Why Do Women Hate Sex?

Do most women "hate" sex?


  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope I made a comment on it being YOUR observation (or approach to the subject), rather than a fact.

You made an insultingly rude comment on what I had say; if you have nothing intelligent to say, don't say it.


Possibly because Western society is only just coming round to the idea that women can be sexual?

Nonsense, women have always hated sex.


Try being in a British pub on a Friday or Saturday night and you'll find out how much women like sex, and how little discrimination they show in getting it.

I highly doubt that. Women are the same wherever you go.
 
Women hate sex? What are you talking about? Most women in their thirties fuck like rabbits (hormone peak) that's their partners are the ones who try to avoid that much of sex (their hormone peack is ancient history) :) As far as I remember, women in their teens and twenties were not exactly sex haters either. I'm sure there are a few of those, but at this point in life I hate sex more than them :) Also, there are asexual people of both sexes who are revolted by sex, they just don't do it even though they can do it. http://www.asexuality.org
 
Last edited:
Are you saying that you should judge a book by its' cover?

No, she's saying that big muscles and easy money mean more than individual character and personality, which is quite sad really.

No, that's just you putting words in her mouth. Nowhere did she say she didn't care about individual character or personality.

Just because she's not desperate and willing to mate with anything that has a penis, doesn't make her superficial. People have the right to have standards for who they mate with. Can I call you superficial because you don't want to screw a 17 stone deformed woman?

Women who have high sex drives tend to be heavily masculinized in both personality and behaviour, this is because testosterone is positively correlated with sexual behaviour; the more T one has, the greater the interest in sex and the more masculine one's physical appearance.

So women can't win. If they're not overtly sexual with anything that moves and has a penis, they "hate sex", according to you.

But if they have a high sex drive, that's wrong too, because it makes them male-typical. Do you see the fault in your thinking?
 
You made an insultingly rude comment on what I had say; if you have nothing intelligent to say, don't say it.
Correct, because you generalised based on nothing but your own observations and hearsay.
If you want intelligent comment you should start by saying something worth listening to.

As for insultingly rude comments how about:
No, she's saying that big muscles and easy money mean more than individual character and personality, which is quite sad really.
Women who have high sex drives tend to be heavily masculinized in both personality and behaviour, this is because testosterone is positively correlated with sexual behaviour; the more T one has, the greater the interest in sex and the more masculine one's physical appearance.


Nonsense, women have always hated sex.
Total bollocks.

I highly doubt that. Women are the same wherever you go.
And you doubt it because...
you prefer to generalise?
you have no experience of British pubs?
you can't be arsed to think?
 
No, that's just you putting words in her mouth. Nowhere did she say she didn't care about individual character or personality.

Just because she's not desperate and willing to mate with anything that has a penis, doesn't make her superficial. People have the right to have standards for who they mate with. Can I call you superficial because you don't want to screw a 17 stone deformed woman?

Yes, but those standards should be based on such things as the content of one's character, individual personality, and intelligence; not superficial, materialistic characteristics such as money and big muscles. By those standards, men are no where near as shallow or materialistic as the vast majority of women are. This can be easily demonstrated by the fact that every woman is attractive to at least some large segment of the male population demographic.

So women can't win. If they're not overtly sexual with anything that moves and has a penis, they "hate sex", according to you.

But if they have a high sex drive, that's wrong too, because it makes them male-typical. Do you see the fault in your thinking?

Nonsense, you're putting words into my mouth. What I am saying is that across all dimensions of human sexual behaviour, women are either not represented at all or severely underrepresented. In addition, women who truly enjoy sex are statistically rare and this could be explained by hormonal masculinization of both female behaviour and personality.
 
Correct, because you generalised based on nothing but your own observations and hearsay.
If you want intelligent comment you should start by saying something worth listening to.

I never made any insulting comments about you're character, did I? You can't prove that.

And you doubt it because...
you prefer to generalise?
you have no experience of British pubs?
you can't be arsed to think?

Science is about generalizations and the fact that women, in general, have little or no sex drive is a very well-validated generalization.

And yes, I have been to English pubs, and all you women are really the same wherever you go, in the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia etc.
 
Yes, but those standards should be based on such things as the content of one's character, individual personality, and intelligence; not superficial, materialistic characteristics such as money and big muscles. By those standards, men are no where near as shallow or materialistic as the vast majority of women are. This can be easily demonstrated by the fact that every woman is attractive to at least some large segment of the male population demographic.

Looks are important too and that does not make you superficial.

It doesn't matter how nice or sensitive someone is, if they are horribly ugly, then however much you like them as a person, you won't find them sexually attractive, unless you're mentally far outside the norm.

As an aside, most women I know say they actually DON'T primarily go for looks. They want first an attractive personality, followed by good looks. Whose anecdotal evidence is right??

Nonsense, you're putting words into my mouth. What I am saying is that across all dimensions of human sexual behaviour, women are either not represented at all or severely underrepresented. In addition, women who truly enjoy sex are statistically rare and this could be explained by hormonal masculinization of both female behaviour and personality

Throw me some actual hard evidence, please, or stop talking of your personal opinions as if they are hard facts.
 
a 17 stone deformed woman?
A what?


But if they have a high sex drive, that's wrong too, because it makes them male-typical. Do you see the fault in your thinking?
I have noticed that women that do have high sex drives, tend to have a bit of maleness* in them, but not necessarily at all masculine.

And you will never hear this guy *points at self with both thumbs* complain about a woman having a high sex drive.

*in lamens terms, tom boyish. IMO, a good thing. That makes them more apt to go mtn biking with you, to go kayaking/canoeing, to amusement parks, etc.
 
@Mike, I know what you mean. I think a higher testosterone level possibly does make us a bit more 'rough and ready', but I wouldn't go so far as to say such women are 'hormonally masculinized', women actually need some testosterone too. The kind of woman you're talking about would have a high level, but within normal range.
 
I never made any insulting comments about you're character, did I?
And neither did I.
I made a comment about your perception.

Science is about generalizations and the fact that women, in general, have little or no sex drive is a very well-validated generalization.
Nope: science is about facts.
And your generalisation is neither scientific nor a general thing: it's merely YOUR perception.

And yes, I have been to English pubs, and all you women are really the same wherever you go, in the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia etc.
All you women? WTF?
Then if you truly have been to a pub on a weekend all I can say is that that it probably does say something about you personally.
When I'm out I get 3 or 4 offers per night, varying from the "you look nice. Buy me a drink?" to "wanna take me home and fuck my brains out?"
 
By those standards, men are no where near as shallow or materialistic as the vast majority of women are.
No, men are just as shallow. The difference being that men don't seem to be ashamed to admit it or carry that persona like women seem to be. (some other examples would be some women refusing to admit they fart)
I'm not saying looks don't matter. They do. While they aren't my #1 priority, I'm not going to date (regardless of their personality) someone that I do not find physically and sexually attractive. Period.

This can be easily demonstrated by the fact that every woman is attractive to at least some large segment of the male population demographic.
You do have a point there. My version of that is: for every woman out there, there are plenty of guys that are just as horny as she is ugly/bitchy/ bossy/{insert other major flaw here}.
 
@Mike, I know what you mean. I think a higher testosterone level possibly does make us a bit more 'rough and ready', but I wouldn't go so far as to say such women are 'hormonally masculinized', women actually need some testosterone too. The kind of woman you're talking about would have a high level, but within normal range.
And neither did I. Notice I used the term 'maleness' rather than masculine?
I love women that have a guy's sense of adventure. I don't love women that have a guy's physique.
 
Looks are important too and that does not make you superficial.

It doesn't matter how nice or sensitive someone is, if they are horribly ugly, then however much you like them as a person, you won't find them sexually attractive, unless you're mentally far outside the norm.

By elevating looks above personality, behaviour, or intelligence, you are being extremely superficial. Looks eventually fade, especially with women once they reach their mid-twenties to early thirties, but character and intelligence last a lifetime. Besides, determining whether someone is ugly or not is completely subjective; it is a product of personal opinion with no basis whatsoever in reality. So, I gather from what you are saying, that a person could be a disgusting, evil person on the inside, but all things are forgiven if that individual has the body of a muscle-bound god? No wonder Ted Bundy was such a ladies' man.

As an aside, most women I know say they actually DON'T primarily go for looks. They want first an attractive personality, followed by good looks. Whose anecdotal evidence is right??

Let's look at what the scientists have to say on this one and according to them, women are attracted to money, money, money and more money (according to Buss, 2003). They're also attracted to violent criminals and dangerous psychopaths with big muscles and vicious temperaments as well.

Throw me some actual hard evidence, please, or stop talking of your personal opinions as if they are hard facts.

Of course. A 2001 scientific paper by Baumeister, Catanese, and Vohs, entitled Is There a Gender Difference in Strength of Sex Drive?, summarizes the evidence for lesser female sex drive/relative absence of female sexuality quite nicely.
 
And neither did I.
I made a comment about your perception.

It came across as a personal insult.


Nope: science is about facts.
And your generalisation is neither scientific nor a general thing: it's merely YOUR perception.

Wrong again. Science is about statistical generalizations that eventually become facts, by means of being falsified through repeated experimentation.


All you women? WTF?
Then if you truly have been to a pub on a weekend all I can say is that that it probably does say something about you personally.
When I'm out I get 3 or 4 offers per night, varying from the "you look nice. Buy me a drink?" to "wanna take me home and fuck my brains out?"

That's because you're female.
 
Women are as horny as men (or more). They need real sex, a man has his hands and it feels about the same :) Yup, women are (subjective collection of data points) more selfish and cruel than men. Nature made them that way, altruism and kindness are not conducive to rearing pups in the hostile world. But women are definitely horny just as men are, they would fuck as long as you can last, they don't need breaks in betweens, they are scary in their hornyness, it makes a man wonder.
 
And neither did I. Notice I used the term 'maleness' rather than masculine?
I love women that have a guy's sense of adventure. I don't love women that have a guy's physique.

Ah, yeah. My comment was aimed more at James, for saying such women are masculine.

By elevating looks above personality, behaviour, or intelligence, you are being extremely superficial. Looks eventually fade, especially with women once they reach their mid-twenties to early thirties, but character and intelligence last a lifetime. Besides, determining whether someone is ugly or not is completely subjective; it is a product of personal opinion with no basis whatsoever in reality. So, I gather from what you are saying, that a person could be a disgusting, evil person on the inside, but all things are forgiven if that individual has the body of a muscle-bound god? No wonder Ted Bundy was such a ladies' man.

You don't get it. Looks are an important component because sexual attraction isn't just about your mind, it's about the body. Looks are not the only component, but they are a necessary one.

So, I gather from what you are saying, that a person could be a disgusting, evil person on the inside, but all things are forgiven if that individual has the body of a muscle-bound god? No wonder Ted Bundy was such a ladies' man

Straw man. I did not say looks trumped everything else. I said they were A necessary component for attraction, I did not say they were the be all and end all.

As for your "evidence", please post a hyperlink.
 
Dixon, there's nothing I can't do for myself. NOTHING.

Frankly, before I'm fucking someone, they have to be smart, funny, good-looking. A man who doesn't make me laugh gets nowhere. If a guy is petty and mean-spirited, he's not getting any. Intellectually lazy? No. Doesn't like children and animals? If a guy tells me he dislikes either, I usually tell him at that point we're not even likely to be friends.

A lot of men who find women to be frigid often treat us like we're intellectually inferior sex toys. That's why we get "unhorny" around you.
 
@Takandjive, that is pretty much my mentality too. Looks are important, but personality is a necessary component too. I don't want someone who is good looking but boring, or rightwing or sexist.

This is the point I keep trying to make to Watson, but it keeps going over his head.
 
Of course. A 2001 scientific paper by Baumeister, Catanese, and Vohs, entitled Is There a Gender Difference in Strength of Sex Drive?, summarizes the evidence for lesser female sex drive/relative absence of female sexuality quite nicely.
From the introduction of that study -
The gender difference in sex drive should not be generalized to other constructs such as sexual or orgasmic capacity, enjoyment of sex, or extrinsically motivated sex.
or even
However, we think it fair to assume that there has been significant influence by culture and society aimed at suppressing female sexuality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top