The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
What's the evolutionary reason for men liking sex way more than women?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:02 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund Has science determined this? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815584) |
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:04 PM Author: Sienna really tough guy black woman You mean pussy at all? It's the strongest evidence that evolution is bullshit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815594) |
 |
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:04 PM Author: Irradiated Duck-like Parlour (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815596) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 6:18 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market It isn't complete bullshit. There are plenty of concepts in evolutionary theory that are tracking real phenomena. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816250) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:07 PM Author: ebony messiness the evo bio people posit that sex is fun for men and can be nearly cost-free. for women, sex can be fun but pregnancy is an enormous commitment and can even mean death. so women are supposed to be way pickier than men and presumably that difference translates into the pleasure side of the equation as well. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815605) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 11:47 PM Author: Chrome idiot alpha (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816007) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:37 AM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness exactly. lots of animals behave this way.
men are incentivized to have sex as frequently and with as many partners as possible. women are incentivized to mate with the most fit male they can. women also likely experience more intense orgasms to promote pair bonding. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:37 AM Author: mustard gaping field humans seem to be quite good at breeding with unfit retards (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816658) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:46 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market yeah thats why the concept of "fitness" is evolutionary theory is kind of retarded folk science. Lewontin wrote a lot about this. Tons of unfit retards "survive" and "mate", and tons of what you would think would be peak fitness die early before getting a chance to. Defining "fitness" as whatever survives ends up being tautological. a lot of evolutionary theory is extremely low iq, but many of the concepts are reasonable estimations and easy to teach so they survive even as we get "harder" fields with more computational genetics and statistical formalism (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816678) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:00 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness of course it's tautological, evolitonary fitness refers to the liklihood of passing on your genome. its literally the same thing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816700) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:04 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market A tautology cannot explain its own instances. "Fit organisms reproduce more" tells you nothing about why this organism reproduced more than that one. For that you need a mechanism and the moment you supply one you've left fitness language behind. Fitness is then either a label you apply after the fact or a placeholder for the real explanation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816706) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:49 PM Author: Concupiscible sick dilemma friendly grandma Herbert Spencer posited that the most "tautologically complete" organisms would survive and reproduce. Being able to withstand philosopical contradiction hardens the genes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817249) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:58 AM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness if they survive to sexual maturity they are fit.
you're conflating evolutionary fitness with what you would consider an ideal human.
spics producing clutches of spiclings that survive to produce their own spiclings are fitter than the 140iq power couple doing ivf in their 40s to shit out a single autist. large mammal populations are frequently the highest risk populations, but rodents are everywhere. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:01 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market That defense only works by completely evacuating fitness of explanatory content. If fitness just means "whoever reproduced, reproduced more," then you cannot use fitness to explain why anyone reproduced. You've redescribed the outcome in fitness language and called it an explanation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816701) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:09 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness idk wym with "explanatory content"
fitness in the context of evolution means the ability to successfully produce offspring that survive to sexual maturity. being smarter, bigger, stronger is only "fitter" if those things lead to a higher chance of reproduction.
people evolved to be smarter in harsher climates because being clever was more likely survive to produce children. but take those "fitter" people and put them somewhere where the bottleneck is outcompeting other men, and they are less fit than dindus. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:17 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market Right, that's the point. Fitness is relational and context dependent, which means it can't be a property an organism has, but rather it's more like a retroactive summary of how an organism to environment interaction resolved. The explanation lives in the specific mechanisms--thermoregulation, caloric efficiency, higher cognition, whatever--not in the fitness label those mechanisms happen to earn in that context. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816735) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:24 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness that's all true but i still dont understand why you have a problem with it. yes, fitness is the totality of many different qualities. yes, it's context dependent, which is why people and animals vary dramatically based on conditions. i don't see how that makes the word less useful or illogical. what would you use in place of "evolutionary fitness" to describe what we're talking about? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816743) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:36 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market I think as a bookeeping term or aggregate label it's fine. I just think it's overused especially in narrative heavy evolutionary theory and can often get thrown around as a causal explanation for the thing that's getting measured in a way that's misleading (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816774) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:46 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness thats fair but you didn't think up an alternative.
language is always going to be imprecise, especially when being understandable is more important. lots of generally true things arent strictly true across the board, but we also want to explain how rockets, biology, etc. works without explaining with the utmost scholarly precision.
we're talking about describing a natural phenomenon. any flaws in how we describe it doesn't change that it is what it is. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:03 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market The alternative is just to say the thing more directly. If we mean outcome, say differential reproductive success. If we mean cause, say the mechanism.
My point isn't really that the word is totally useless, or that the phenomenon is fake. It's that “fitness” often functions as a pseudo-explanation where people tend to slide between fitness as an outcome (who left more descendants), fitness as propensity, and fitness as a cause (reason one lineage outcompeted another). That is why the tautology point even matters, because if “the fitter reproduced more” just means “the ones that reproduced more reproduced more,” then it really doesn't mean shit |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:51 PM Author: Concupiscible sick dilemma friendly grandma dyslexic Bumble date coming over for "causal sex" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817252) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:08 PM Author: dead filthy whorehouse codepig Sperm is dirt cheap. billions a day, zero cost to spray and pray. women's eggs + 9 months of pregnancy + years of raising the babydood a massive investment. Evolution slapped max horniness on males so we'd bang everything that moves and rack up offspring variance (one Chad floods the gene pool, betas die trying), per Bateman's principle and parental investment theory. Women evolved to be picky hypergamous gatekeepers to avoid getting stuck with shit genes or lone wolf cub-rearing in the wild. That's why dudes think about fucking 24/7, chase variety, and have way higher drive while roasties need Chad + feels. Nature doesn't do equality, faggot.
|
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:22 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market CR. What's funny is that Bateman's original fruitfly experiments came under fire a decade ago, apparently he kind of botched the experiment design but the theoretical logic was so air-tight that it survived poor design and turned out to be even stronger than originally assumed. And Triver's extension is where it really gets teeth because it generalizes the principle away from gamete size specifically to any asymmetry in investment, which means it applies to species with male parental care, sex-role reversed species like seahorses and jacanas, and predicts the direction of reversal correctly every time (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815652) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:23 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund Good post until you insulted me for no reason at the end (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815655) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 11:48 PM Author: Chrome idiot alpha doesn't the hypergamous drive just end up with single moms raising kids without a father, thus putting their offspring at risk? or the offspring are now robust enough to handle it given they have chadly genes? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816010) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 6:15 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market No because the actual biological mechanism is designed to ensure that chads semen fertilizes the egg and melvin doesn't know and raises it as his (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816248) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 7:31 AM Author: Alcoholic Opaque Masturbator Kitchen “designed?” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816294) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:53 PM Author: Concupiscible sick dilemma friendly grandma evolutionarily Curated (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817254) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 7:37 AM Author: comical lemon university This is not correct and fundamental flaw in the theory (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816298) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 7:42 AM Author: Alcoholic Opaque Masturbator Kitchen Nah it tracks I just don’t like the “design” terminology. Roissy’s teachings touch on this. It becomes more salient in wartime where rapes are rampant.
Losers over emphasize this though bc they don’t see the full picture, they just see themselves not getting laid. Anything in the monogamy era, Women get shamed for being sluts iirc. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:22 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market RE your distaste for the "design" framing: IMHO this more of a terminological reflex than a philosophical objection. "Design" doesn't have to imply a sculptor or telos. This is actually Simon's point in The Sciences of the Artificial that design is what happens when a system selects from possibility space under constraint. TBH though I didn't really mean to write it like that, and I understand the reaction.
Agree with the rest of your point. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:37 AM Author: Chrome idiot alpha now I'll argue the other side. It's been a long time since humanity was so violent that single mother's child was at risk of instant death. I understand all the stuff about higher risk of sexual abuse, and danger growing up in a single parent household. But many single mothers figure it out. And for this pattern to continue maybe it means that Chadly genes confer an evolutionary advantage that is greater than that of the "nurture" provided by Melvin parenting vs an absence? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816440) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:10 PM Author: bronze patrolman i think it's evolutionarily inevitable once giving birth in only one sex evolves
the sex that doesn't give birth is always going to be selected for trying to fuck and impregnate as much as possible |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:15 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market Male sexuality sits closer to the "wanting-dominant" architecture. For comparison addicts in late-stage addiction often show maximum wanting, minimum liking. The seeking machinery has been hijacked completely away from the pleasure machinery. The rat presses the lever until it dies not because pressing the lever feels good anymore but because the wanting circuit has been decoupled from the feedback that would normally terminate it. Women could enjoy the actual act more and just not seek it out, where men are more like the rats pressing the lever. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815637) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:17 PM Author: Irradiated Duck-like Parlour rats pressing the lever tp (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815639) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:23 AM Author: stirring bisexual coldplay fan location (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816635) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:39 AM Author: godawful temple depressive (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816660) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:16 PM Author: black low-t electric furnace Is this a serious question? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815638) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 8:24 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund It's been a disaster since online dating was invented now ugly fat hoes think they are models (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815656) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 10:14 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815868) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 10:17 PM Author: Bateful metal idea he suggested (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49815878) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 11:51 PM Author: coiffed affirmative action Women fucking love sex, they literally have it on the sly with total strangers and just never tell anyone. If the women you date "don't like sex", well, (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816016) |
|
Date: April 13th, 2026 11:54 PM Author: flatulent fluffy area 🤯 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816022) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:04 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market the women I date don't appear to like sex so far from all of the evidence I have experienced first hand. But I am patiently awaiting update on this. from the corner of the bedroom of course. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816039) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:09 AM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund I'm a virgin so far but this is definitely not true (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816047) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:10 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816049) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:16 AM Author: Bateful metal idea he suggested https://incels.wiki/images/6/6c/Redpillcomics44.jpg (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816057) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 7:35 AM Author: bull headed knife state How could you not be horny all the time when you are forced to look at and hold a vascular aesthetic af COCK every time you piss? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816296) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:25 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816637) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 10:54 PM Author: Bearded Stage Turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49818282) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:28 AM Author: godawful temple depressive possibly the most deranged op I have ever seen
you people should be in prison |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:09 PM Author: racy submissive pervert station (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49818311) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:30 AM Author: diverse psychic base They just don't like sex with you. Women want sex all the time, just not with you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816426) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:32 AM Author: Passionate place of business we don't
we have more of a biological urge to nut, but women get far more out of sex itself than men |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:34 AM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness we still definitely want it more frequently. i agree with what you're saying but its hard to say we like it less when we want it more frequently. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816655) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:42 AM Author: bronze patrolman no they don't
if this was true, women would seek out sex more than men. but they don't. the reverse is overwhelmingly true
this reddit meme will never die for whatever reason |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:45 AM Author: godawful temple depressive not a 'reddit meme' it is emphatically true & accurate and has been well known since the Greeeks. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tiresias |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:50 AM Author: bronze patrolman it's completely false and part of Respecting Women is recognizing that they get way less out of sex than we do and That's Okay (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816682) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:54 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market there is no way men get more out of it that's absurd. men get more out of masturbation for sure, men can have a quick intense orgasm that is great that women don't really have an analog for. but women having actual sex is something else, its not even fair how much they enjoy it there aren't really any experiences I have seen a man have that seem like they would compare. Like a woman can sit there for hours getting railed, sometimes by multiple men in a row and basically be having intense screaming pleasure the entire time its seriously insane. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816689) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:58 AM Author: bronze patrolman nope
if this was true, women would seek out sex more than men
they don't
they don't enjoy sex as much as us. obviously. how could this possibly be any more obvious from observing actual male and female sexual behavior
why are you guys so desperate to believe this obvious fiction |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:59 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market yfwgi (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816697) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:09 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816713) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:52 AM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness anyone that has seen a woman orgasm knows that its a more intense and pleasurable experience than a male orgasm.
the desire or even compulsion to fuck isnt 100% correlated with how pleasurable it is. mens libidos can vary dramatically throughout their lives, but cumming always feels the same, so it's not even true that men's desire to cum is 1:1 with how pleasurable their orgasms are. horny guys will bust into hambeasts and the experience isn't pleasurable at all, but we are compelled to bust into the best fertile puss we can. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:56 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market yeah I agree with this 100%. male orgasms are more like a nicotine addiction, where you get cheap quick easy pleasure and the desire to constantly redo it. where female sexual pleasure is more like heroin. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816690) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:57 AM Author: bronze patrolman nope
the male orgasm is obviously more subjectively pleasurable. it's why men seek out sex way more than women do. it's not any more complicated than this. there is no way to lawyer your way out of this blatantly obvious self-evident logical truth
this reddit meme will never ever fucking die. if i had a dollar for every time i witnessed some irl male redditor triumphantly declaring that "the female orgasm is WAY more intense and pleasurable than the male orgasm!" i'd have like 247 dollars |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:58 AM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market lol shutup you are just running some lame shtick where you pretend to be a clueless naive millennial white male (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816695) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:05 PM Author: bronze patrolman i do not understand why so many men so desperately want to believe this goofy ass nonsense
like i want to just call you guys "simps" but i think that's uncharitable and i also think that there genuinely is something else going on other than just being simps who prefer to imagine women as they wish they were, rather than how they actually are
it probably has something to do with this category of men really, really wanting to believe that they are capable of giving women the same amount of sexual pleasure that women are capable of giving them. so yeah i guess that really is just simping after all. go figure |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:08 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market no because I enjoy watching other men give women large amounts of sexual pleasure too (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816711) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:29 PM Author: godawful temple depressive this assumes there is only one relevant input (amount the gender enjoys the actual physical moment of orgasm) which leads to one relevant output (sex-seeking behavior). the world is more complex than this
I obviously think the simp framing is absurd on numerous levels but if anything the "simp" take would be to say "oh women are so wonderful and desirable, that's why men enjoy having sex with women so much. whereas men are so awful, which is why women don't enjoy sex"
|
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:42 PM Author: bronze patrolman those actually are the only relevant inputs and outputs though
humans are animals. if we were talking about any other animal, you would never claim something so ridiculous as "the animals are having sex for a reason other than the physical sensation of orgasm"
animals have sex because it feels good. they don't even know that sex leads to offspring. humans aren't any different. our females ovulate and when they ovulate their brains release a bunch of hormones that make them desire and enjoy sex way way more than they normally do. so they drastically increase their efforts to seek out sex during that period of time
look, i'm not denying that women sometimes have sex with men for reasons other than the pleasure of sexual release. sometimes they just want to feel close to us and feel emotional warmth. sometimes they're being straight up transactional. but these are separate things from enjoying orgasm. notice that the above claim from turboredditor poasters is specifically that women experience a more pleasurable orgasm than men. this is obviously completely bogus nonsense |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:03 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness then explain why male libido varies despite the pleasurableness of orgasms being the same? why repeat yourself over three paragraphs and dodge this? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816702) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:09 PM Author: bronze patrolman "explain why there is variance in [any trait] at the individual level"
gee whiz i dunno man maybe take a bio 101 course from chat gpt dot com or something
can you explain to me why some men are taller or shorter than other men, but also why men are on average taller than women?
this is why we just slur you with "simp" instead of engaging with you btw |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:13 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness you said if women had more pleasure from sex they'd have a higher libido, i.e. you believe that sexual pleasure and libido must be 1:1. however that isn't even true if we just look at men. it's empirically untrue that sexual desire is completely correlated with pleasure, because otherwise libidio would be static so long as a person can achieve orgasm, but it's not. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816722) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:20 PM Author: bronze patrolman it *is* true for men. relative sexual desire *is* completely correlated with relative pleasure (reward from brain)
this is true for Everything. not just sex. jews receive a larger relative reward from their brain for getting money, compared to white gentiles. it's why they're relatively way more obsessed with money than we are
all human behavior can be modeled and explained with revealed preferences. denying the truth of revealed preferences is something that dishonest, coping people do who are trying to deceive themselves and/or others |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:27 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market This is empirically false. See work on Berridge's dissociation between wanting and liking which is probably the most important result in reward neuroscience for this exact question. Nicotine is the canonical example because it's primarily a "wanting" drug with weak "liking" activation, which is why addicted smokers report low subjective pleasure but extremely high craving. The reward is almost entirely motivational. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816754) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:34 PM Author: bronze patrolman i'm familiar. yes, it's possible for the brain to become "hijacked" in this way, resulting in these two things diverging
that's not what is happening with sex and sexual desire in humans (or any other life form) except in unusual and pathological cases. we are talking about General Human Behavior And Preferences, On Average
i'm surprised nobody itt has "pointed out" the other "debunking" of "some women enjoy sex more than some men." which is also true. but again - we're talking about General Human Behavior And Preferences, On Average |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:42 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market No because the dissociation exists because the systems are distinct. Claiming the nicotine example is "just hijacking not normal function" is kind of like saying "color blindness is just a pathological edge case that tells us nothing about normal color vision." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816790) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:40 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness so isn't it possible then women experience more physical pleasure from sex but their rewards centers are triggered as much when sex is initiated and after it's over?
wouldn't it make sense that a woman who has an evolutionary impetus to be highly selective in mates would have negative feelings when she gives it up to a subpar mate or if the mate leaves right after, but that her pleasure during the act is much higher during the act to incentive pair bonding, whereas men did not evolve the same way, but are wired more to have frequent orgasms because we have an impetus to mate as much as possible?
regardless of the speculation on this is, i think its undeniable that it do be this was. men want sex more often, and women clearly have more intense orgasms than men. we can argue about why we're like this but i can't see how you can argue it's not the case. do you think women are all just faking whole body convulsive orgasms? |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:11 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund They aren't the same imo. A huge powerful load blasted into a female pussy feels way better than a watery cialis load dribbling onto a paper towel (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816720) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:17 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness by "always feel the same" i mean on average, of course some are better than others. but that usually depends on how often you've cum, how attractive you find your partner, etc.
however, when men are most fertile and have high t they'd rather have a limp dick watery bust into a hambeast than gooning at home and having a better orgasm, which goes to show that the pleasure of the orgasm isn't the only thing matters in terms of libido. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 2:16 PM Author: Passionate place of business not wading into this slopthread wasteland but the simple fact is if you've seen and felt a woman have a crazy orgasm(s) first hand you know there is a level to their sexual pleasure that men truly cannot comprehend (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817048) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 2:19 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness yeah this is another example of autists using flawed rationalizations to deny an empirical fact. idk why i get sucked into this shit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817052) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 2:23 PM Author: bronze patrolman what is "autistic" is insisting - despite literally all evidence suggesting the exact opposite - that women experience more pleasure during orgasm than men do
this is, unironically, one of the most "autistic" things that a human being could insist on being true. something so bizarre, so obviously contrary to directly observable reality, that it could only ever occur to someone who is completely disconnected from the real world, lost in abstractions
literally the definition of "autism" |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 2:32 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness "literally" all evidence! except the stuff you ignore, like women visibly experience more intense pleasure than men during orgasm.
"literally" the definition of autism!
have you considered that you're a person who uses literally incorrectly for emphasis like a midwit, and that maybe you're just kinda dumb and that's why everyone itt disagrees with you? |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 2:48 PM Author: bronze patrolman it really is a simp ego thing for you guys, huh lol
you really, really want to believe that you, personally, are giving women even more pleasure from sex than you get as a man from sex. i think that really is all that's going on with you guys
hey bro, i can't stop you from believing made up cope that makes you feel better. you're the same as the johns who believe that the strippers and prostitutes really do love them and really are having enjoyable orgasms from having sex with them. you're Him. congratulations. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:44 PM Author: Passionate place of business you have a really bizarre "simp complex" and try to ascribe everything to that
I actually find it infuriating and cosmically unfair that women are more capable of taking or leaving sex (ie have less of a biological imperative to coom) but are capable of getting far more pleasure out of it. It's fucking bullshit. But it's just an indisputable fact of life if you've seen and felt a woman go nuts while getting boned. They are simply capable of achieving a higher plane of sensation feeling |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:49 PM Author: bronze patrolman yeah mannnnn, women are like, totally having better orgasms than us, duuuude. that's why they're like, super loud and moaning and shit, oh my god broooo
bro did you know that women can have MULTIPLE ORGASMS holy shit brooo *hits bong*
bro it's so unfair that women are like, enjoying sex waaaay more than us duuude, wowwww, i wish i was a woman, i'd like, have sex all the time brooo because it would be sooo great haha
there are men who live their entire lives in this cognitive frame btw |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:47 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market yeahhhh mannnn, women are like, totally just faking all the pleasure and orgasms they get from sex, all of them conspiring together to do it and doing such a good job at faking liking it all to like make mens egos feel better about the fact they dont enjoy it at all, holy shit brooo *hits bong* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817532) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 3:52 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness if i was a virgin or someone that never gave a woman an orgasm that would have no impact on the truth of what i said. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817253) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 4:58 PM Author: fiercely-loyal gunner The truth is that women are performative, and make exaggerated noises and putting on a whole act. Kind of how they do with everything. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817397) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:05 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817409) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:11 PM Author: provocative half-breed twinkling uncleanness sure, but theyre performing something that does occur. unless you think its a coordinated global conspiracy amongst women to fake something that doesnt exist. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817423) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:13 PM Author: bronze patrolman No way man women aren’t like that
They’re always Genuine. Especially when it comes to sexual matters. That’s when women are the most trustworthy and when we can most take them at face value |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:53 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market You are trying to take the example of not being able to take women at face value and apply it to a very different example of female orgasms and obvious signs of pleasure during sex. you are seriously low iq if you can't tell the difference between someone acting and someone genuinely having an intense physical experience. has nothing to do with taking things someone says at face value. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817552) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 9:06 PM Author: fiercely-loyal gunner Hmmm, checks out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49818043) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:31 PM Author: Stimulating Sneaky Criminal Dysfunction Simplest one word answer ever: babies.
Jfc xo. |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 12:46 PM Author: puce maniacal rigor op, how did you get an xo account? do your parents know you post here? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49816805) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 4:14 PM Author: Irradiated Duck-like Parlour I just wanted to say that I've really liked it here ITT (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817295) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:05 PM Author: autistic exhilarant hall trust fund (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817410) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 5:14 PM Author: Concupiscible sick dilemma friendly grandma (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49817429) |
|
Date: April 14th, 2026 11:05 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49818305) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2026 2:00 PM Author: Beady-eyed arrogant market (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5856803&forum_id=2#49819539) |