens to CBC Radio.)








How dare you slag off feminist icon Germaine Greer!

Next you'll be disagreeing with Gloria Steinem when she says: (and perhaps my changing the subject of this thread a bit more)


https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem
The Humanist interview (2012)







As if at least some strands of today's feminism aren't as anti-sexual, at least anti-PIV-and-the-like sex.


Candida Royale or whatever her name was 25 years ago: "feminist porn." If I remember correctly, I read little about her from feminists, mostly alt-porn 'zines and TV shows on sex—pink washing?


Not here to bully, more teasing.

I have a fair amount of respect for feminists, including the aforementioned. Our society is sexist, a few seem to have taken the brunt of it and they're reacting. They make mistakes—who doesn't?—and some of them are ideological. I'm simply pointing them out in a humourous way—or attempting to.


I hope no one's getting pissed at me, as it's not my intention. It's also emotional energy wasted. I'm just a schmuck posting on the internet. (Folks, don't let my avatar fool you, I don't have naked ladies sitting on my lap in CMNF scenes.)







Saint Peter, I've yet to check your Literotica contributions, but that should be made into a frickin' poem.







"Fee-males."

"Baby, when it comes to females, Cosmo ain't got nothing on you!"





Where? Wazat?








Your ally, adrina, God bless her, did a decent amount of linking in our tête-à-tête.

You can no longer get an abortion as of week 20
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1461814

If people think it's bad here, they should check out our abortion debate—and I'm mostly pro-choice!

"and then supporting the ramble with random things pulled from the internet, or stuff he's 'heard'."

Yeah, like I'm frickin' FeNomm. I believe my sources tended to be WP and I quoted them at times for easier reading.

I'm not sure. I'll have to give that debate a decent analysis and then perhaps post my hopefully concluding posts.


As for feminism, my definition is simple:

A feminist is someone who thinks what is good for women is good.

(An environmentalist is someone who thinks that what is good for the environment is good.
An liberal is someone who thinks that freedom is good.
An conservative is someone who thinks that conserving the status quo or something in the recent past is good.)

Now as there are over 3 billion women on this planet, there will be various forms of feminism.

You guys post as if the icons are irrelevant. They are still alive. Their ideas still matter. Their ideologies probably aren't that much different than a few prominent strands of feminism today.


Though to be fair, I've gotten enough annoyed and tired at times in thinking of their stuff, I thus have less interest in today's feminists, hence my ignorance; though there is that MariannaShutUp-or-whatever on YouTube going on about cultural appropriation. (More than today's Christians, these PC feminists are killing Halloween.)






[size=+1]and finally...,[/size]

I remember watching a porn video where a naked woman was standing and the camera was going from up to down. Her mons publis was quite swollen. I figured there was a decent chance that she was aroused by something.

I don't have a problem with people linking material to support their argument, but your's is really random, indicating no actual research, just 'here's something vaguely related to my interpretation of the topic of the thread'.

 

[psiberzerker]

If you're going to double post, do you have to quote the whole thing, twice?

 

[DMBFFF]

Such a happy dog.

They have such good senses. Primal and deeper than ours in many respects, as shown here.

Woof!

:nana:[/QUOTE]

I like yours better though, Saint Peter.






[QUOTE="psiberzerker, post: 89081047, member: 201558"]I know.[/QUOTE]
So that's where you got your pic! Thanks!






[QUOTE="KimGordon67, post: 89081400, member: 2239455"]You're trying to sound like you know what feminism is but refusing to actually engage with it. Basically, you're explaining feminism to actual feminists. Surely there's a word for that sort of thing ... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
What's the word? Presumptuous?

[size=+1]Okay KimGordon67, tell me: what is feminism?[/size]






[QUOTE="KimGordon67, post: 89081406, member: 2239455"]I don't have a problem with people linking material to support their argument, but your's is really random, indicating no actual research, just 'here's something vaguely related to my interpretation of the topic of the thread'.[/QUOTE]

psiberzerker's thread is about how to tell if a woman is sexually aroused. If I remember correctly, her (and I hope I'm using the proper pronoun) first post indicated a lot of pitfalls—presumably, mostly, by us menfolk—in being too sure about assuming female sexual arousal.

Again, if I remember correctly, I think I indicated that arousal isn't only difficult to detect, but further added female arousal, by likely not being as evolutionary—a woman's arousal isn't necessary for reproduction, a man's pretty well is—is likely not as prominent as male arousal; and that feminists—both 2nd wave and 3rd wave, pop the balloon that we men can appreciably satisfy women with our penises—and that women protesting arousal, or even appearing aroused, might not be the actual situation. Men can perhaps satisfy them—cunnilingus, masturbation, sex toys, rubs, chocolates, watching chick flicks, being good providers and kind to children—but sexual intercourse is likely the man's pleasure and a woman's favour—perhaps part of a quid-pro-quo.

Now, I'll be among the first to admit that I could be wrong, that I'm out to lunch. If so, correct me.

Jada59 somewhat elaborated that she not only gets aroused, but her arousal is at times at least observable.

That counters my argument-of-sorts/presumptions/answers-my-question/whatever.

(As for the dogs, I'll make three more presumptions—or at least guesses. First, there might be some non-sexual aspects to its sniffing—they are reputedly very olfactory. Second, whatever scents might diffuse more easily from under a dress than through pants. Third, in our male heterosexist society, pictures that allude to female sexuality might be of greater interest than that of males.)

In the LJ thread, you indicated that you've had more than the odd sexual experience. Again, such refutes my argument a bit—or maybe you and Jada and others might be anecdotes who hang around sex forums. You might also be quite immune to male expectation: you tell it like it is and fake nothing. Such women, I presume are not only hypothetical, they might be numerous. Indeed they might be a majority, at least in OCED-member countries that psiberzerker, myself, and you are posting from.

However, of what little I understand—and please correct me KimGorden67 if I'm wrong, you're going on about my ignorance or manner of posting isn't particularly enlightening—of feminism and feminists: some are explicitly pro-sexual, more talk about no-means-no and now yes-means-yes without going into details and our sexist society of males as Bill Maher put it "dumb fucks," and then there are the strands of feminism, if not majority then at least disproportionate in influences, which are, if not actually anti-sexual, are anti-PIV-and-the-like sex.

and yes, there are the straw feminists: Marcy-D'Arcy-or-WTF-is-her name—and even she had a point in the male breast fetishism and public nursing episode (Al Bundy likes topless bars but freaks out at nursing women, Marcy and a few women march into his living room and acting in coordination, nurse their babies).




Female physiological response
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_arousal[/url]

[quote]The beginnings of sexual arousal in a woman's body is usually marked by vaginal lubrication (wetness), swelling and engorgement of the external genitals, and internal enlargement of the vagina.[11] There have been studies to find the degree of correlation between these physiological responses and the woman's subjective sensation of being sexually aroused: the findings usually are that in some cases there is a high correlation, while in others, it is surprisingly low.[12][/quote]






File:Female sexual arousal.JPG

[url]https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Female_sexual_arousal.JPG[/url]

[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Female_sexual_arousal.JPG/640px-Female_sexual_arousal.JPG




File:Labia becoming engorged with blood as female reaches arousal.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...rged_with_blood_as_female_reaches_arousal.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Vaginal_lubrication
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Sexual_arousal
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Female_copulatory_vocalizations

 

[Libsam]

So, the first thing that popped into my head was a smartass comment, and then my brain went off. It was awesome!

You can't see female arousal under a burka... which works out nice for the 1% men who have many wives and need to protect their assets from the hordes of incels. Monogamy is a tradition for a reason.
In the West women don't have to depend on men anymore, could this be why there is a new incel category? Is there really enough of them that we had to create a new word to describe them?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

So, the first thing that popped into my head was a smartass comment, and then my brain went off. It was awesome!

Cerebral orgasm?

You can't see female arousal under a burka...

Can't see it under a pair of denim jeans, either. Or any fabric that's not thin and translucent.

Which is why we have this handy thing called "communication" and "talking." The way it's s'posed to work is, in order to find out someone else's actual state of being, instead of assuming through a filter of arrogance, we just simply talk to them face to face. As a person instead of an object.

I know, I know...it's kinda revolutionary! But trust me, I hear that people talking to each other is gonna hit big, like indoor plumbing!

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

That gif is freaking hilarious as hell. Like it's the 60s free love and mind blowing shit happening all over again. Real communication is making a comeback!

 

[psiberzerker]

female arousal, by likely not being as evolutionary—a woman's arousal isn't necessary for reproduction, a man's pretty well is—is likely not as prominent as male arousal;

I wasn't making that argument, but thank you for bringing it up. Feminine arousal is likely evolutionary, as it applies to physical signs. Pheromones. Blood rushing to the genitalia (Thanks for the photos) and the erogenous zones to display their attraction.

However, there's also the Social, and Cultural cueues. Saying "Fuck me now" isn't natural, because words didn't grow on trees. The natural order is to piss where we stand, and the receptive female in heat. (We don't do that, it's called Estrus, any more.)

Now, we have cultural inventions, like indoor plumbing, clothes, and makeup. Lipstick, blush, and perfume, which are social standards to "Look professional." Unfortunately, the instinctual reactions are still there, so if they see a woman in red lips, cheeks darkened by blush, and smart pumps, the natural feeling is this is a mating display, and not a woman off to work, or a job interview.

"Hey, baby, if I told you you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?"

The modern order, the mating ritual of the north american redneck is Wordplay. A pickup line, oh look. He thinks he's clever.

Women also have a word with an arbitrary meaning: "No. Go fuck yourself."

This triggers a different set of instinctual response: The male feels his identity is threatened, and reacts with Anger, Rage, and Violence.

This is where Social Entropy gets involved. Basically like the laws of Thermodynamics:

1: You can't please everyone all the time, but you can piss them all off.

2: The honor system only works as long as everyone honors it. It only takes one asshole to fuck it up, and there's always at least 1 asshole.

These, taken together, in a nutshel are the Evolutionary factors that underpin Rape Culture. It's easier to react to a woman saying "No" with violence than to learn to talk to her, AND Listen.

It's easier to risk man's wrath by being sexually aggressive than to wait for him to notice she's aroused.

Fortunately for me, we also have another social construct: Money, or I would be out of a job.

 

[Libsam]

Can't see it under a pair of denim jeans, either. Or any fabric that's not thin and translucent.

Which is why we have this handy thing called "communication" and "talking." The way it's s'posed to work is, in order to find out someone else's actual state of being, instead of assuming through a filter of arrogance, we just simply talk to them face to face. As a person instead of an object.

I know, I know...it's kinda revolutionary! But trust me, I hear that people talking to each other is gonna hit big, like indoor plumbing!

Oh, communication, like we're doing right now? Where you ignore facial cues, and pretend we wear pants on our heads?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Oh, communication, like we're doing right now? Where you ignore facial cues, and pretend we wear pants on our heads?

If we're at the stage of the evening where your pants are on your head, I'll give you just one guess as to where my eyes are peeping.

 

[KimGordon67]

If you're going to double post, do you have to quote the whole thing, twice?

I actually thought I was responding to different posts, because thingummy makes so many random points in one post (partly because he seems to need to respond to every single person who's posted since he last did) I lose track of what I'm actually responding to.

 

[KimGordon67]

psiberzerker's thread is about how to tell if a woman is sexually aroused. If I remember correctly, her (and I hope I'm using the proper pronoun) first post indicated a lot of pitfalls—presumably, mostly, by us menfolk—in being too sure about assuming female sexual arousal.

Again, if I remember correctly, I think I indicated that arousal isn't only difficult to detect, but further added female arousal, by likely not being as evolutionary—a woman's arousal isn't necessary for reproduction, a man's pretty well is—is likely not as prominent as male arousal; and that feminists—both 2nd wave and 3rd wave, pop the balloon that we men can appreciably satisfy women with our penises—and that women protesting arousal, or even appearing aroused, might not be the actual situation. Men can perhaps satisfy them—cunnilingus, masturbation, sex toys, rubs, chocolates, watching chick flicks, being good providers and kind to children—but sexual intercourse is likely the man's pleasure and a woman's favour—perhaps part of a quid-pro-quo.

Now, I'll be among the first to admit that I could be wrong, that I'm out to lunch. If so, correct me.

Jada59 somewhat elaborated that she not only gets aroused, but her arousal is at times at least observable.

That counters my argument-of-sorts/presumptions/answers-my-question/whatever.

...

In the LJ thread, you indicated that you've had more than the odd sexual experience. Again, such refutes my argument a bit—or maybe you and Jada and others might be anecdotes who hang around sex forums. You might also be quite immune to male expectation: you tell it like it is and fake nothing. Such women, I presume are not only hypothetical, they might be numerous. Indeed they might be a majority, at least in OCED-member countries that psiberzerker, myself, and you are posting from.

However, of what little I understand—and please correct me KimGorden67 if I'm wrong, you're going on about my ignorance or manner of posting isn't particularly enlightening—of feminism and feminists: some are explicitly pro-sexual, more talk about no-means-no and now yes-means-yes without going into details and our sexist society of males as Bill Maher put it "dumb fucks," and then there are the strands of feminism, if not majority then at least disproportionate in influences, which are, if not actually anti-sexual, are anti-PIV-and-the-like sex.

I'm quite confused about what you're actually saying here ... but I can tell you one thing. If I have sexual intercourse with a man, it certainly isn't because I'm doing him a 'favour'. I don't know where you got the idea that straight women can't cum from PIV intercourse.

 

[psiberzerker]

Does it really matter, though?

Not reall, that answers my question. It only becomes a problem if a lot of people do it. Especially if they have 3 Massive images in their signatures as well. Then, it tends to junk up the page. Didn't realize it was an accident.