If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

"ALL/98% of women want to be dominated"

edited 2011-07-01 11:26:05 in General
We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
I have heard this stated so many times, and no one's ever presented any form of evidence for this, other than the fact that they get laid all of the time.
«13

Comments

  • When in Turkey, ROCK THE FUCK OUT
    wait what
  • edited 2011-07-01 11:28:13

    lol, prejudice

    lol, lies, damned lies, and statistics

  • Sample pool is biased, the bros who say this would (sub)consciously only go for easily dominated women on whom their dating tactics work, and present that as evidence.
  • edited 2011-07-01 11:30:21
    Dagnabbit, I forgot to mention "anecdotal evidence".
  • We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
    For the record, I usually hear this from PUA types and guys like this....

    so what IA said essentially
  • Are these the same people who think that women are significantly more monogamous than men?
  • edited 2011-07-01 11:34:57
    Tableflipper
    The title made me think of the statistics on rape fantasies.

    I don't know if people are talking about women just tending to like awesome guys with leader-ish personalities or how women supposedly like men that look like gorillas about to ravage them any second. It's probably the latter though.

    ^ Well that has been true for a while I suppose...mainly because the law didn't punish men for doing so as much, historically. And men tend to be praised for it while women receive degradation.
  • We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
    Are these the same people who think that women are significantly more monogamous than men?


    I remember seeing something about how it was natural for men to have multiple sexual partners, but not women, so yeah probably.
  • ☭Unstoppable Sex Goddess☭
    -raises hand-

    I want to be dominated. I don't mind.
  • We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
    *insert sandwich/kitchen joke here*
  • Myr, I belive evo psych can explain some things, but not all.

    What exactly do you hate about it?
  • We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
    There's nothing wrong with evolutionary psychology, it's just people who twist its results to reinforce sexist double standards like this who piss others off.
  • edited 2011-07-01 12:51:11
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    It uses a bunch of poorly thought-out pseudo-science to justify racism and misogyny.

    ^Yeah, that.
  • I never wanted it to be used like that...

    I just thoughg it explained certain human behaviors.
  • edited 2011-07-01 12:52:01
    Diet NEET
    He doesn't hate it, bro. If you read the bingo card closely, it points out that the person it lampoons understands nothing of evopsych at all.
  • ☭Unstoppable Sex Goddess☭
    Women are stupid.

    Men want sex.
  • MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    ^Both of these are true and can have their first words interchanged.
  • ☭Unstoppable Sex Goddess☭
    Women are sex?

    Men want stupid?
  • I suppose a lot of men do want stupid.
  • When in Turkey, ROCK THE FUCK OUT
  • edited 2011-07-01 14:13:21
    Loser
    Malkavian,
    It uses a bunch of poorly thought-out pseudo-science to justify racism and misogyny.

    Yep, that is pretty much my view on the matter too. Then again, my first experience with that stuff comes from Men And Marriage, a book I did not care for given that it has passages like this in it:

       The ideology of the sexual liberationists sees society as a male-dominated construct that exploits women for the convenience of men. In evidence, they cite men's greater earning power, as if economic productivity were a measure of social control rather than of social service. But it is female power, organic and constitutional, that is real--holding sway over the deepest levels of consciousness, sources of happiness, and processes of social survival. Male dominance in the marketplace, on the other hand, is a social artifice maintained not for the dubious benefits it confers on men but for the indispensable benefits it offers the society: inducing men to support rather than disrupt it. Conventional male power, in fact, might be considered more the ideological myth. It is designed to induce the majority of men to accept a bondage to the machine and the marketplace, to a large extent to the service of women and in the interests of civilization.

  • «What exactly do you hate about it?»
    Mostly the fact that it seems to be used to justify things that aren't true; it's used to prove the equivalent of «Humans have wings in order to better escape predators».
  • edited 2011-07-01 21:25:52
    I can kinda see where this is coming from. No, I don't agree with it at all, but I can see where it is coming from.

    The majority (not all, not 98%, just more than 50%) of women are sexually submissive. Not necessarily exclusively, though, most people have the potential to switch.

    And there are very few women who want to be the dominant one in every scenario in their lives, but there are also very few men who want to be the dominant one in every scenario in their lives. Mostly, people are all dominant in some scenarios, and submissive in others.

    HumansAreSwitches :P

    P.S. It's important to distinguish between romantic/sexual dominance and social dominance, and between consensual dominance and non-consensual dominance. I'd wager that the majority of women are open to the former. However, I don't see more women than men wanting to be socially dominated, nor do I think that any psychologically healthy individual wants to be dominated non-consensually.
  • Eh, it's really stretching it to even say a majority of women are submissive.

    I am pretty sure a majority of the women who are interested in BDSM are submissive, but that doesn't mean a majority of all women are submissive. Or, rather, a majority of women who are interested in BDSM like to be on bottom in any sense; once you split it out into the subcategories none of the six parts of BDSM is a majority, obviously. Maybe a plurality, but even that I'm not sure.
  • Glaives are better.

    All I know is that my being a sweet, attentive nice guy who is respectful of women's feelings has got me approximately zero amounts of pussy. Bitches like guys who are leaders and have good tribe-building skills. I'm going to test this theory by wearing copious amounts of leopard skin when I go back to college in August.

    Inb4 anecdotal evidence. I used anecdotal evidence in an argument and won once.

  • edited 2011-07-27 13:59:07
    Mr. The Edge goes to Washington

    I once dated a girl who was very submission. She did anything I wanted but rarely had an opinion about where we should eat, what we should watch, and such. Her lacking of an opinion annoyed the crap out of me. She was crazy anyway.


    My wife, however, is only submissive in the bedroom and not at all in our everyday life. Just the way I like it.

  • Glaives are better.

    Yeah, having a puppet for a girlfriend would be boring.

    Unless said puppet was Miss Piggy. Then things would get pretty wacky.

  • I'm always suspicious of former nice guys who claim it doesn't work, as if that's some sort of reason to not be nice.

    If you abandoned being nice because it didn't get you any pussy, were you ever really a nice guy?
  • Glaives are better.
    I was already a nice guy. I'll still be a nice guy. But I was spineless before. No one respects that.
Sign In or Register to comment.