Why is it so?

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

It has occured to me not such a while ago that men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts). I am under a state of obfustication concerning the matters, which I am sure aren't only alien to myself. I can't cease to stop pondering on why exactly do men experience such phenomenon. Is it the angles(I am sure you are familiar with the free stone masons )? What exactly provokes sexual desires on the male part when it comes to expose of the female body?

I do hope that no one is irate because of this discussion or question otherwise.

[ada]

what on earth are you going on about debussy? I am under a state of obfuscation as to your point.

honestly you sound more and more like al hinton every day  .

[debussy symbolism]

what on earth are you going on about debussy?

honestly you sound more and more like al hinton every day  .

Your sentence doesn't make much sense so I will try to answer it as I see most fit under the current standarts of undestanding and argument, that is relating to my initial question.

I think that we are all most accustomed to seeing guys glaring in awe at the passing by women in hopes of eventually, or perhaps on some ephemeral or ethereal level have a form on intimacy which naturally holds the position of a sexual adventures. All of that largely depends on the women's physical stature, that is of course in relation to the natural predilection of the mentioned guys, but that is another story. To make this succinct, guys find woman's physical appearance as "hot", and women generally do not resort to such thoughts. Relating to the initial question, why is it that? Why does the physical body of a woman entice a man so>

[phil13]

Der, cuz boobz and bodies is gud 

1. Straight men are wired that way, man. We can rewire the brain so it doesn't work like that, but it requires rehab or unusual circumstances (ie monasteries).

2. EVERY STRAIGHT PERSON, MAN OR WOMAN, IS SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO GOOD-LOOKING MEMBERS OF THE OPPOSITE SEX. Men are just less complex than women, so we go for the bodies first. 

3. Define "obfustication". 

Phil

[debussy symbolism]

Sorry, it's late and I don't care for mistakes. I meant obfuscation.

[debussy symbolism]

Here comes that dreadful question again. Why? Why do female genitalia agravate the male impulse. What is it about maternal reproductive organs that captures the man's desire?

[debussy symbolism]

I do care for mistakes, just not at this particular while.

[debussy symbolism]

For the stance of lucidity, I am a guy and hopefully that will not deviate from the general acceptance and reasonings in this particular discussion.

[phil13]

Here comes that dreadful question again. Why? Why do female genitalia agravate the male impulse. What is it about maternal reproductive organs that captures the man's desire?

Here's your answer:

One of our species' purposes is to survive. In the days of ancient man, that meant a man needed to choose a mate who could be a fruitful mother. Hence, she needed to be fertile (hence the genitals) and be able to support and feed babies (hence the breasts)

Other fetishes (ass, feet, hair etc.) I suppose are just generated from the chaos factor and the fact that every human is different.

ALSO...

The way a woman moves can be arousing for the same reason all animals do dances or calls: mating dances and calls are aphrodisiacs. That's the way we are. Basic animal instinct.

Phil

[debussy symbolism]

Here's your answer:

One of our species' purposes is to survive. In the days of ancient man, that meant a man needed to choose a mate who could be a fruitful mother. Hence, she needed to be fertile (hence the genitals) and be able to support and feed babies (hence the breasts)

That wasn't my question though. Of course reproduction is an integral part of any species. My question adresses the desire to reproduce, and how it is arroused just by a simple glance at a nude woman. What is it about the nude woman that makes a man.....

[leucippus]

My question adresses the desire to reproduce, and how it is arroused just by a simple glance at a nude woman. What is it about the nude woman that makes a man.....

I don't believe that it is true for everyone.  It certainly isn't true for me.  In fact, women who think that all they need to do is get naked and they've done "their part" for sexual arousal turn me right off.  Like just because she's naked I'm supposed to get excited and do all the rest?  I don't think so.

I think a LOT of women think that way too!  Which I personally find quite disgusting.

Also, I have never found porn material to be exciting at all.  To me most of what is sexy is in the mind.

But I think you do have a point overall.  As far as I can tell, for the vast majority of men sex is entirely physical and all they need is a naked woman or a porn magazine to get them excited.  In some ways I wish I was excited that easily, but I'm definitely not.  It takes a woman with a MIND to get me excited.

[debussy symbolism]

Do you mean to say that a woman with a "mind" gets you excited? How about a physically unatractive woman with a good "mind"?

[debussy symbolism]

sorry, extra post.

[leucippus]

Do you mean to say that a woman with a "mind" gets you excited? How about a physically unatractive woman with a good "mind"?

I think you're missing the point.  You originally stated:

men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts).

I'm just saying that being exposed to female genitalia does nothing for me in and of itself.

In fact, I've never cared much for breasts at all, especially large breasts.   A woman could be totally flat-chested and it wouldn't bother me in the least.  I'm much more attracted to long legs which aren't even "genitalia".

There are a lot of physical features that I find sexually arousing on women that have absolutely nothing to do with genitalia or reproduction.  Eyes for example, a pretty face, or a seductive smile.  None of those things are required for reproduction.

Yes, it's true that there are physical traits that actually serve to turn me off.  In fact, very large breasts is one of them.  And that goes directly against what you are proposing that exposed genitalia is a turn on.

But like I say, I'm probably among a minority of men in what turns me on.

[nicco]

It has occured to me not such a while ago that men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts).

Breasts are reproductive organs you say? someone hasent been paying attention in sex class.

[ada]

female genitalia ...  maternal reproductive organs

My, you make it sound so sexy debussy. You are a strange boy 

Me, I'm just drop dead gorgeous AND I have a mind

[ted]

I think some very interesting points have been raised in this thread (so to speak). I am very close to leucippus in my own outlook. In my fifty-nine years I have never been physically attracted to women who are considered beautiful in the popular, film-star sense. All the women I have been strongly attracted to in the physical sense have been considered plain, or even ugly by most other men.

As for pornography, I never saw any, believe it or not, until I was almost fifty and my son started collecting it on the computer, as most youngsters seem to. He kept saying that I should watch some so I tried it but, to me, once I had seen one I had seen them all. I couldn't get excited about any of it. As I remarked to him, it seemed to resemble a doctor's consulting room more than anything.
"How long has the wart been there, Mrs Brown ?"

Now, in both these matters I have come to realise that I lie within a very small minority of the male population. I don't think it's low hormone levels and I was just the same in my teens and twenties. I am the sort of person who finds it very difficult to pick out the most beautiful woman from a collection of photographs. Most of my friends take very little time to pick one or two. I don't know whether that has anything to do with it.

It took my wife many years to believe me about these things, I might add. In answer to her incessant questions I would reply that no, I did not find such and such a glamorous film star more attractive than her and no, I would not choose the star over her given the opportunity.

So overall, I am probably one of the least qualified here to answer the original question.

[quasimodo]

It’s very difficult to answer to that question as far as it is positively impossible to assess whether the arousal reaction is innate (genetic) or learned. To do so, one should have to take a male specimen, prevent him to see any female until he gets sexually mature and then expose him to a naked woman and see what happens.
Personally, I tend to lean on the learned part. This opinion is based on the fact that the notion of female sexual attractiveness varies from one man to another. Men are not equally attracted to the same parts of female body (mind you, gays are not attracted by female body at all).

[jas]

Sorry, it's late and I don't care for mistakes. I meant obfuscation.

Here comes that dreadful question again. Why? Why do female genitalia agravate the male impulse. What is it about maternal reproductive organs that captures the man's desire?

I do care for mistakes, just not at this particular while.

For the stance of lucidity, I am a guy and hopefully that will not deviate from the general acceptance and reasonings in this particular discussion.

Are you still with us? You sound like you're just going through this stream of consciousness in your own head.

I'm just saying that being exposed to female genitalia does nothing for me in and of itself.

In fact, I've never cared much for breasts at all, especially large breasts.   A woman could be totally flat-chested and it wouldn't bother me in the least.  I'm much more attracted to long legs which aren't even "genitalia".

There are a lot of physical features that I find sexually arousing on women that have absolutely nothing to do with genitalia or reproduction.  Eyes for example, a pretty face, or a seductive smile.  None of those things are required for reproduction.

Yes, it's true that there are physical traits that actually serve to turn me off.  In fact, very large breasts is one of them.  And that goes directly against what you are proposing that exposed genitalia is a turn on.

But like I say, I'm probably among a minority of men in what turns me on.

Actually, you're probably more like the average man in that regard than you think. I know few men who are into boobs over personality.

It has occured to me not such a while ago that men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts).

When you say "more" do you mean more than when they see other body parts, or more than women are when they see male genitalia? (Isn't "genitalia" a horrible word? It has to be up there with "scalp".)

[quasimodo]

Actually, you're probably more like the average man in that regard than you think. I know few men who are into boobs over personality.

Maybe it's just that you know few men at all  ...

(Edit: or that you have big, awesome boobs  )

[leahcim]

Me, I'm just drop dead gorgeous AND I have a mind

That's just a waste of a mind isn't it?

As for the rest of the thread, a couple of people joining the thread seem to have either watched too much Mr Spock or have overdosed on political correctness - we don't really believe them do we?

Err, yeah, when it comes to nookie, I'm into your minds ladies. Of course. Just like you are...haha hahaha hahaha. Do people really still buy that about women?

Although we do have 5 senses and anyone who thinks the visual one is key is probably still at the theory / research stage

[jas]

Maybe it's just that you know few men at all  ...

(Edit: or that you have big, awesome boobs  )

Well, y'know... don't want to brag...

[prometheus]

Because males that get aroused by female genitalia have improved fitness(in the Darwinian sense).

[quasimodo]

Because males that get aroused by female genitalia have improved fitness(in the Darwinian sense).

That's an obscure statement.

[pianowolfi]

Me, I'm just drop dead gorgeous AND I have a mind

There is a thread called 'Pictures'....

[pianistimo]

is this a serious question?

well, one funny instance that this brings to mind is that when my son was 1 or so - i was dressing and the corner mirror made it look like i had four boobs.  he was still nursing at the time (as all of my kids nursed for a couple of years.  don't ask my why i did it!  i think it was that it helped them go to sleep whenver i needed them to).  anyway,  the look on his face was complete enthusiasm and then frustration about which one to look at or  pick or something.  i just remember it was so funny. 

[chopinisque]

Maybe it's because men are simple and their reaction to stimuli is likewise, simple.  Of course, this is a terrible and obnoxious generalisation but...

It has been shown that men play more computer games because they are captivated by the relatively simple games whereas women tend to play certain games like the Sims.  They seem to require more depth (emotional) to sustain their interest.

[zheer]

Greetings.

It has occured to me not such a while ago that men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts).

  Not sure about that, i think women wont sex just as much as men,the only difference is that women dont make it so obvious, infact next time you see a young women dressing down, think why.
    Yes men are less complex than women, when i was a teenager i was more in-touch with my feminin side,wanted a lasting GF ,was more emotional.These days i just want sex and nothing more,pure and simple. The first thing that enters my mind if am attracted to a women is haw to have sex with her in all different positions and am very flexible and can go for 6 hours non stop.

[phil13]

Maybe it's because men are simple and their reaction to stimuli is likewise, simple.  Of course, this is a terrible and obnoxious generalisation but...

No it isn't! It's TRUE!

The first thing that enters my mind if am attracted to a women is haw to have sex with her in all different positions and am very flexible and can go for 6 hours non stop.

Boasting now, aren't we? 

Phil

[zheer]

No it isn't! It's TRUE!

Boasting now, aren't we? 

Phil

  No really, something has changed in my head, i dont fall in love, fancy, or find my-self having a meaning full conversation with women. I just want good old fationed sex and lots of it. Trust me man its the animal instinct with zero emotional and intellectual atachment, its great so simple perfect cant be better.

[phil13]

Actually, I was referring to your comment about being very flexible and going for 6 hours non-stop. 

Phil

[zheer]

Actually, I was referring to your comment about being very flexible and going for 6 hours non-stop. 

Phil

  The flexibility part is true, the 6 hour is also true. Must be the biological clock ticking something to do with reproduction and the fact that i have a sperm factory testicle. Trust me next time you see a women think sex and nothing more the rest will fall into place.

[henrah]

and can go for 6 hours non stop.

6hours and only once, or 6hours and multiple times? If multiple, is 6hours the cumulative, because surely there are breaks inbetween each arrival

[pianistimo]

althought the six hours non-stop also caught my attention --this is the second time i am tempted to 'click here.'  the first time was on wolfi's thread.  i got diverted completely off piano forum.  is this a trick of a different kind.

zheer, i think you should quit worrying about haircuts. 

[debussy symbolism]

The notion of men being less complex is not true in my humble opinion. That particular statement would question the roles of men in society. Think about it, you don't see as many poets, artists, scientists, musicians who are women in comparison to men. I am not biased, just observant. I know that some may probably argue about "men taking over women", but even that posesses a counter argument to itself.

It is true that women hide their feelings more so than men do. A woman is more prone at nuances, whilst the man just blurts out what is on his mind. I have read some articles dealing with this, but lets not get into a different topic here.

Concerning video games, I have made some keen observations that may ameliorate or somewhat expatiate this topic or discussion herein. My sister is a fan of video games. The paradox lies in that she likes violent games, e.g, World of Warcraft. From observing the game, the character kills others, fights, etc. I suppose that it is a matter of preference, but anyhow, an observance is an observance.

Returning again to the "complex" theme, my conjecture would hold that women are not more "complicated", if that's the word you want to use, than men are. In my college class, women are less striving to involve in phylosophical conversations, debates, and their views are generally that of trite, with no new information or argument involved. Men however are more apposite for such discussions that compare different thoughts and visions, and are more prone to get involved in conversations. I do not say this against females or males for that matter, I just relinquish my observations.

Breasts are reproductive organs in that they enable the infant to be fed via natural means. Therefore, they should be classifed as reproductive organs.

[zheer]

6hours and only once, or 6hours and multiple times? If multiple, is 6hours the cumulative, because surely there are breaks inbetween each arrival

  Obviously the sex hour bit is not true, but the rest is very true.

[debussy symbolism]

Because males that get aroused by female genitalia have improved fitness(in the Darwinian sense).

That's quite a revolutionary and quite a rude thought. Perhaps to some extent it is true, with a relatively fit body, certain chemicals responsible for arousal are active.

[debussy symbolism]

Breasts are reproductive organs you say? someone hasent been paying attention in sex class.

Without breasts the nurturing of the baby is impossible, hence reproduction is impossible.

[debussy symbolism]

I think some very interesting points have been raised in this thread (so to speak). I am very close to leucippus in my own outlook. In my fifty-nine years I have never been physically attracted to women who are considered beautiful in the popular, film-star sense. All the women I have been strongly attracted to in the physical sense have been considered plain, or even ugly by most other men.

As for pornography, I never saw any, believe it or not, until I was almost fifty and my son started collecting it on the computer, as most youngsters seem to. He kept saying that I should watch some so I tried it but, to me, once I had seen one I had seen them all. I couldn't get excited about any of it. As I remarked to him, it seemed to resemble a doctor's consulting room more than anything.
"How long has the wart been there, Mrs Brown ?"

Now, in both these matters I have come to realise that I lie within a very small minority of the male population. I don't think it's low hormone levels and I was just the same in my teens and twenties. I am the sort of person who finds it very difficult to pick out the most beautiful woman from a collection of photographs. Most of my friends take very little time to pick one or two. I don't know whether that has anything to do with it.

It took my wife many years to believe me about these things, I might add. In answer to her incessant questions I would reply that no, I did not find such and such a glamorous film star more attractive than her and no, I would not choose the star over her given the opportunity.

So overall, I am probably one of the least qualified here to answer the original question.

You let your son indulge in the observation of pornography? That's unwise, as study shows that those who have been exposed to pornography show more violent tendencies towards women in later age.

[henrah]

You let your son indulge in the observation of pornography? That's unwise, as study shows that those who have been exposed to pornography show more violent tendencies towards women in later age.

I hope to god that I don't fall into that statistic!

[debussy symbolism]

As a father?

[ted]

You let your son indulge in the observation of pornography? That's unwise, as study shows that those who have been exposed to pornography show more violent tendencies towards women in later age.

Why ? How is looking at a few pictures of people having mutually enjoyable intercourse going to hurt anybody ? I don't know what sort of pictures other people look at but there was no violence in anything he watched. Graphic violence is an entirely different matter. If there had been films of that I would have done something about it. He is one of the kindest and gentlest people I know; he abhors violence.

If you had said that watching rude pictures causes inability to budget and handle money rationally instead of giving it away to people... now THAT would have given me pause to think !

[nicco]

Without breasts the nurturing of the baby is impossible, hence reproduction is impossible.

breasts have nothing to do with the act of reproducing. Quote from wikipedia:

A reproductive system is the ensembles and interactions of organs and/or substances within an organism that strictly pertain to reproduction. As an example, this would include in the case of female mammals, the hormone estrogen, ova, and the uterus and the vagina, but not the breasts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_system

[pianistimo]

edit.  one thing that i cannot take is plastic surgery reproduction.  one surgeon lost a nipple on the floor.  after i saw that - and the horror of the zero zone with nothing on it - i thought 'what a horrible thing to lose a nipple over a breast augmentation.'

i think it must be similar to men getting peck implants.  (in the arm).  you look at him and think - 'wow, he must be strong' - but then you feel the thing moving around and think 'what a rip -off.  it's just a piece of plastic.'   

[leucippus]

i think it must be similar to men getting peck implants.  (in the arm).  you look at him and think - 'wow, he must be strong' -

His peck's implanted plastic
his pecker's inelastic
the women can't resist him
they're like so enthusiastic!

To them,… it's all that counts
a ridged genitalia,
pecks in large amounts

Nothing else holds much importance
to women anymore
it seems that all they care about
is a sexual rapport

[pianistimo]

well, i suppose a man could try that kind of implant.  do they have them?  i was talking about arms.  you are quite a poet! 

now, if a man got one of those, how would he hide it during the daytime?  all i'm thinking is 'tent in pants.' 

[pianowolfi]

His peck's implanted plastic
his pecker's inelastic
the women can't resist him
they're like so enthusiastic!

To them,… it's all that counts
a ridged genitalia,
pecks in large amounts

Nothing else holds much importance
to women anymore
it seems that all they care about
is a sexual rapport

Wow, shouldn't leucippus be declared as the official pianoforum poet?

[debussy symbolism]

Why ? How is looking at a few pictures of people having mutually enjoyable intercourse going to hurt anybody ? I don't know what sort of pictures other people look at but there was no violence in anything he watched. Graphic violence is an entirely different matter. If there had been films of that I would have done something about it. He is one of the kindest and gentlest people I know; he abhors violence.

If you had said that watching rude pictures causes inability to budget and handle money rationally instead of giving it away to people... now THAT would have given me pause to think !

You as adult understand the "harmlessness" of such pictures, however, the child doesn't. These pictures are going to shape his thoughts on how the intercourse is being done and since pornography offers a "not so gentle" approach, your sun will copy that and not focus on what's really important. Pornography can make your child pay for it and eventually go bankrupt. If you know what's better for your son, eliminate all pornography content and access as best as possible.

[pianistimo]

i'm agreed on that one.  it's really a matter of money see, monkey do.  of course, as adults - if something accidentally comes on - we are tempted for a matter of seconds or hours - to succumb to mindlessness.  sex in the city, nip tuck.  but, after watching a few episodes (out of a strange curiousity) i found it absolutely boring and felt sad for the characters.  they seem to be wasting their lives and even acknowledge it!

[ted]

Perhaps I did not clarify sufficiently. My son has been an independent adult for several years and he is the antithesis of a violent person. Several of his contemporaries, brought up in restrictive, prudish households, are MUCH more inclined to unkindness than he. I cite him as a factual counterexample to your hypothesis that the visual observation of mutually enjoyable sexual behaviour leads to a violent character.

Films which contain obvious association of sex and violence, I agree, are quite repulsive. Indeed, I find films which contain violence at all to be obnoxious. Perhaps,after all, we are talking about two different things here.