Sexual desire seems to be a curse for men

[Rev. Rye]

That is a very disturbing post.

Boru

Maybe browsing r/inceltear has desensitised me, but as far as incel rants go, this isn't that disturbing.

I mean, there's a lot of incel shit in that little essay, but when you see the real shit routinely covering absurd levels of misogyny, blatant rape apology, openly advocating violence against women, pedophilia, and hardcore biological determinism, this doesn't seem to be all that bad. Not that good, just not at "very disturbing" levels.

[Macoleco]

I view it a bit like a game, some people are on tutorial mode and some people are playing Doom, on the highest difficulty with no cheats only using the knuckleduster.

Its a dog eat dog World and after all the workplace cheating I've seen going on with my own eyes I've become skeptical of the value in official relationships and marriage.

I currently have children with a woman I like and I don't cheat or pursue other women.
When I watch social media I see videos on how men should act, dress, live, down to the right amount of eye contact to give women. It makes me glad I'm not involved in all that anymore.

I'm not innocent though, I've only calmed down after spending over a decade pursuing anything that moved on any kind of social website or app I could find.

If you read about the upper classes in different societies, sexual monogamy was not always required. Usually for men, and often for women, there were unwritten customs about how you could have an active sex life outside of marriage. 

Generally the idea was that marriage was an arrangement for the good of the family line and for society -- not the individual. Once the couple had done its duty and produced an heir and a spare, different sexual rules came into play. So for example in upper-class Vienna until the War, both men and women frequently took lovers. The rules were that the lovers had to be from your same social class -- no open fooling around with the gardener. And the side relationships were expected to be somewhat devoted; too much switching around would make you seem unserious. 

In Italy it was normal for a married woman to form a semi-permanent relationship with a paramour. He acted as her social support and guide as well as lover, and as long as it followed the unwritten rules it was accepted in society. Husbands wouldn't complain because they were likely acting as paramour for some other lady. Again, the paramour had to be of the same social level, or occasionally a younger man who seemed to have a promising career. For example, if the lady's husband was a general in the army, the lady might select one of her husband's lieutenants or adjutants. Not a common soldier, though. This was accepted and the only trouble-makers were people like Byron or Casanova who tried to be the third unofficial lover, offering sex but no social standing. 

Japan had similar arrangements. Often of course the men were freer than the women, since making sure that the children were legitimate was important for inheritance reasons. But unofficial half-siblings were not unheard of. 

It would be interesting to hear about how the lower classes handled these things, but they tended not to record their lives in writing as much. 

Anyway, it appears you're right that lifelong monogamy is a difficult thing to demand, and different societies have found ways to accommodate this.

Indeed through times the concept of love, marriage, and monogamy/polygamy have changed through times. If I am not mistaken the concept of romantic love nowadays is the medieval one.

I think that the emotion has always been the same for all of humanity, but depending on the concept you have of it, you may act in different manners. Love is a topic that is never exhausted

[Ranjr]

That is a very disturbing post.

Boru

Maybe browsing r/inceltear has desensitised me, but as far as incel rants go, this isn't that disturbing.

I mean, there's a lot of incel shit in that little essay, but when you see the real shit routinely covering absurd levels of misogyny, blatant rape apology, openly advocating violence against women, pedophilia, and hardcore biological determinism, this doesn't seem to be all that bad. Not that good, just not at "very disturbing" levels.

Showing the disturbing bar has been raised makes the previous disturbing bar no less disturbing.

[Belacqua]

Indeed through times the concept of love, marriage, and monogamy/polygamy have changed through times. If I am not mistaken the concept of romantic love nowadays is the medieval one.

I think that the emotion has always been the same for all of humanity, but depending on the concept you have of it, you may act in different manners. Love is a topic that is never exhausted

This topic sort of overlaps with another recent thread -- the one about social constructs. Surely attraction between people is built-in, but beyond that everything about marriage, promised monogamy, etc., depends on social custom.

The more I think about it, the more I think that this may be a case where social norms correct and improve biological imperatives. If it's true that men are hard-wired to chase different women, it is nonetheless true that we benefit more in the long run from a deep, long-term commitment. The intentional, active, sometimes difficult effort of keeping one's promise of togetherness has benefits that run deeper than the evolutionary advantage of making as many random babies as possible. 

It is to my advantage not to obey what my animal nature wants.

[Fake Messiah]

That is a very disturbing post.

Boru

Maybe browsing r/inceltear has desensitised me, but as far as incel rants go, this isn't that disturbing.

I mean, there's a lot of incel shit in that little essay, but when you see the real shit routinely covering absurd levels of misogyny, blatant rape apology, openly advocating violence against women, pedophilia, and hardcore biological determinism, this doesn't seem to be all that bad. Not that good, just not at "very disturbing" levels.

Still, you can not deny that it is eerily reminiscent of this video





All that is missing in the OP are physical threats.

[Rev. Rye]

This is closer to early stage "Redpilled" than the sort of "Blackpill" shit that tends to lead to incels going full Elliot. He seems to have a point about there being a lot of sexually frustrated men, but the fundamental problem he seems to have (besides placing getting his dick wet as a high priority) is that he focuses so much on the men's pain that he doesn't stop to consider that the reason women might not be into less attractive men might not be because they're shallow Stacies holding out for Chad, but for a variety of other reasons (like being afraid of sexual violence, or the less attractive men not being able to sell themselves as all that good of a catch for them.)

Or, for fuck's sake, focusing so much on how women are manipulative that he fails to notice that men can be just as manipulative to women. Why do you think those "Chads" who treat their girls like shit keep a hold of them? It's not because they see a hot guy and don't care about anything else. It's not because they're hybristophiles, either. It's because, odds are, those men have manipulated their way into these women's lives. Manipulation isn't a female thing. It's a human thing.

[Fake Messiah]

The problem with Elliot is that there were no doubt women that wanted to have sex with him but he didn't want to have sex with them because he thought he was too good for them, he didn't even notice them. And I have no doubts that the case is the same with Moleco. There are probably women that want to have sex with him but he thinks that they are not attractive enough, and yet he whines about how he is sexually frustrated.

Well, Moleco welcome to the world of grownups. You can either swallow your stupid pride and have sex with women that you deem are not worthy of you, or shut the fuck up and be sexually frustrated.

[GrandizerII]

Based on personal experience and observation, it is quite easy to notice that men are on the constant pursue of women, mainly with the objective of having sex with them. The desire for a relationship may depend on several factors, such as falling in love with her, which can happen at first sight or after some time of friendship, or after certain age at which company is more desirable than lust. 

Nonetheless, for young men, such scenario of having a strong sexual desire, and not being able to easily satiate it, albeit temporaly, creates feelings of frustration, and even anger and resentment, which unfortunately have to be endured. And thus, men enter a vicious cycle, which makes them waste resources, time, and forces them to act into sometimes awkward and uncomfortable social situations, such as approaching women, which may lead into unfavorable situations. 

The option of prostitution is always available, which can be a curse in itself. Most men want to be desired the same way they desire women. Unfortunately nature decided to create women in a different a fashion. Prostitution has many shortcomings, like the possibility of being scammed or STD, the emptiness which one may feel after the act, or not finding a woman attractive enough. Using this service frequency can also become very expensive. 

Only few men are lucky enough to sleep with either highly attractive women, be it due to their looks, social circle, socio-economic status, etc., or with a woman they deem worthy of a relationship and capable of good sex. Now, these both scenarios do not satiate the desire of men permanently, but on a regular basis it keeps him satisfied, and the feelings of resentment and frustration disappear.  Still, the desire for different women will probably remain, although not as strong, as before.

Women know of such fact, either based on observation, experience, or instinct. And will use it as a weapon against man, mainly manipulation. Like the donkey that cases the carrot, man chases the woman who, might or might not, give him sex, which, will unlikely, fully please him, keeping him into the vicious cycle.

There is no solution to this dilemma, only ways to cope and keep the desire under control. Nonetheless, most men will still chase women, since the idea of putting one's sexuality aside is disagreeable. Time is limited, specially youth, and thus having as much sex as possible while feasible is something most men can not simply ignore, again, forcing them into this vicious cycle. 

Only time can end lust, in the fashion only death can end life.

Ok, how about no more reading pop psychology articles written by PUAs and Jordan Peterson-like figures, and working on adjusting your perspective regarding women instead.

Fact is women are not some monolithic group of strange sexy creatures that are hard to crack and who only go for a select few lucky men. They are nothing more than human beings just like you, each different from another, each with their own looks, personality, disorders, desires, needs, goals, pursuits, interests, virtues, and insecurities. Not to mention preferences. Some (even many) women will not go for a guy like you, but I'm willing to bet there are women who will want to give you a go, and partly because (just like you), they may be desperate for love/sex, and not getting any (surprise, surprise). Maybe give these women a look out, and stop overlooking them in favour of women who want nothing to do with you.

[Macoleco]

Indeed through times the concept of love, marriage, and monogamy/polygamy have changed through times. If I am not mistaken the concept of romantic love nowadays is the medieval one.

I think that the emotion has always been the same for all of humanity, but depending on the concept you have of it, you may act in different manners. Love is a topic that is never exhausted

This topic sort of overlaps with another recent thread -- the one about social constructs. Surely attraction between people is built-in, but beyond that everything about marriage, promised monogamy, etc., depends on social custom.

The more I think about it, the more I think that this may be a case where social norms correct and improve biological imperatives. If it's true that men are hard-wired to chase different women, it is nonetheless true that we benefit more in the long run from a deep, long-term commitment. The intentional, active, sometimes difficult effort of keeping one's promise of togetherness has benefits that run deeper than the evolutionary advantage of making as many random babies as possible. 

It is to my advantage not to obey what my animal nature wants.

And then you can start questioning weather those social constructs are really beneficial for oneself or the partner.

Take for example the group of Mormons in which the husband has multiple wives. One would have to wonder if such arrangement is truly beneficial for the family. But when again, the same applies for monogamy.

What most of these traditions have in common is unity. That nor you, nor your partner or children are alone. To keep the unity of family.

[Belacqua]

And then you can start questioning weather those social constructs are really beneficial for oneself or the partner.

Absolutely. Customs and traditions should be questioned and we should recognize that none of them is one-size-fits-all. I mean, some social constructs are required by law, and it's probably not a good idea to go around flouting those left and right, but in terms of your love life -- sure, we should think about what's best for all parties involved.

Take for example the group of Mormons in which the husband has multiple wives. One would have to wonder if such arrangement is truly beneficial for the family. But when again, the same applies for monogamy. 

I guess I've never thought about the multiple-wife thing. It's hard to imagine many women would go for it, but hey, if it's all consenting adults, I guess I'm not supposed to judge. If the Mormons said they had a "polycule" then it would sound cool, like something they'd do in Brooklyn, and people might like it more.

And you're right, monogamy isn't for everybody. 

What most of these traditions have in common is unity. That nor you, nor your partner or children are alone. To keep the unity of family.

Well, unity is kind of a big deal in life. 

I'm not saying divorce should be illegal or anything like that -- bad things should be ended. But I'm old enough to have gone through some stuff in life -- deaths in the family, and things like that -- and I can say for sure that having someone with you who you can totally count on makes all the difference. 

Maybe some guys don't think the trade-off is worth it. But real lasting partnership is a great treasure.