Why are demands about male sexual performance quite so acceptable?

Humans form family units because we are intelligent and can pass on knowledge to our offspring, thereby increasing their overall level of genetic fitness. Animals species that don't rely on shared knowledge are better off abandoning their offspring rather than expending energy to care for them. In that case, the best way to maximize the survival of their genes is to mate as much as possible -- a quantity over quality scenario. All of this is deeply rooted in biology ... biology dictates the social structure, not the other way around.

Humans can overcome being complete slaves to Bateman's Principle, but it would be silly to claim that it has no bearing on human reproduction considering the habits of most mammals (males take on limited roles in parenting). Perhaps more importantly, women produce hundreds of eggs in their lifetime and males produce hundreds of millions of sperm per day, which is basically all the proof we need that the principle of "sperm is cheap" holds considerable biological significance for humans.

Sorry if all this is obvious to everyone, but I do think that the influence of biology is understated in discussions such as these.

For example, if we posit that women have a nurturing instinct, and this is why they nurture, then the circularity and non-explanatory trickery is all too clear. If we twiddle our thumbs, it's because we have a thumb-twiddling instinct. If we don't, it's because we have a not-thumb-twiddling instinct. Buses arrive in threes because they have a herding instinct. If they arrive separately, it's because they have a separation instinct.

Reading back through the thread, there's plenty of this kind of reasoning. No offense to anyone - it's really hard to avoid in the absence of biological structures we can see and give a name not immediately referrable to the effect we are trying to explain.

Reading back through the thread, there's plenty of this kind of reasoning. No offense to anyone - it's really hard to avoid in the absence of biological structures we can see and give a name not immediately referrable to the effect we are trying to explain.

er...come again.

A woman can mainly (but not only) come through oral sex. Not my words, but some sex expert's words.

I also think it would be just fine for a man to say, "I certainly wouldn't put up with any woman who just lies there" or "I couldn't date someone who wouldn't do [sexual act I really like]." Regardless of gender, people should seek out partners that meet their needs, and what's wrong with that?

I have to go to church now.

It's worse than that. Women are born with all the eggs they'll ever have.

That is, in fact, one of the primary reasons that the "abstinence only" programs fail as a sex ed curriculum in HS. People are driven by the basic biological need to reproduce, and that will take precedence over anything you tell them. Abstinence only works fine the day you tell them to say no, but when the hormones kick in, that goes out the window in a lot of cases. The human drive to reproduce mimics most other mammals in that the male is programmed to do exactly what I suggested. It is not hard to overcome, of course, but you have to make the effort to do it.

Unless and until you provide me with something that proves or suggests otherwise, I stand by my original statement.

That is, in fact, one of the primary reasons that the "abstinence only" programs fail as a sex ed curriculum in HS. People are driven by the basic biological need to reproduce, and that will take precedence over anything you tell them.

Your first statement refers to "individual" sexual equations. You then try to relate it to statistical reacions to a population at large. It might be true that "people" are driven by the basic biological need to reproduce, but that doesn't necessarily mean that any "individual" (even with that set of "people") is so driven.

OTfuckingM. It's really enough to put you off of having sex with that partner at all.

Isn't that overthinking? I mean, isn't it possible that the guy just wants you to get something out of the experience and is turned on by your arousal? "Affirmation of his sexual prowess," really? I mean, what if there's guilt on the part of the guy when the woman isn't enjoying it as much? Acting like every guy is all egocentric is part of the stereotype!

I get that, but it's kind of the difference between wanting you to have a good time, and needing you to have a good time.

It's worse than that. Women are born with all the eggs they'll ever have.

I did know that, but I guess I could have worded that sentence in a way that didn't suggest my possible ignorance about the reproductive system.

Your first statement refers to "individual" sexual equations. You then try to relate it to statistical reacions to a population at large. It might be true that "people" are driven by the basic biological need to reproduce, but that doesn't necessarily mean that any "individual" (even with that set of "people") is so driven.

This is self-evident, no? It doesn't affect alma's argument.

This happens in the other gender direction, too! Except less about attention and more about presumption. Like women who think getting with them is the awesomest thing ever, but in reality they're kinda hurting you.

Granted, the descrip of Uptown Girls shrilling into their cell phones about deficient partners sounds like a different kind of...over-entitlement, but I suspect the phenomenon as a whole has several root causes.

When a midwife told us this, I completely freaked out. Worrying even more about the baby in my belly. *sigh*

Er, not to be confused with taking an *active role* since as discussed this is about expecting MEN to perform...just that if you're worried about being taken advantage of in some sense, it's easy to wind up being over-demanding/critical. Because equality/math/life is hard.

i suffer from a bit of performance anxiety. simply cos i havent um performed in almost a year lol. someone give me a tip to combat these nerves.

Practice! Find a nice girl who'll have a bit a bit of patience with and explain the situation to her. Worked for me recently, and I was in a similar position. I know, easier said than done etc. Also if down there isn't behaving quite as it should, make sure you use every other means at your disposal to give her satisfaction - this'll help you get your confidence back.

ta. got a facebook buddy who has intimated that she would be up for it but im a bit worried she has quite high expectations cos of the nature of our phone/msn conversations. i dont think im bad in bed or anything, its just that after so long you become less sure.

Dear Mr x do you read? never mind, I suggest gay awful no good, horrible,very bad house music for all the confidence in the world. trust me it works! best wishes!

the nature of our phone/msn conversations

http://www.df.lth.se/~ola/Starwars/Empire/thumbs/thumb0.jpg

Just go for it, I say. If she's a halfway decent person it won't really matter if you don't live up to her expectations, which you may have blown out of proportion anyway.

"I suggest gay awful no good, horrible,very bad house music"

er.... thanks?

jordan s, im more of a return of the jedi guy myself.

Chap OTM. I think most people would understand that you're not necessarily up for you're best performance when you're doing it for the first time with a new person. With most couples it takes a while to get used to each other's needs and likes. It'd be different if she was just looking for a good one-night lay, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.