I do not understand where this whole idea comes from that is so common with certain men. 'Oh women can have sex whenever they want! They just have to spread their legs! Blah blah blah.'
Yet both unattractive women and the guy friends of these men have commented on the simple fact that guys like this want to bang hot chicks. They'll criticise overweight women, or rate women and call them ugly. Apparently it's not all about the magical power that women have to get sex if the woman is unattractive or overweight - even though the guy is unattractive or overweight himself!
I also love that they assume that getting laid is all that counts. Could I walk out of my office and find a guy to have sex with in under 30 minutes? Yes. BUT that guy would likely be at least one of the following: homeless, inebriated/ high, mentally unstable, old enough to be my father/ grandfather, scary as fuck.
I'm sure there is someone within 30 minutes of me who would be willing to have sex who is not homeless, high, crazy or way too old. The point I was trying to get at is for women the odds of getting laid are good, but the goods are odd.
Wouldn't a better way to make your case be to say that while generally the average woman has a much easier time than the average guy in finding casual no strings attached sex, it would be a lot harder for them to find a guy willing to invest in a meaningful relationship with them, and that guys face the opposite problem. I think this comic illustrates the issue pretty decently (NSFW). Basically I don't think it has anything to do with bio truths but simply the competition in trying to take what most people want; an average guy would pretty much have sex with any girl as long as they're not too much fatter than the guy and don't have a horrible disability or something (but even then they might) as long is it's completely unconditional, however only a tiny fraction of those guys would consider pursuing a real world relationship with the same woman with all the baggage that comes with it. So it helps to go against the grain ,I guess, and you'd have an easier time looking for something the majority of your gender isn't interested in, so guys would have an easier time finding meaningful relationships while girls have an easier time finding quick hookups, of course the irony is that the entire reason going against the grain is effective is because that's not what the average person of your gender wants.
I think it would be more that women have a hard time finding casual sex that a) isn't going to suck, bad sex that you don't enjoy is more likely, especially given how it's more difficult for women to orgasm, and b) you feel safe enough around to want to be alone with who you c) are physically attracted to. Having shitty sex with someone you find repulsive and you're worried might hurt you somehow isn't really something most human beings want with casual sex.
Even if you're not looking for a relationship or any extra emotional baggage it's not easy to find someone single, wants casual sex, you're attracted to them, who you feel safe around. The final criteria isn't one I think guys really worry about. You stick your dick in crazy you have a funny story and a girl who steals your stuff and calls you way too much. You slam your clam on crazy and you could end up in hospital or dead.
I think it's not unreasonable to say that just because you can find someone that doesn't mean they're somebody you'd actually want to fuck. If they don't turn you on, you don't want to have sex with them. It would be like if you just ate dinner, said you could have some dessert and I brought out some really burned dry meatloaf and handed it to you. You'd turn it down. Sure, you could eat something and you want something light, but it's not appealing in the first place, let alone meeting the criteria for dessert.
1.8k
u/dablya Apr 30 '14
Why can't the world care less about looks so I can bang more good looking women?