Cross Pollenation of Forums: Porn, etc, discussions in Women's/men's forums - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 01-20-2005, 11:05 AM
Veggie Regular
 
zoebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,451
In reading the men's forum, particularly in regards to beforewisdom's post regarding not being about to respond to interesting ideas in the women's form, and then, my reciprocal situation in the forum thread of the similar topic, i think cross pollenating in the compost heap may be a happy medium. Quote as necessary, then discuss between sexes/genders. Sound good?



Ok, here's what i was going to respond to:



Quote:
Testosterone is the sex hormone. Men have at least ten times the level of it that most women do. Men have less risk with sex and they want sex more then women do. Men traditionally have also had more resources and freedom.



I think that these generalizations are damanging to both male and female sexuality. i don't know where testosterone is "the" sex hormone, and i don't argue that men have a higher level of it than women. But, I do take issue with the notion that men have less risk with sex and that they want sex more than women do.



The reason that i find this problematic is because it pidgeonhole's men's sexuality into a particular idea of sexual appitite, and any male who is different from this cultural notion is somehow 'not as masculine' or doesn't have a real, viable, strong male sexuality. Similarly, it pidgeonhole's a woman's sexuality into monogamy, with a low sex drive or sexual interest. This is why promiscurity among women is considered 'bad'--because it deviates from the cultural notion that a woman's sexuality is somehow more docile or women are less inclined biologically to sexual interest.



Similarly, sex is no less risky for men than for women. Pregnancy is not a risk for women and men who use birth control consistantly and correctly. The more educated both parties are about their own bodies and the bodies of their partners, the more they are able to avoid this particular situation. And, worst case scenario, there's always abortion options. This greatly reduces this one 'risk' of sexual activity. The next risk, particularly in promiscurity, is the risk of disease. Disease is also easily avoided by maintaining a certain diligence with safety measures in the sex act. again, birth control, or avoiding particular activities, reduces this risk. But, men are no less at risk than women in regards to disease.



the idea that men are this because of thus and women are that because they lack thus is mostly a bunch of hooey. DIfferent people, of all sexes and the variety of genders, have a variety of sexual interests, sexual desires, and sexual drives. My husband, at roughly 10 times the testosterone of me has far less interest in sexual activity than i do. In fact, one could say that i want sex 'as often as a man.' but truly, it's as often as i want it--regardless of what standard one is using falsely. Other women want it less often, some men aren't interested at all. Each his/her own.



perpetuating these ideas inhibits free expression of human sexuality.
zoebird is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 01-20-2005, 12:37 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post

In reading the men's forum, particularly in regards to beforewisdom's post regarding not being about to respond to interesting ideas in the women's form, and then, my reciprocal situation in the forum thread of the similar topic, i think cross pollenating in the compost heap may be a happy medium. Quote as necessary, then discuss between sexes/genders. Sound good?



Yes.



FWIW, I think many threads are put gratuitiously in the Women's Forum that could have otherwise been intelligently discussed by both sexs.



Regarding my snippet, I made a generalization. I thought it was appropriate as it was a response to the general question of why, in general, many more men use the services of sex workers then women do... In general.



IMHO, it is not harmful, nor hurtful to state general observations that most people can make for themselves.



I think it is the individual's perrogative to decide if it is good, bad, or neutral that they differ from a general trend.



In general, I believe there are cultural, economic, evolutionary, and biological reasons to make women want fewer sexual encounters then men, in general.



This creates the situation of more men, in general, wanting sexual encounters then there are women willing to engage in those encounters.



So, in general, there is more of a demand for sexual services for men.



Historically and economically....women have also had fewer resources and freedoms. The "market" will not respond to provide a service unless there is demand and the ability to pay.



Again, I am talking historically and generally.



There are individual women who want sex much more then many men, who have a better ability to pay for sexual services then many men, and who have the will to pay for it more then some men. There are individual women who do these things. I have talked with some so I know they exist, but again........in general.....it is men who have the desires and resources that fuel the existence of such services.



Thanks for opening up this topic!

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#3 Old 01-20-2005, 12:46 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post

I think that these generalizations are damanging to both male and female sexuality. i don't know where testosterone is "the" sex hormone, and i don't argue that men have a higher level of it than women. But, I do take issue with the notion that men have less risk with sex and that they want sex more than women do.



The hormones that generate those exciting feelings of "wanting some" aren't testosterone, but are in a family of male hormones called androgens, which men do, in fact, generate more of. As for risk with sex, IMO, men face more risk, not less, than women. Yes, women get pregnant and men don't, but women have the legal right to terminate a pregnancy (and any responsibility for raising a child) if they wish. A man is just along for the ride. He cannot force a woman he has impregnated to give up her pregnancy, nor can he opt out of responsibility for contributing to its upbringing (at least, financially). On the other side, a woman can opt to keep that baby, but if she doesn't want to, then the man doesn't have that option either. Whether or not a man has children is ultimately up to whatever woman chooses to bear them for him, and he really has no say.



Now, I'm not saying that this is wrong (except, perhaps, for the part about a man not being able to opt out if that is his choice) but it is the way things are.



Quote:
The reason that i find this problematic is because it pidgeonhole's men's sexuality into a particular idea of sexual appitite, and any male who is different from this cultural notion is somehow 'not as masculine' or doesn't have a real, viable, strong male sexuality. Similarly, it pidgeonhole's a woman's sexuality into monogamy, with a low sex drive or sexual interest. This is why promiscurity among women is considered 'bad'--because it deviates from the cultural notion that a woman's sexuality is somehow more docile or women are less inclined biologically to sexual interest.



Agreed. The idea that either sex, or their roles, should be determined by their level of sexual desire is incredibly limiting.



Quote:
Similarly, sex is no less risky for men than for women. Pregnancy is not a risk for women and men who use birth control consistantly and correctly. The more educated both parties are about their own bodies and the bodies of their partners, the more they are able to avoid this particular situation. And, worst case scenario, there's always abortion options. This greatly reduces this one 'risk' of sexual activity. The next risk, particularly in promiscurity, is the risk of disease. Disease is also easily avoided by maintaining a certain diligence with safety measures in the sex act. again, birth control, or avoiding particular activities, reduces this risk. But, men are no less at risk than women in regards to disease.



Some of the options you list are for women only, such as abortion. While the use of birth control by either party is a good idea, there are still accidents. If one occurs, only the woman has any real options.



Quote:
the idea that men are this because of thus and women are that because they lack thus is mostly a bunch of hooey. DIfferent people, of all sexes and the variety of genders, have a variety of sexual interests, sexual desires, and sexual drives. My husband, at roughly 10 times the testosterone of me has far less interest in sexual activity than i do. In fact, one could say that i want sex 'as often as a man.' but truly, it's as often as i want it--regardless of what standard one is using falsely. Other women want it less often, some men aren't interested at all. Each his/her own.



perpetuating these ideas inhibits free expression of human sexuality.



Generalizations about people are nearly always limiting (of course, generalizations about generalizations are another matter entirely ).







The REv
GhostUser is offline  
#4 Old 01-20-2005, 12:58 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rev View Post

The hormones that generate those exciting feelings of "wanting some" aren't testosterone, but are in a family of male hormones called androgens, which men do, in fact, generate more of.



Testosterone is an androgen and is a major player in biologically based sexual desire( though you are right, it is not the only one ).



Quote:

As for risk with sex, IMO, men face more risk, not less, than women.



I disagree. If a woman gets pregnant it is she who has to get an abortion and deal with the reprecussions. If she decides to have the kid her life is changed apart from the significant economic issues.



A man, once having settled the legal/economic issues of that child, is free to move on as before.









Quote:

Agreed. The idea that either sex, or their roles, should be determined by their level of sexual desire is incredibly limiting.



I never said that.



It was also never established how a generalization about such things could cause those ends.

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#5 Old 01-20-2005, 01:40 PM
Veggie Regular
 
zoebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,451
i don't think, though, that the generalization stands. i think that our culture perpetuates the generalization, so people see what they are told to see.



when i see (and talk with) men and women, i find that they have generally equal appitites for sex *unless* there is a fear/shame element involved. i do see a culture that seeks to perpetuate male sexual dominance through the use of drugs (eg, birth control pills can and often do lower sex drive in women) and certain foods (both chocolate and soy products may have a link to sex-related hormones in women).



I just think that the generalization is false.



Similarly, i greatly dislike the notion that sex rests nearly entirely on male hormones. If that were the case, it's likely that women wouldn't have any significant level of such male-based hormones to incline her to have sex at all. Yet, women seem to like sex, have a proclivity for multiple orgasms, and fantasize about sex as often through the day as men (the estimated, every few minutes or so). I can't imagine that it's all because one woman may have an unusually high notion of sex hormones.



The concept of "wanting some" must also be related to female hormones somehow--perhaps different hormones all together--or a combination of hormones and emotional elements (as well as social and cultural). I "want some" all the time, and i wonder if we had my hormones tested if i would be far lower or far higher than an 'average' man who claims to have an 'average' sex drive.



I tend to think that sexuality is more than just this biological push to want some and that i am somehow lesser or have a lesser appitite (or should have a lesser appitite) simply because of my inability to produce these hormones at the male levels.



Similarly, women 'in the business' who enjoy the business that they're in must have an appitite as well--as high as a mans, because in many cases she's 'getting more' than most men do in a given day--some as many as 8 partners or more. So, are we going to explain her drive, beyond economics, to sex acts as merely 'abborations from the norm?" or are we going to open up the box and let women have a vibrant, active sexuality of her own independent of concepts of male hormones?



i believe that women, in general and based on my general observation, are just as interested in sex, in wanting some and getting some, as men are. The difference is, there is a certain social "ok" about services for men, but less so for women to participate in (as sellers or buyers) in these activities. Another social stigma based on a stale idea of a male sexuality being more virile and dominating than a female sexuality.



pregnancy and abortion issues are tricky. i see both sides of your arguments and agree with both--there's lots of common ground in the issues.
zoebird is offline  
#6 Old 01-20-2005, 02:03 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post

that the generalization stands. i think that our culture perpetuates the generalization, so people see what they are told to see.



That is a possibility, but it is beyond both of our capabilities to prove it.



Quote:

Similarly, i greatly dislike the notion that sex rests nearly entirely on male hormones.



That is just an issues of semantics. Men and women have testosterone, so it is also a woman's hormone.



Quote:

Similarly, women 'in the business' who enjoy the business that they're in must have an appitite as well--as high as a mans, because in many cases she's 'getting more' than most men do in a given day--some as many as 8 partners or more.



That is making the assumption that the satisfaction they have from "the business" is always physical. Sexually orienteted acts also provide people with psychological and emotional gratification. Their high level of "job satisifaction" might be from these places as well or in exclusion to an orgasm.



I'm not saying that is the case, just offering another possibility.

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#7 Old 01-20-2005, 03:42 PM
Veggie Regular
 
zoebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,451
of course there are other reasons for job satisfaction.



but, related to hormones:



if a man has 10 times 'the' sex hormone of a woman, then it would stand that a man would have 10 times the appitite for sex than a woman does. Yet, get a group of women in a room to talk about sex, and their answers will resemble male answers in regards to desire for sex. The discrepancy isn't there. The small amount of testosterone in the female system doesn't account for the amount of sex drive that most women have.



i suppose we could do a blind study where we test for testosterone and give them a questionaire about sexual interest and desire, and see if women with so called 'unusually high'n sex drives have more or less testosterone, but i don't think this is necessary.



It is entirely possible that what works for male sex drive doesn't have a part, or only plays a small part, in what works for female sex drive. consider that female bodies may have entirely different hormonal structures that supports her sexual interest, that drives her interest. Her structure would be *strikingly* different, but she would have "as much as" a man would, and therefore the similar desire for sex that a man has.



do you see why i would take issue with calling certain male hormones "the" sex hormones? i believe that women's bodies are independently capable of sex drive, perhaps along hormonal pathways that science has yet to explore or begin to understand.



by accepting that perhaps women are different, that those different hormonal structures give us similar interests and drives (just different ways of approaching those interests and drives, which may pull into cultural significance or may merely be products of cultural development) to men, begins to make us 'sexual equals' rather than subject to a sexuality both defined by men and their concepts of the importance of their own hormonal structures over our own.



What is interesting is pornography and various exotic arts developed by women for women for use in their sex lives with men or women (or other genders). completely different lens. worth a look.
zoebird is offline  
#8 Old 01-20-2005, 04:01 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post


if a man has 10 times 'the' sex hormone of a woman, then it would stand that a man would have 10 times the appetite for sex than a woman does.



Not necessarily. Testosterone is used for many other things. It could be that men and women can only use so much for sexual desire, but since men have so much more they can tap into that capacity.



Quote:

i suppose we could do a blind study where we test for testosterone and give them a questionnaire about sexual interest and desire, and see if women with so called 'unusually high'n sex drives have more or less testosterone, but i don't think this is necessary.



Castrated men lose a lot of sexual drive, so do men with low testosterone levels. Testosterone is used as a treatment with women with low sex drives.



This is just supposition, I don't know this, but, in general ( I didn't forget ) women hit their sexual peak in their 30's, about the same time that their fertility/estrogen wanes. So, maybe they are getting that boost in their sex drive because their estrogen levels decline freeing up the little testosterone they do have to further stimulate their sex drives.



It would make sense from an evolutionary perspective.



You would want a lower sex drive in younger more fertile women so that they would be choosier with whom they copulate which would produce better children.



Since younger people tend to know fewer things this has another advantage.



Women with lower sex drives would tend to pare up with men with lower sex drives to be compatiable.....this would be older men. Thus these women and their children woudl get the benefit of an older person's experience.



Likewise a younger man with a higher sex drive would be more compatiable with an older woman with a higher sex drive. When they pair up the older woman would be his mentor, teaching him things he could then take with him, perhaps with a mating with a younger female when he gets older.





Quote:

What is interesting is pornography and various exotic arts developed by women for women for use in their sex lives with men or women (or other genders). completely different lens. worth a look.



This isn't clearly written. Do you mean that women authored erotica is different then male authored porn? I agree ( watch those generalizations ).



Erotica tends to be far more psychological, sophisticated, having things like stories, plots, character development attached to it all.



That would go with the idea ( generalization ) that women are more psychologically and emotionally based with their sexuality.

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#9 Old 01-20-2005, 04:19 PM
Veggie Regular
 
zoebird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,451
to be specific, i mean female authored pornography as it compares to male authored pornography. there are striking differences. it's fascinating cultural study on 'male gaze' and 'adoption of the male gaze' and the newly forming 'female gaze.'



Teen girls are often as interested in sex as are women in their 50s and beyond. everyone in between. some women say that they have less sex drive between 35 and 45, but this could be because of her busiest years as a mother and career woman rather than as a matter of hormonal structures. i have basicly the same hormonal drive and interest in sex as i have had over the past 16 yrs (since age 12 when i first became aware that masturbation was a sex act). it's as strong now as ever, and it may wane, as many women claims that it will after i give birth. Again, i don't know if it is related to mothering or hormones within a woman based on that biological change or testosterone--but i would assume that it's based on my own hormonal structure that is independent of male structure.



I think that testosterone does play a part, but what part in a woman's sexuality, i can't say. PErhaps the amounts that a male uses of his 10 times is the amount that a woman uses in her development which would still show a level of equality. No question that men lacking in a hormone that drives their sexual functions would decrease in sex drive if that hormone was lacking. but, that doesn't mean that it's the same occurance in women.



similarly, what is medically 'low sex drive' and why is there a medical treatment for it? this is another entirely different kettle of fish, and i'm not sure if the treatments work or not. they could work as plecebo in our pill-crazed culture (many people claim to have great results from herbal supplements that don't have testosterone-basis--so is it the testosterone or the pill?).



is there a possibility that women have their own hormonal structure, their own way that drives their sexual interest, independent of male hormone?
zoebird is offline  
#10 Old 01-20-2005, 07:39 PM
Veggie Regular
 
beforewisdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoebird View Post

to be specific, i mean female authored pornography as it compares to male authored pornography. there are striking differences.



I agree.



Quote:

some women say that they have less sex drive between 35 and 45, but this could be because of her busiest years as a mother and career woman rather than as a matter of hormonal structures.



That is a good point.





Quote:

similarly, what is medically 'low sex drive'



I don't know if there is a strict medical term in precise measurements of a persons chemistry. People do complain about it, doctors do treat it, and medical researchers do investigate it.



Quote:

and why is there a medical treatment for it?



because there are medical causes of low sex drive and people want to be cured.



Quote:

this is another entirely different kettle of fish, and I'm not sure if the treatments work or not.



There are treatments that work. I don't know how universal the protocols are for all patients.



Quote:

is there a possibility that women have their own hormonal structure, their own way that drives their sexual interest, independent of male hormone?



I don't know.



I doubt it.



I would bet cash that it is only a difference in a matter of degrees rather then a radically different system. Men and women are much more alike biologically then they are different.



I also don't think equality necessitates proving "sameness".



I think many people believe at some level that in order for people not to be discriminated against, to be respected, and not to be maltreated in anyway that it has to be shown that people are the same in all ways.



I don't believe that and I think it is a faulty way to try to set up equality as people are diverse in their attributes. I also think that it is faulty that if people want to discriminate, to disrespect, and to maltreat the idea of sameness will not stop them. A rationale will be found and used no matter how lame.

My Blog: beforewisdom.com
beforewisdom is offline  
#11 Old 01-20-2005, 09:37 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
Errrr...this is OT, but I've wanted to comment, and haven't because we're not supposed to comment about the other forum - I find the men's forum to be hilarious and rather sweet by turns. Much more entertaining than the women's forum.
GhostUser is offline  
#12 Old 01-20-2005, 09:41 PM
Administrator
 
Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,873
Yeah, I would really prefer that people not comment on specific discussions in the other forum. It defeats the purpose. I'm going to close this.

VeggieBoards Alumni Facebook Group

If you're an old time VB'er stop by and say hi!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Michael is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off