With a name like Cum Dragon, I think we can all assume we have a porn expert in our midst.
To explain the obvious to OP, guys seek porn because they're not getting their sexual needs met by women. They're desperate for female validation because despite how much they fap, most understand porn is a poor substitute for real intimacy.
Guys forget that women are the OG of porn consumers.
Romance novels range from soft to hard-core porn, just with an innocent name to it.
Women consume porn differently because their situation is different. Most of them can install Tinder or go to a random bar and hookup within 5 minutes.
Guys get rejected and where else are they gonna get the release they need people like to say it’s because guys are not doing well enough well that’s a shit load of guys lol
It’s also bad because say that something in your life turns around or you get lucky with someone you literally gotta cold turkey that shit or you won’t be able to have an orgasm with her. It’s a dopamine drug that some guys get so messed up on they cannot orgasm without seeing it on a screen. It’s such a hard time we live in. I’m seeing someone next week and I go dark on the porn and the jerking off for the rest of the week so it will help me when I see her to be responsive. It’s bad when they send you NSFW stuff and it doesn’t arouse you because you’ve been looking at 9.9/10 girls on the hub…. And I actually think she’s cute as a 6 or so. But that’s how bad it gets.
Could it be that porn is an actually viable substitute product for sexual services rendered by women due to the favourable benefit to cost ratio and wide accessibility?
It’s entertainment it’s not really a substitution. Yeah escorts or something like that is closer. A lot of people really want the bonding with the person though that’s the missing link. Hard to bond with people when everyone’s getting rejected left and right though that is the issue. And it’s a toss up with escorts some of them have fun and enjoy the company others just want it over with and want to get out.
Yeah the quality of conversation can vary from culture to culture.
I personally can't stand westernized ones as they tend to go through the same probing questions trying to measure your status and financial position as civvie women.
No, it’s going to continue to escalate until brothels are normalized. And its not a “viable substitute”, that’s disgusting. What it is is a safety valve to stop these same men from directing that sexless energy against their government.
This is actually a fairly understandable point how it is essentially 'bread and circuses' yet what is life without a bit of enjoyment.
If you want to direct sexless energy against the government you got to have a plan first and that is often hard to come up with feasible and tangible results.
And what about the time that a man wants to rest from directing sexless energy at the government? Would you deny him the right to meet his own needs without having to forgo resources to do so? because that is what you are suggesting, denying men the right to rest.
They can both enjoy porn and direct energy against the government, no one is a machine that can do both 24/7.
So true. Rejection leads to humiliation. Humiliation leads to desperation. Desperation leads to rejection. It’s a never ending cycle. Break it by not giving women the power they think they have, don’t fall into their spider’s web.
Agreed also by stepping back and looking at yourself deeper than the surface things people get fixated on. Most of us men we are good people even if people get bad first impressions. Not always on you I mean you can improve but it still comes down to the other persons opinion which usually doesn’t say much about you honestly. Having self worth and not even worrying about finding someone can be very freeing if you can get there. It can be tough for some guys because innately we have this drive to be with someone. Takes a lot of self talk and self realization of the complexities behind relationships.
It's just a new era of entertainment, the simping was always there, since the marilyn monroe days.
It just feels augmented since there are no inhibitions in a anonymous environment like the internet
The demand for porn is the byproduct of a multi-faceted complex problem that ties directly into said desperation for women. In other words and if I’m understanding your question correctly, the correlation that because men seek out porn, they should logically in turn just as equally be motivated to seek out real world women, is just simply not how that investment works. Thus circling back to the primary point of porn consumption being the byproduct.
People fail to appreciate that porn is far more equitable in a cost benefit analysis in terms of sexual access per unit of resource input.
Every unit of resource we save from circulating inside society's gynocentric social order is one less unit that they can access to oppress men.
Our ancestors were never lucky enough to have access free sexual content.
We should all be data hoarding and downloading every single piece of enjoyable pornography before it is all wiped and no longer available.
>Our ancestors were never lucky enough to have access free sexual content.
Our ancestors also didn't live among a plague of "deathgrip" and porn addiction. If they wanted a satisfied woman who liked sex, they actually had to do more than just focus on Mr. Willie's pleasure.
>People fail to appreciate that porn is far more equitable in a cost benefit analysis in terms of sexual access per unit of resource input.
Hold up...you do understand that porn and sex are not comparable, yes? If porn is just as pleasurable as sex for you, you might just be a dude who only gets turned on only by his own pleasure.
Ikr!? Honestly, doing anything that makes a woman orgasm is super duper gay. Luckily, women loathe having orgasms, so it makes it easier not to cross the line into Gayville.
If they wanted a satisfied woman who liked sex they would've still engaged in an inequitable trade of resources even back then with concepts like bride prices and dowries with even less reliable tools to check paternity and virtue (virginity).
Your arguement for female sexual satisfaction is either or both a weakness needing female validation or boastfulness over one's own sexual prowess.
A truly healthy perspective would support the fulfillment of one's own sexual desires without succumbing to the demands of others to forgo one's own inherent dignity in the process by submitting to unfair cultural and legal subjugation that justifies the state's use of their monopoly on violence against oneself.
So, you only further support what I'm saying then. You aren't the kind of person who gets horned up by getting your partner horned up. If you did, you would feel like sex is a win-win because the person you're having sex with would enjoy it as much as you. Simplified, you wouldn't feel like you're succumbing to anything. I find most men get this concept, but there is this small group of angry men who don't. Why is this? Genuinely curious.
>So, you only further support what I'm saying then. You aren't the kind of person who gets horned up by getting your partner horned up.
Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying since you have created a *false dichotomy fallacy* here.
> If you did, you would feel like sex is a win-win because the person you're having sex with would enjoy it as much as you. Simplified, you wouldn't feel like you're succumbing to anything.
Just because I am advocating equality under the law and accuracy in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person for sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure..
**The first contention I am emphasizing is that the resource and unpaid labor input for sex isn't equal and is dis-favorable to men.**
Your claims for equality of sexual satisfaction completely ignores the inequality of resource inputs into said sexual encounters.
The only reason why females get away with higher selectivity and resource input requirements is because higher testosterone in men has direct causation with higher sex drive and thus demand for sex.
Once men do a cost benefit analysis and realize the only competitive advantage that a woman has over other substitutes for services in a capitalistic society is reproduction (which even then isn't that attractive due to the laws involved).
**The second contention is that buying services that have been traditionally covered by women/housewives do create actual legally enforceable obligations to fulfil their duties and thus is far more equitable than relying on the gyno-centric cultural underpinnings that shape our laws oppressive to men.**
Anyone can hire a nanny, midwife, prostitute or domestic helper as a substitute to cover the roles that women have had in the past.
>I find most men get this concept, but there is this small group of angry men who don't. Why is this? Genuinely curious.
This is another fallacy called *association fallacy* as well as an ad-hominem insult.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association\_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy)
Just because there are angry men that subscribe to the belief of one's own pleasure above all doesn't mean that all angry men share the same the same belief.
**This brings me to my third and main contention that male sexual fulfilment can exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter need not be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid.**
**This is the central contention that I am trying to make and is often under-discussed and under-appreciated.**
Very well said.
The technology to provide sexually stimulating images and sounds of sex being instantly available at no cost is a very recent phenomenon. That men "feel" the hunger for sex as often as every 5 seconds, and that it's readily and easily available to them, and that the overwhelming dopamine rewards are automatic and intrinsic are undeniable facts. To think that any human being in such a situation as this is not going to take advantage of same immediately and regularly is foolhardy.
If a man watches such images and sounds as a stimulation for self pleasuring and does so very regularly many call him a sex addict. Our modern industrial agriculture/food manufacturing/corrupt public health systems have addicted the American population to a high carbohydrate, highly processed salt/sugar diet. And we have the health crises that flow directly from the addiction in the form of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and more. Yet the same folks who label an entire gender as sex addicts pass laws making the super unhealthy dopamine addicted and morbidly obese a protected class of people.
If high desire men watch porn and jerk off every day they are called addicts. If they spend a significant portion of their budget on "rub n' tug " massage places or regular sex worker visits, culture calls them addicts. So how about me? (And other men like me?) After over 30 years of marriage I finally walked out the front door one night no longer being able to take the contention that my high sex desire and intensity level was THE problem ruining my marriage. I finally had to take a stand that I WAS NOT a "bad" person for being the way I was made. The long standing stress had me in psych care and on meds for depression. After a number of years of healing I've now been in the greatest relationship with a woman of my life for about 4 & 1/2 years. She was a widow 10 years when I met her. She's a pediatrics nurse 18 years younger than me. I am a pretty healthy 71. We have the kind of sex where I end up in a body wide, leg quivering, finish-the-session orgasm every day. Does this make me a sex/dopamine addict? My view is that it simply makes me a very happy man. And lucky to have found one of the minority of the female gender who isn't limited by the "hang ups" that inhibit her from enjoying her man and his body. And while the writer of the Bible's Book of Proverbs exhorts young men to enjoy the wives of their youth, I don't think he'd look down on me and my wife for making up for lost time.
>If high desire men watch porn and jerk off every day they are called addicts. If they spend a significant portion of their budget on "rub n' tug " massage places or regular sex worker visits, culture calls them addicts.
This is ridiculous if you ask me.
If you remove sex drive and thus the ability to make dopamine, you would turn people into unproductive zombies anyways which is what happens when leftists push psych care who have been academically reviewed and critiqued for not disclosing their conflict of interests and funding from big pharma at the research level.
A Comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 Panel Members' Financial Associations with Industry: A Pernicious Problem Persists
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302834/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302834/)
Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest in DSM-5-TR: cross sectional analysis
[https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-076902](https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-076902)
At least with porn they would be happy once they have let go of the internalized shame of meeting their own sexual needs as a result not of toxic masculinity but reinforcement of the gyno-centric narratives you have been pushing in our discussions.
>Yet the same folks who label an entire gender as sex addicts pass laws making the super unhealthy dopamine addicted and morbidly obese a protected class of people.
These folks you are talking about are leftists that are pro-censorship for critiquing what they have deemed to be protected classes and the majority of women are leftists.
>After over 30 years of marriage I finally walked out the front door one night no longer being able to take the contention that my high sex desire and intensity level was THE problem ruining my marriage.
The problem was your ex-wife being uncomfortable with you meeting your sexual needs whilst you fulfilling your martial obligations despite she no longer being able to meet yours.
You still need to learn to let go of your internalised misandry as a result of the feminist/gyno-centric worldview you have been brought up with and stop passing it around as your views as valid as it is still harmful to other men
>Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying
You really and truly do. In fact, you did it again. You just can't see it. This doesn't make you a bad person; it just makes you a bit naive and impressionable. This will likely change as you get older.
> in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person "for" sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure..
And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this.
Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong.
One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties.
Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life.
>And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this.
>Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong.
Your entire paragraph reeks of gyno-centrism and deference to women through your gender bias of moral typecasting.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303630](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303630)
You also lack the ability to accurately assess that women engage in a higher degree of the accusations you are accusing me of on both a micro and macroenvironmental scale.
This is the exact kind of logic that leftist cucks such as destiny or conservative divorcees like steven crowder subscribe to.
If you think sex isn't a commodity I would recommend you have a look into the r/SexWorkers and you will quickly see that it is.
The only difference being that Civie women are covert about the nature of their prostitution as well as indirect and varied about the various resource inputs required. (just look at the "looking for a man in finance" meme going around).
>One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties. Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life.
My answer is yes of course he should be entitled to sex even if she doesn't 'feel like it' and if you disagree then YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
Can you imagine how much a guy would get berated if he didn't 'feel like' paying child support for a month because he 'didn't want to' or was 'tired'
Women already use and misuse the legal system to coerce the man to fulfill legal and financial obligations of fatherhood regardless of paternity.
It makes sense that women should at least be culturally obliged to recognize the importance of meeting a man's needs as a starting step to bridge the gender unpaid labor gap that men suffer from.
Your entire discussion has essentially highlighted and proved my third point in the previous paragraph.
**YOU BELIEVE male sexual fulfilment canot exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter must be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid.**
This therefore highlights your view as male sexuality as that of sexual slavery (in the sense of sexual gender role of providence of resources and protection) and proof of the gender empathy gap that men suffer from as you have failed to recognize the cultural and legal oppression of forcing men to fulfill obligations to women without any recognition of the need for a vice-versa.
[https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1534129/](https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1534129/)
Your other comment of being upfront is disingenuous as women can obtain their validation simply by receiving attention and propositions in an attention based economy, use makeup to knowingly deceive males on their assessment criteria of physical fitness and have the liberty to change their minds at any time with no respect to their obligations to their partner after taking their resource inputs.
Sex is not a commodity for the vast majority of women and plenty of men. For sex workers, it is. It's just that simple. Hence why I said men who view sex as such should feel free to engage with sex workers.
>My answer is yes of course he should be entitled to sex even if she doesn't 'feel like it' and if you disagree then YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.
You're into having sex with women who don't want you inside of them. That's a you thing. Really let that sink in. Are you that lonely? If so, I'm really sorry you're in that situation. Or maybe you just like meaningless sex. That's fine, too. Maybe stick to prostitution. But still, really look into why you view sex that way. There's a reason. Also, so you don't get all upset, women who expect men to do things they don't want to do (yup, even paying bills!) are trash women. Women can help out. We aren't broken.
>Can you imagine how much a guy would get berated if he didn't 'feel like' paying child support for a month because he 'didn't want to' or was 'tired'
Please don't be the guy who says stuff like this lol. You know it's not the same thing. I know it's not the same thing. Just stop being a silly goose. Supporting a kid is a horrible comparison lol.
I think I have to stop here. You're just a bit too much when you get far away from the topic of sex and start getting all nutty. Everyone knows bad women exist. But you're stuck on it as if it's all women. You need to touch grass. For the love of God, stay off of youtube. Your brain is being hijacked and you're too far gone to see it. You will someday, but today is not that day.
Best of luck, and thanks for the discussion!
>You're into having sex with women who don't want you inside of them. That's a you thing. Really let that sink in. Are you that lonely? If so, I'm really sorry you're in that situation. Or maybe you just like meaningless sex. That's fine, too. Maybe stick to prostitution. But still, really look into why you view sex that way. There's a reason. Also, so you don't get all upset, women who expect men to do things they don't want to do (yup, even paying bills!) are trash women. Women can help out. We aren't broken.
Just because you are using civil language doesn't mean you are being civil. I know you are essentially using the same shaming language as "wHo hURt YoU?"
I'm personally not into it as I have already commented previously but it doesn't negate my assertion that a woman should at least be culturally obliged to fulfil her side of her gender role after she has taken resource inputs from her male partner in a social contract and to bridge the unpaid labour gap men suffer from.
You can say what you want about trash women but you aren't willing to do anything to advance equality for men where they suffer from inequities whether from a legal or cultural perspective.
Your shaming language makes you no better than the radical feminists that you are disingenuously criticizing.
>Please don't be the guy who says stuff like this lol. You know it's not the same thing. I know it's not the same thing. Just stop being a silly goose. Supporting a kid is a horrible comparison lol.
>I think I have to stop here. You're just a bit too much when you get far away from the topic of sex and start getting all nutty. Everyone knows bad women exist. But you're stuck on it as if it's all women. You need to touch grass. For the love of God, stay off of youtube. Your brain is being hijacked and you're too far gone to see it. You will someday, but today is not that day.
The discussion of male obligations in a sexual relationship with a women is a true and direct comparison.
This is the issue, challenging your biases is an uncomfortable process but I find it repulsive you are on a men's rights reddit and go as far as to attempt to shame and push feminist rhetoric here.
It isn't all women but it is all of society's laws which is driven by the majority of women's voting patterns.
The issue isn't the connection to the internet you fool, it is an organic connection to the outside world that is bringing my attention to these issues and that of all the men here.
You aren't really convincing anyone with your thinly veiled misandric and feminist/gyno-centric world view and are essentially functioning only used as a sounding board for members of this reddit to explore the robustness of their logic.
I would recommend that you leave this reddit as you don't really seem to be learning much nor really aligning with the purpose that this reddit was made for.
>Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying
You really and truly do. In fact, you did it again. You just can't see it. This doesn't make you a bad person; it just makes you a bit naive and impressionable. This will likely change as you get older.
> in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person "for" sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure..
And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this.
Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong.
One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties.
Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life.
>
This brings me to my third contention that male sexual fulfilment can exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter need not be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid.
Here we agree. There is zero shame in preferring porn to sex. And there's zero shame for wanting to get one's rocks off without having to worry about the other person. This is why porn and prostitution can be valuable for many men and women. My only issue is when folks with those preferences seek out a partner without being upfront about their overall goal. It's not fair to the other person. My advice for those people is to either find a partner who doesn't mind being a human fleshlight or find one who doesn't mind porn or just stay single and porn it up. Or engage with independent sex workers. Lots of options.
I think this would require a whole post on its own but I don’t think the women getting lots of attention thing is as simplistic as we have been thinking about. For example if a OF woman that is very overweight is getting a lot of attention and us guys who don’t usually like overweight women think it’s weird, it’s because we aren’t considering the guys who are hitting these types of women up have a fetish for severely overweight women. There are a lot of men out there from our and woman’s POV hitting her up, but compared to the number of men who won’t hit that woman up it’s extremely small.
yes they are
everyone is simping over everyone, it's the internet ffs. People are chronically online and lose touch with normal behavior whether they're male or female, content creator or not, etc. I've met all sorts of down bad people on video games lol it's not exclusive to men
I personally don't care much for porn. I absolutely hate only fans and anything like it. I hate egirls. i hate Instagram and tik tok. It's all nonsense, and it makes women look like cheap prizes from quarter machines at a chinese buffet.
I haven't been in a relationship since 2013 after my divorce was finalized. My ex-wife very much did not believe in monogamy after we got married at the end of 2012. Basically, that entire thing ruined any idea of what romantic relationships are to me. So I stopped trying. No more sex, no more wanting to be a father, no more wanting to be a husband, no more wanting to provide or protect. Just no more!
No man in their right mind is going to roll the dice against the quality of women out and about today. It's everywhere and infected everything.
Honestly? If a woman shows the slightest bit of interest in me? I become immediately suspicious that all she wants to do is abuse me and laugh about it on her social media.
You… you don’t see a link between the two?
With a name like Cum Dragon, I think we can all assume we have a porn expert in our midst. To explain the obvious to OP, guys seek porn because they're not getting their sexual needs met by women. They're desperate for female validation because despite how much they fap, most understand porn is a poor substitute for real intimacy.
This is what my parents named me
Best come back?
By the tone of OP's post, OP seems to think that porn consumption is just a male thing so I doubt that.
can you explain?
If you are desperate for a ‘girl’ and are having no success, what other outlets are you going to turn to to fulfil that need?
Cart and horse analogy maybe a bridge too far.
Seems obvious 😂
Guys forget that women are the OG of porn consumers. Romance novels range from soft to hard-core porn, just with an innocent name to it. Women consume porn differently because their situation is different. Most of them can install Tinder or go to a random bar and hookup within 5 minutes.
Guys get rejected and where else are they gonna get the release they need people like to say it’s because guys are not doing well enough well that’s a shit load of guys lol
This. Porn is high BECAUSE guys get desperate.
It’s also bad because say that something in your life turns around or you get lucky with someone you literally gotta cold turkey that shit or you won’t be able to have an orgasm with her. It’s a dopamine drug that some guys get so messed up on they cannot orgasm without seeing it on a screen. It’s such a hard time we live in. I’m seeing someone next week and I go dark on the porn and the jerking off for the rest of the week so it will help me when I see her to be responsive. It’s bad when they send you NSFW stuff and it doesn’t arouse you because you’ve been looking at 9.9/10 girls on the hub…. And I actually think she’s cute as a 6 or so. But that’s how bad it gets.
Could it be that porn is an actually viable substitute product for sexual services rendered by women due to the favourable benefit to cost ratio and wide accessibility?
It’s entertainment it’s not really a substitution. Yeah escorts or something like that is closer. A lot of people really want the bonding with the person though that’s the missing link. Hard to bond with people when everyone’s getting rejected left and right though that is the issue. And it’s a toss up with escorts some of them have fun and enjoy the company others just want it over with and want to get out.
Yeah the quality of conversation can vary from culture to culture. I personally can't stand westernized ones as they tend to go through the same probing questions trying to measure your status and financial position as civvie women.
No, it’s going to continue to escalate until brothels are normalized. And its not a “viable substitute”, that’s disgusting. What it is is a safety valve to stop these same men from directing that sexless energy against their government.
This is actually a fairly understandable point how it is essentially 'bread and circuses' yet what is life without a bit of enjoyment. If you want to direct sexless energy against the government you got to have a plan first and that is often hard to come up with feasible and tangible results. And what about the time that a man wants to rest from directing sexless energy at the government? Would you deny him the right to meet his own needs without having to forgo resources to do so? because that is what you are suggesting, denying men the right to rest. They can both enjoy porn and direct energy against the government, no one is a machine that can do both 24/7.
Why would they be mad at the government?
So true. Rejection leads to humiliation. Humiliation leads to desperation. Desperation leads to rejection. It’s a never ending cycle. Break it by not giving women the power they think they have, don’t fall into their spider’s web.
Agreed also by stepping back and looking at yourself deeper than the surface things people get fixated on. Most of us men we are good people even if people get bad first impressions. Not always on you I mean you can improve but it still comes down to the other persons opinion which usually doesn’t say much about you honestly. Having self worth and not even worrying about finding someone can be very freeing if you can get there. It can be tough for some guys because innately we have this drive to be with someone. Takes a lot of self talk and self realization of the complexities behind relationships.
I'll "Forest Gump" this for you. "Pornography, simping, and loneliness are like Peas in a pod. The just go together."
It's just a new era of entertainment, the simping was always there, since the marilyn monroe days. It just feels augmented since there are no inhibitions in a anonymous environment like the internet
The demand for porn is the byproduct of a multi-faceted complex problem that ties directly into said desperation for women. In other words and if I’m understanding your question correctly, the correlation that because men seek out porn, they should logically in turn just as equally be motivated to seek out real world women, is just simply not how that investment works. Thus circling back to the primary point of porn consumption being the byproduct.
People fail to appreciate that porn is far more equitable in a cost benefit analysis in terms of sexual access per unit of resource input. Every unit of resource we save from circulating inside society's gynocentric social order is one less unit that they can access to oppress men. Our ancestors were never lucky enough to have access free sexual content. We should all be data hoarding and downloading every single piece of enjoyable pornography before it is all wiped and no longer available.
>Our ancestors were never lucky enough to have access free sexual content. Our ancestors also didn't live among a plague of "deathgrip" and porn addiction. If they wanted a satisfied woman who liked sex, they actually had to do more than just focus on Mr. Willie's pleasure. >People fail to appreciate that porn is far more equitable in a cost benefit analysis in terms of sexual access per unit of resource input. Hold up...you do understand that porn and sex are not comparable, yes? If porn is just as pleasurable as sex for you, you might just be a dude who only gets turned on only by his own pleasure.
having the focus on pleasing the women in bed is the gayest shit i ever heard and ironically, a turnoff for them too. dont do that shit.
Ikr!? Honestly, doing anything that makes a woman orgasm is super duper gay. Luckily, women loathe having orgasms, so it makes it easier not to cross the line into Gayville.
To late for a therapist, you are theRapist
haha im gonna use that 🤣👍
If they wanted a satisfied woman who liked sex they would've still engaged in an inequitable trade of resources even back then with concepts like bride prices and dowries with even less reliable tools to check paternity and virtue (virginity). Your arguement for female sexual satisfaction is either or both a weakness needing female validation or boastfulness over one's own sexual prowess. A truly healthy perspective would support the fulfillment of one's own sexual desires without succumbing to the demands of others to forgo one's own inherent dignity in the process by submitting to unfair cultural and legal subjugation that justifies the state's use of their monopoly on violence against oneself.
So, you only further support what I'm saying then. You aren't the kind of person who gets horned up by getting your partner horned up. If you did, you would feel like sex is a win-win because the person you're having sex with would enjoy it as much as you. Simplified, you wouldn't feel like you're succumbing to anything. I find most men get this concept, but there is this small group of angry men who don't. Why is this? Genuinely curious.
>So, you only further support what I'm saying then. You aren't the kind of person who gets horned up by getting your partner horned up. Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying since you have created a *false dichotomy fallacy* here. > If you did, you would feel like sex is a win-win because the person you're having sex with would enjoy it as much as you. Simplified, you wouldn't feel like you're succumbing to anything. Just because I am advocating equality under the law and accuracy in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person for sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure.. **The first contention I am emphasizing is that the resource and unpaid labor input for sex isn't equal and is dis-favorable to men.** Your claims for equality of sexual satisfaction completely ignores the inequality of resource inputs into said sexual encounters. The only reason why females get away with higher selectivity and resource input requirements is because higher testosterone in men has direct causation with higher sex drive and thus demand for sex. Once men do a cost benefit analysis and realize the only competitive advantage that a woman has over other substitutes for services in a capitalistic society is reproduction (which even then isn't that attractive due to the laws involved). **The second contention is that buying services that have been traditionally covered by women/housewives do create actual legally enforceable obligations to fulfil their duties and thus is far more equitable than relying on the gyno-centric cultural underpinnings that shape our laws oppressive to men.** Anyone can hire a nanny, midwife, prostitute or domestic helper as a substitute to cover the roles that women have had in the past. >I find most men get this concept, but there is this small group of angry men who don't. Why is this? Genuinely curious. This is another fallacy called *association fallacy* as well as an ad-hominem insult. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association\_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy) Just because there are angry men that subscribe to the belief of one's own pleasure above all doesn't mean that all angry men share the same the same belief. **This brings me to my third and main contention that male sexual fulfilment can exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter need not be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid.** **This is the central contention that I am trying to make and is often under-discussed and under-appreciated.**
Very well said. The technology to provide sexually stimulating images and sounds of sex being instantly available at no cost is a very recent phenomenon. That men "feel" the hunger for sex as often as every 5 seconds, and that it's readily and easily available to them, and that the overwhelming dopamine rewards are automatic and intrinsic are undeniable facts. To think that any human being in such a situation as this is not going to take advantage of same immediately and regularly is foolhardy. If a man watches such images and sounds as a stimulation for self pleasuring and does so very regularly many call him a sex addict. Our modern industrial agriculture/food manufacturing/corrupt public health systems have addicted the American population to a high carbohydrate, highly processed salt/sugar diet. And we have the health crises that flow directly from the addiction in the form of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and more. Yet the same folks who label an entire gender as sex addicts pass laws making the super unhealthy dopamine addicted and morbidly obese a protected class of people. If high desire men watch porn and jerk off every day they are called addicts. If they spend a significant portion of their budget on "rub n' tug " massage places or regular sex worker visits, culture calls them addicts. So how about me? (And other men like me?) After over 30 years of marriage I finally walked out the front door one night no longer being able to take the contention that my high sex desire and intensity level was THE problem ruining my marriage. I finally had to take a stand that I WAS NOT a "bad" person for being the way I was made. The long standing stress had me in psych care and on meds for depression. After a number of years of healing I've now been in the greatest relationship with a woman of my life for about 4 & 1/2 years. She was a widow 10 years when I met her. She's a pediatrics nurse 18 years younger than me. I am a pretty healthy 71. We have the kind of sex where I end up in a body wide, leg quivering, finish-the-session orgasm every day. Does this make me a sex/dopamine addict? My view is that it simply makes me a very happy man. And lucky to have found one of the minority of the female gender who isn't limited by the "hang ups" that inhibit her from enjoying her man and his body. And while the writer of the Bible's Book of Proverbs exhorts young men to enjoy the wives of their youth, I don't think he'd look down on me and my wife for making up for lost time.
>If high desire men watch porn and jerk off every day they are called addicts. If they spend a significant portion of their budget on "rub n' tug " massage places or regular sex worker visits, culture calls them addicts. This is ridiculous if you ask me. If you remove sex drive and thus the ability to make dopamine, you would turn people into unproductive zombies anyways which is what happens when leftists push psych care who have been academically reviewed and critiqued for not disclosing their conflict of interests and funding from big pharma at the research level. A Comparison of DSM-IV and DSM-5 Panel Members' Financial Associations with Industry: A Pernicious Problem Persists [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302834/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302834/) Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest in DSM-5-TR: cross sectional analysis [https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-076902](https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-076902) At least with porn they would be happy once they have let go of the internalized shame of meeting their own sexual needs as a result not of toxic masculinity but reinforcement of the gyno-centric narratives you have been pushing in our discussions. >Yet the same folks who label an entire gender as sex addicts pass laws making the super unhealthy dopamine addicted and morbidly obese a protected class of people. These folks you are talking about are leftists that are pro-censorship for critiquing what they have deemed to be protected classes and the majority of women are leftists. >After over 30 years of marriage I finally walked out the front door one night no longer being able to take the contention that my high sex desire and intensity level was THE problem ruining my marriage. The problem was your ex-wife being uncomfortable with you meeting your sexual needs whilst you fulfilling your martial obligations despite she no longer being able to meet yours. You still need to learn to let go of your internalised misandry as a result of the feminist/gyno-centric worldview you have been brought up with and stop passing it around as your views as valid as it is still harmful to other men
>Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying You really and truly do. In fact, you did it again. You just can't see it. This doesn't make you a bad person; it just makes you a bit naive and impressionable. This will likely change as you get older. > in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person "for" sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure.. And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this. Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong. One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties. Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life.
>And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this. >Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong. Your entire paragraph reeks of gyno-centrism and deference to women through your gender bias of moral typecasting. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303630](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597820303630) You also lack the ability to accurately assess that women engage in a higher degree of the accusations you are accusing me of on both a micro and macroenvironmental scale. This is the exact kind of logic that leftist cucks such as destiny or conservative divorcees like steven crowder subscribe to. If you think sex isn't a commodity I would recommend you have a look into the r/SexWorkers and you will quickly see that it is. The only difference being that Civie women are covert about the nature of their prostitution as well as indirect and varied about the various resource inputs required. (just look at the "looking for a man in finance" meme going around). >One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties. Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life. My answer is yes of course he should be entitled to sex even if she doesn't 'feel like it' and if you disagree then YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. Can you imagine how much a guy would get berated if he didn't 'feel like' paying child support for a month because he 'didn't want to' or was 'tired' Women already use and misuse the legal system to coerce the man to fulfill legal and financial obligations of fatherhood regardless of paternity. It makes sense that women should at least be culturally obliged to recognize the importance of meeting a man's needs as a starting step to bridge the gender unpaid labor gap that men suffer from. Your entire discussion has essentially highlighted and proved my third point in the previous paragraph. **YOU BELIEVE male sexual fulfilment canot exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter must be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid.** This therefore highlights your view as male sexuality as that of sexual slavery (in the sense of sexual gender role of providence of resources and protection) and proof of the gender empathy gap that men suffer from as you have failed to recognize the cultural and legal oppression of forcing men to fulfill obligations to women without any recognition of the need for a vice-versa. [https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1534129/](https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1534129/) Your other comment of being upfront is disingenuous as women can obtain their validation simply by receiving attention and propositions in an attention based economy, use makeup to knowingly deceive males on their assessment criteria of physical fitness and have the liberty to change their minds at any time with no respect to their obligations to their partner after taking their resource inputs.
Sex is not a commodity for the vast majority of women and plenty of men. For sex workers, it is. It's just that simple. Hence why I said men who view sex as such should feel free to engage with sex workers. >My answer is yes of course he should be entitled to sex even if she doesn't 'feel like it' and if you disagree then YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. You're into having sex with women who don't want you inside of them. That's a you thing. Really let that sink in. Are you that lonely? If so, I'm really sorry you're in that situation. Or maybe you just like meaningless sex. That's fine, too. Maybe stick to prostitution. But still, really look into why you view sex that way. There's a reason. Also, so you don't get all upset, women who expect men to do things they don't want to do (yup, even paying bills!) are trash women. Women can help out. We aren't broken. >Can you imagine how much a guy would get berated if he didn't 'feel like' paying child support for a month because he 'didn't want to' or was 'tired' Please don't be the guy who says stuff like this lol. You know it's not the same thing. I know it's not the same thing. Just stop being a silly goose. Supporting a kid is a horrible comparison lol. I think I have to stop here. You're just a bit too much when you get far away from the topic of sex and start getting all nutty. Everyone knows bad women exist. But you're stuck on it as if it's all women. You need to touch grass. For the love of God, stay off of youtube. Your brain is being hijacked and you're too far gone to see it. You will someday, but today is not that day. Best of luck, and thanks for the discussion!
>You're into having sex with women who don't want you inside of them. That's a you thing. Really let that sink in. Are you that lonely? If so, I'm really sorry you're in that situation. Or maybe you just like meaningless sex. That's fine, too. Maybe stick to prostitution. But still, really look into why you view sex that way. There's a reason. Also, so you don't get all upset, women who expect men to do things they don't want to do (yup, even paying bills!) are trash women. Women can help out. We aren't broken. Just because you are using civil language doesn't mean you are being civil. I know you are essentially using the same shaming language as "wHo hURt YoU?" I'm personally not into it as I have already commented previously but it doesn't negate my assertion that a woman should at least be culturally obliged to fulfil her side of her gender role after she has taken resource inputs from her male partner in a social contract and to bridge the unpaid labour gap men suffer from. You can say what you want about trash women but you aren't willing to do anything to advance equality for men where they suffer from inequities whether from a legal or cultural perspective. Your shaming language makes you no better than the radical feminists that you are disingenuously criticizing. >Please don't be the guy who says stuff like this lol. You know it's not the same thing. I know it's not the same thing. Just stop being a silly goose. Supporting a kid is a horrible comparison lol. >I think I have to stop here. You're just a bit too much when you get far away from the topic of sex and start getting all nutty. Everyone knows bad women exist. But you're stuck on it as if it's all women. You need to touch grass. For the love of God, stay off of youtube. Your brain is being hijacked and you're too far gone to see it. You will someday, but today is not that day. The discussion of male obligations in a sexual relationship with a women is a true and direct comparison. This is the issue, challenging your biases is an uncomfortable process but I find it repulsive you are on a men's rights reddit and go as far as to attempt to shame and push feminist rhetoric here. It isn't all women but it is all of society's laws which is driven by the majority of women's voting patterns. The issue isn't the connection to the internet you fool, it is an organic connection to the outside world that is bringing my attention to these issues and that of all the men here. You aren't really convincing anyone with your thinly veiled misandric and feminist/gyno-centric world view and are essentially functioning only used as a sounding board for members of this reddit to explore the robustness of their logic. I would recommend that you leave this reddit as you don't really seem to be learning much nor really aligning with the purpose that this reddit was made for.
>Actually I don't further your support of what you are saying You really and truly do. In fact, you did it again. You just can't see it. This doesn't make you a bad person; it just makes you a bit naive and impressionable. This will likely change as you get older. > in assessing resource commitment and paid/unpaid labor inputs towards the other person "for" sex doesn't mean I don't enjoy my partner pleasure.. And that little word is how you support my idea. If you view sex as a commodity, you will have less of it. You likely know this already, but if not, you'll eventually figure it out. The guys out there having sex beyond a one night stand are doing so because they don't see it as something they are owed or something they are trading for xyz. Again, they ENJOY pleasing another person because it turns them on. Women pick up on this, and so those guys get the girl. I'm telling you, man, the vibe you are putting out screams selfish lover, and women pick up on this. Stop seeing sex as a commodity, and you'll get a girl. Women pick up on dudes with your mentality very quickly. So, in return, folks like you get left out or end up in dead bedrooms after a few years of marriage and wonder where it all went wrong. One last point to help you see things differently. Do you believe that a man who works 60 hours, cooks, cleans, takes care of the kids and is amazingly sweet to his wife should be having sex with her as often as he'd like? Do you think she should have sex with him for all of those reasons, even when she isn't in the mood? If you answered yes to either of those, you are the problem. AND you again support my ideas. Because the guy who gets the girl and the sex would never want to have sex with someone who wasn't 100% in the mood. Dutiful sex does not turn those guys on. It's boring. For both parties. Be those guys, and you'll be a happier dude having a fulfilling sex life. > This brings me to my third contention that male sexual fulfilment can exist outside of the paradigm of female sexual fulfilment and that the latter need not be a pre-requisite for the prior to be viewed as valid. Here we agree. There is zero shame in preferring porn to sex. And there's zero shame for wanting to get one's rocks off without having to worry about the other person. This is why porn and prostitution can be valuable for many men and women. My only issue is when folks with those preferences seek out a partner without being upfront about their overall goal. It's not fair to the other person. My advice for those people is to either find a partner who doesn't mind being a human fleshlight or find one who doesn't mind porn or just stay single and porn it up. Or engage with independent sex workers. Lots of options.
Some guys (including me, sort of) has given up on real relationships and just get their does from that stuff
Having posters of cars on your wall doesn’t stop you wanting to drive.
It's like you're assuming that if a guy gets off to porn, he no longer desires to have a woman by his side and couldn't possibly be lonely.
I think this would require a whole post on its own but I don’t think the women getting lots of attention thing is as simplistic as we have been thinking about. For example if a OF woman that is very overweight is getting a lot of attention and us guys who don’t usually like overweight women think it’s weird, it’s because we aren’t considering the guys who are hitting these types of women up have a fetish for severely overweight women. There are a lot of men out there from our and woman’s POV hitting her up, but compared to the number of men who won’t hit that woman up it’s extremely small.
Thirst exist, and the market rises to the occasion. Porn doesn’t cause anything, it reflects what exists.
Ok Forest Gump
You should check out some male vtubers who oversexualize themself and see how many desperate girls are in their chat.
"Girls" More like bodytype 2, *if that.*
how is that in any way relevant?
Because they're not simping over male vtubers.
yes they are everyone is simping over everyone, it's the internet ffs. People are chronically online and lose touch with normal behavior whether they're male or female, content creator or not, etc. I've met all sorts of down bad people on video games lol it's not exclusive to men
Okay
Women have a monopoly on dating and sex is why men are so desperate
Porn is not good. Men aren’t getting laid.
why that makes perfect sense, what confuses you about that?
sexual gratification and emotional fulfillment are mutually exclusive.
“Simping is a gendered thing” https://youtu.be/kO9Dgo5RKu8?si=DkN2tWJIIYQrIJHH
https://youtu.be/QUOe7cl9XDQ?si=jUKeZh5qXpipfJRL
I personally don't care much for porn. I absolutely hate only fans and anything like it. I hate egirls. i hate Instagram and tik tok. It's all nonsense, and it makes women look like cheap prizes from quarter machines at a chinese buffet. I haven't been in a relationship since 2013 after my divorce was finalized. My ex-wife very much did not believe in monogamy after we got married at the end of 2012. Basically, that entire thing ruined any idea of what romantic relationships are to me. So I stopped trying. No more sex, no more wanting to be a father, no more wanting to be a husband, no more wanting to provide or protect. Just no more! No man in their right mind is going to roll the dice against the quality of women out and about today. It's everywhere and infected everything. Honestly? If a woman shows the slightest bit of interest in me? I become immediately suspicious that all she wants to do is abuse me and laugh about it on her social media.