Are men more sexual than women?

[Nessa]

Also the whole 'men getting frustrated with little or no sex'...on the flip side theres women faking orgasms and being frustrated during sex with their partner. The whole story often is just stereotyped to the male point of view.

Hmmm, all this talk gotta go and find Kerry*






*Stealing Phil's joke from earlier haha

[Nessa]

Are you trying to confess a a little of your own being "visual stimulated" Nessa?

Yes

Rick must already know cos he wont give me a recent pic of himself

[Nessa]

PS. Lucky Trump didn't walk by or he'd have grabbed him by the pussy.

Trump even comes up in our sex threads?!

That guy sure gets around! Hopefully not as much as clinton tho... hide the cigars!!

Great joke re pussy... You have rather quick wit.

[Philip]

Uh, we're getting WAY off track here, with the politics of it, gender wars, etc.

As to the question, depends upon WHICH men and WHICH women we are speaking of. Privately, we should all be VERY sexual. But we are in a fallen world, many having difficult situations and pasts. And oft-chaotic or inconsistent hormones of both sexes often play a huge part as to what is going on. Small children? Stressful job or home life? It all has a role in the answer, and that answer for a person can widely vary over time.

Next question should be: WHY should either gender be anymore sexual than the other - whenever one is in touch (don't read anything in to this word ) with that side of themselves, and with their spouse?

[melanie]

This is following on from one if the polygamy threads.

I think there can be misconceptions about men being more sexual etc?

What do you think?

I think culture itself has had a great bearing on this. But the more sexually 'free' women become in society the more it feels like the tide is turning. And perhaps its just revealing what has always been there.

But I'm sure plenty will disagree.

Nessa, you are right.
According to the latest studies.
In the past, not surprisingly there was a very misognist idea that men were more sexual. Overall and visually which accounted for the preconcieved notion that men cheated more and were more prone to sexual indiscretions due to a higher sex drive. Not surprisingly these studies were all conducted by men.
The latest studies have proven this outdated idea to be wrong.
Women are overall just as visually sexually stimulated as men. The key difference being that whilst
women are quite highly also aroused by women, men tended to be less so by the same sex.
So by and large women are actually the more sexually aware but tend to deal and conduct themselves with more restraint and control.....
Bottom line
In the words of Beyoncé
'Who run the world'
Girls!!!

[B. W.]

Both sexes are equally attracted to each other and equally crude. Both can be equally abusive and cruel too.
-
-
-

[Kenny]

This is following on from one if the polygamy threads.

I think there can be misconceptions about men being more sexual etc?

What do you think?

I think culture itself has had a great bearing on this. But the more sexually 'free' women become in society the more it feels like the tide is turning. And perhaps its just revealing what has always been there.

But I'm sure plenty will disagree.

Nessa, you are right.
According to the latest studies.
In the past, not surprisingly there was a very misognist idea that men were more sexual. Overall and visually which accounted for the preconcieved notion that men cheated more and were more prone to sexual indiscretions due to a higher sex drive. Not surprisingly these studies were all conducted by men.
The latest studies have proven this outdated idea to be wrong.
Women are overall just as visually sexually stimulated as men. The key difference being that whilst
women are quite highly also aroused by women, men tended to be less so by the same sex.
So by and large women are actually the more sexually aware but tend to deal and conduct themselves with more restraint and control.....
Bottom line
In the words of Beyoncé
'Who run the world'
Girls!!!

If women are just as visually sexually stimulated as men, one must ask; why is the customer base of the porn industry dominated by men? Even male porn (directed at women) had more gay men as customers than women.

Ken

[Nessa]

I was looking at a marriage bed website that phil has put up a few times.

One woman said she had looked at porn to learn how to do oral sex better. And strangely found herself attracted to watching the material and masturbating afterwards. It was becoming a problem.

I wonder if at least part of it is stereotypes and ignorance. It is ingrained into our thinking men are more visual... Men are the ones with the problem with porn. It just isnt true. At least not entirely.

[Jac3510]

Seems like there might be a bit of equivocation between "more sexual" and "visually stimulated" going on here.

[Kurieuo]

Men and women are visual in difference ways. For example, I think men are more visually "focused". I don't mean that they are more observant, but you know how your husband can never find anything when it's right in front of his eyes? (and I'm not saying women don't have the problem at times, but it'd be far less I'm sure).

I really hate clutter. Partly because I like being clean and tidy, but then also because clutter makes it difficult finding the one item I need. I put it down to being male, that when looking for something, I look at one object at a time. If there are lots of objects in my field of vision, then its like finding a needle in a haystack -- even if the object I'm after is right in front of me. I can spend 10 minutes trying to find something I should have found right away, or perhaps not even find it all telling my wife she's wrong it's not where she said it was.

When I ask my wife where an object is, she sees it almost immediately amongst whatever mess is on the kitchen bench or in the cupboard or amongst the kids toys. BUT, last time I noticed she didn't look here or there. Rather, seemed to just look in the direction, and then zoom in upon whatever particular item it was that I was trying to find.

I asked her when she looked, whether she looked at one item at a time, or more broadly scanned and just saw the item in her field of vision. It was the latter and she thought the former was silly. However, us men, we focus in on things, one at a time. Take breasts for example, males tends to get easily distracted by boobs and some women love to push them up to make it difficult for us men to hold a conversation.

Now I'm sure, when women check out a man that they are also taking in the full scene of it all. His whole body and face and even the surroundings. Like that black man on a white horse. They're not zooming in on one part but the whole visual scene. If there were a gorgeous naked woman on the other hand, I guarantee you men would focus in on her breasts, then perhaps down below and then her face. We wouldn't care much for the fuller scene at all, if we could even scope her out as a complete woman rather checking her out one piece at a time.

Tell me I'm wrong. It's just what I've tended to notice with the way women visually sees things, compared to the way men tend to.

[Philip]

Well, part of the "problem" with breasts is that they are, well placed within the perfect visual zone to be noticed - and they stand out. Also, they are placed so that they stick out from the plane of the body. If they are of any unusual size or if they are strategically highlighted by dress, etc. - well, it's just hard to not notice them. So, if they were at the toe level, or on the back - well, us fellows would have it a lot easier. We'd remember names better, actually listen to conversations better, pay more attention to eye color, smiles, all that. Plus, we seem almost hard-wired to notice them. All that to say, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT! (But most married men are well practiced at pretending to not notice the most obvious and alluring breasts they might see while walking the beach with their wife - it's a skill! - a LIFE-PRESERVING one, at that! )

[RickD]

You perverts are all going to hell!

[Kurieuo]

If you're a man Rick, then we'll see you there.

[Nessa]

Well, part of the "problem" with breasts is that they are, well placed within the perfect visual zone to be noticed - and they stand out. Also, they are placed so that they stick out from the plane of the body. If they are of any unusual size or if they are strategically highlighted by dress, etc. - well, it's just hard to not notice them. So, if they were at the toe level, or on the back - well, us fellows would have it a lot easier. We'd remember names better, actually listen to conversations better, pay more attention to eye color, smiles, all that. Plus, we seem almost hard-wired to notice them. All that to say, IT'S NOT OUR FAULT! (But most married men are well practiced at pretending to not notice the most obvious and alluring breasts they might see while walking the beach with their wife - it's a skill! - a LIFE-PRESERVING one, at that! )

If they were at toe level, there would be a heck.of a lot more clumsy guys....

'Whoops! I dropped my pen AGAIN! Let me just bend down and pick it up....'

And women can like breasts too and notice them.

[Nicki]

Men and women are visual in difference ways. For example, I think men are more visually "focused". I don't mean that they are more observant, but you know how your husband can never find anything when it's right in front of his eyes? (and I'm not saying women don't have the problem at times, but it'd be far less I'm sure).

I really hate clutter. Partly because I like being clean and tidy, but then also because clutter makes it difficult finding the one item I need. I put it down to being male, that when looking for something, I look at one object at a time. If there are lots of objects in my field of vision, then its like finding a needle in a haystack -- even if the object I'm after is right in front of me. I can spend 10 minutes trying to find something I should have found right away, or perhaps not even find it all telling my wife she's wrong it's not where she said it was.

When I ask my wife where an object is, she sees it almost immediately amongst whatever mess is on the kitchen bench or in the cupboard or amongst the kids toys. BUT, last time I noticed she didn't look here or there. Rather, seemed to just look in the direction, and then zoom in upon whatever particular item it was that I was trying to find.

I asked her when she looked, whether she looked at one item at a time, or more broadly scanned and just saw the item in her field of vision. It was the latter and she thought the former was silly. However, us men, we focus in on things, one at a time. Take breasts for example, males tends to get easily distracted by boobs and some women love to push them up to make it difficult for us men to hold a conversation.

Now I'm sure, when women check out a man that they are also taking in the full scene of it all. His whole body and face and even the surroundings. Like that black man on a white horse. They're not zooming in on one part but the whole visual scene. If there were a gorgeous naked woman on the other hand, I guarantee you men would focus in on her breasts, then perhaps down below and then her face. We wouldn't care much for the fuller scene at all, if we could even scope her out as a complete woman rather checking her out one piece at a time.

Tell me I'm wrong. It's just what I've tended to notice with the way women visually sees things, compared to the way men tend to.

Very interesting idea. I find when I'm looking for something amongst clutter I have that one thing in mind and scan over everything, and what I'm looking for usually stands out to me - trying to look for two things at once is when it gets harder. I've noticed that when looking for particular pieces amongst Lego with the kids - it's not easy looking for two kinds of pieces at once! Does that sound like the female technique you were talking about?

In answer to the survey, I voted that it depends on the individual. Men might be typically more sexual but I've heard many stories that show a lot of variation in both men's and women's attitudes and feelings.