Why do girls get attached after sex, even if it's someone they barely know?

[alor1an]

i'm only asking this because i have that problem. that's why i don't do things like friends with benefits, or one night stands. it's almost like it's a switch inside you that you can't turn off, and sometimes i really wish i could.

[redeyemindtricks]

Okay, so, on one extreme, there are some people who just CAN'T have sex without forming attachments, and/or without pre-existing attachments ("low sociosexuality").
On the other extreme, there are people like me, who are perfectly capable of fucking for fun and fulfillment, come of it what may.
Most PEOPLE (not just most women) are somewhere in the middle.

But... butbutbut.

This is simpler than people like to make it.

The reality of the situation is:

• MEN are generally WILLING TO LOWER THEIR STANDARDS to find a casual sex partner.

• WOMEN are ABSOLUTELY NEVER willing to lower their standards for a casual sex partner -- and, in fact, most women have substantially HIGHER standards for casual sex partners than for anything else (which makes sense, given the risk involved on a fundamental level).

In other words -- To be blunt about it, MOST women have casual sex with guys who are, broadly speaking, in a higher "league" than the guys with whom they've historically had committed relationships.

Highly desirable guys.

If you're fucking someone who's hotter/better/more desirable than what you've always been used to, then, it's hardly surprising that you'd become attached. LOL.

If men could regularly get casual sex with women who were hotter/more desirable than they could pin down otherwise, don't you think THEY would get attached, too?
... Fuck yeah they would!
like duhhhhh
LOL
But, generally speaking, this just doesn't happen in the real world.

__

Honestly, I think men and women are pretty much symmetrical with respect to this -- I think there are just as many women out there who are CAPABLE of enjoying casual sex as men.
The problem is, women can "borrow" guys who would be "out of their league" for the longer term -- and THAT is where the problem originates.

[redeyemindtricks]

@bandit74 ^^ What do you think.

[Bandit74]

I do think there would be more unrestricted men than women and more restricted men than restricted men. Assuming what you’ve said under MrOracle’s opinion, unrestricted men probably wouldn’t pass their gene down very often. For starters, being unrestricted they wouldn’t be having sex with that many women and whichever women they do have sex with and commit to would probably be seeing other people on the side so it seems like unrestricted guys would be more likely to pass their genes on. Assuming the girl is sober, I do agree about women going above their league for casual sex. Lot’s of girls on gag deny it so I’m not sure I’d use the word “willing” which makes it sound like it’s a conscious decision and I don’t think it is in most cases. I don’t believe most of them realize it.

[Bandit74]

As far as guys being more likely to become attached if they could regularly get beautiful girls…maybe but not necessarily. I would see it being more likely if it was a guy who normally can’t get attractive women but then suddenly gets a beautiful girl to hookup with him. In that case he would probably develop feelings. However if a man could regularly hookup with attractive women, they would be pretty replaceable so I don’t think he would have that much trouble separating feelings. I mean there are men now, mainly celebrities who can regularly hookup with beautiful women and they don’t seem to have trouble avoiding attachment.

[Bandit74]

Another aspect of whether or not a man feels attached is fidelity. Sure I think it makes sense that it would be advantageous that a guy commits and invests resources in the woman who will bear a child with the highest quality genetics but it’s also advantageous that he is actually investing time in resources in HIS child. He wouldn’t want to be one of those guys who is the provider for some other guy’s child. So from a perspective of wanting to pass down your genes, it would be most advantageous that the guy DOESN’T become attached if he questions her fidelity or if suspects she has had sex with other men recently. Even today, I do think a woman’s sexual reputation or vibe she gives off can affect how likely a guy is to become attached. Guys seem to have an easier time viewing a girl as being in the “sex only” category and not developing feelings if he sees her as the type that gets around.

[Alex88F]

WOMEN are ABSOLUTELY NEVER willing to lower their standards for a casual sex partner -- and, in fact, most women have substantially HIGHER standards for casual sex partners than for anything else (which makes sense, given the risk involved on a fundamental level). Really? That means that if she wanted me before and admitted it, now she's not into me is a straight lie? Which means im still on the game or im fucked up? Honestly, I think men and women are pretty much symmetrical with respect to this -- I think there are just as many women out there who are CAPABLE of enjoying casual sex as men. The problem is, women can "borrow" guys who would be "out of their league" for the longer term -- and THAT is where the problem originates. Having sex with a girl thinking you're out of her League will make her act all high and mighty. That's what i observed. And sometimes that creates MONSTERS

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bandit74 *okay one BIG caveat -- everything I'm saying applies only when she's sober. It's actually been conclusively demonstrated that "beer goggles" totally distort her perception of who's attractive/desirable and who isn't, so, none of these observations applies to drunken hook-ups.

[SovereignessofVamps]

This is all true xD

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bandit74 Even in the case of the male celebrities, their casual partners are still not more desirable than (and are almost certainly less desirable than) the women they could have if they committed, so, everything here still applies.

[redeyemindtricks]

@SovereignessofVamps I meant to tag you, too. But you found it. I'm also curious what @tarvold and @smmyskittles have to say here. And @fearless_banana

[Bandit74]

I know, that's why I specified "---Assuming the girl is sober,--- I do agree about women going above their league for casual sex." What about Dicaprio, I think physically speaking the women he hooks up with are out of his league physically speaking. :D

[Bandit74]

We should also get the opinions of @0112358 and @bcromatie

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bandit74 Look dude, I have the priorities of a gay mae gym bunny when it comes to men so I am totally on board with you there -- but you know damn well that the "leagues" for men, broadly speaking, go way way WAY beyond the physical.

[redeyemindtricks]

*male

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bandit74 that's @bcromartie ftfy and maybe @walterradio, too -- he is pretty realistic about these things

[Bandit74]

Yeah, but I thought those other qualities like status mainly only matter for when you want a provider. For casual sex and pure sexual attraction, isn't it mostly looks, confidence, and maybe social skills?

[Fearless_banana]

So I sort of already discussed this in my take with you www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a29147-slut-shaming-we-need-to-stop-abusing-that-term

You brought up a great point in which you were saying that women are usually shooting above your league. It would make sense to say that a girl shooting above her league for casual sex would make her more susceptible to feeling a quicker emotional attachment... she feels lucky. But I don't think that completley trumps every other variable.

While I said there are girls out there that genuinely love sex and can have it with no emotional attachment for the most part girls who sleep around as much as I do are insecure as fuck and I've experienced that first hand. You could say guys who hookup are the same way but if you were to reverse it.. the percentage of women who are insecure versus men who hook up would be women dominant.

[Fearless_banana]

Now the very root of the conclusion is off of the notion that being in a friends with benefits situation generally isn't in the best interest of a woman. I explained as to why all in my take. Not going to copy and paste all of that. I still stand by what I say but I do accept what you said about women usually raising their standards when it comes to casual sex... but I accept that as one variable.. that doesn't negate what I've mentioned in my take from my perception and point of view

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana See, I'm saying that *is* the most important variable. If you could somehow remove the effect of socialization/slut shaming (= theoretically possible), *AND* you could somehow remove the inherently greater physical danger to women because of the strength/power/pregnancy-risk differential (= absolutely impossible), then I think the situation would become exactly symmetrical. There'd be just as many women "slumming it" as men -- and the "slummy" men would ABSOLUTELY get attached in huge numbers. But, that latter asymmetry will never ever ever go away, so, it's all theory.

[Fearless_banana]

Well the social construct of slut shaming was completley irrelevant in my opposition that I stated. I didn't factor in to my statement. I would put more emphasize on the simple fact that a FWB's situation doesn't suite a woman nearly as much as a man. Generally there is much more benefit to a woman to have a committed partner instead of casual sex. As I said there are exceptions and some women genuinely do love sex but I wouldn't just completley just say it's because it's solely for the reason of them shooting above their league which creates that dynamic I described of women being more susceptible to attachment for that reason.

[Fearless_banana]

Now throw that aside.. women and men are not biologically wired the same no matter how third-wave feminist try to tell us that. Every person even if the same sex is not biologically wired the same but genders differences typically fall on two spectrums. It's no secret that women treat sex with more emotion. That's not only for the fact that women are shooting out of their league… it goes deeper than that. A key hormone released during sex is oxytocin, also known as the ‘cuddle hormone’. This lowers our defenses and makes us trust people more. It’s also the key to bonding, as it increases levels of empathy. Women generally produce more of this hormone.

[Fearless_banana]

NOW… I do recognize what you’re saying when you say slut shaming. Women might feel insecure about sleeping around because it doesn’t typically fight to the better side of social norms. That insecurity can stem off of how society views them. BUT.. I think it goes much deeper than that. It’s generally goes against a woman's best interest to not stay in a long term relationship.. more so because of how men and women are typically hardwired. Women are nurturing and are always looking for the most suited mate while men are more hardwired to stick their dick in as many women as he can. So it’s not in a women’s best interest from an inner emotional level but yes I recognize social mores can dictate how a girl feels about herself

[Fearless_banana]

I don't think it would be symmetrical like you said just because of the social stigma that goes along with a girl sleeping around for the reasons I explained above.

[Fearless_banana]

I really need to work on my grammar and double check what I type lol. I type 130WPM lol but I think you understand what I was saying. Just tell me if you didn't and I'll clarify.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Well, if yr gna type that slow, mb you *should* proofread... piker 😂😂

s18.postimg.org/.../...16_02_27_at_12_56_31_AM.png

[Fearless_banana]

170 lmfao you realize how rare that ability is? Jesus.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Dude it's the new low-travel keyboard on the 12" Macbook OMG I LOVE IT Actually, that was a couple months ago, not long after I got it. I'm probably faster now -- I'll take another one in a few mins here. You can blame it all on a game called Typing of the Dead -- I spent SO MUCH time playing that game when I was in Japan 😂😂

[Fearless_banana]

I can type faster on my old gaming keyboards. I use a 13 inch mac airbook.. keys are much smaller and my fingers are big lol.

Fucking lmfao @Typing of the Dead..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jslf5hJMtvs
Had to look it up. My mom is trying to type faster. I have to introduce this to her.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana OK here's a current attempt
s32.postimg.org/.../..._2016_07_19_at_07h38_51.png

MUST GET 200 lmao

also, remember that typing tests underestimate how fast you are really typing, because (1) they aren't natural sequences of words or thoughts, (2) you have to keep looking at the screen, and (3) you have to put the words into short term memory. When I'm typing random shit like on here, I am probably about 20 percent faster than that.

Yah tell yr moms about that game.

Also, the other thing I did that helped A LOT was, I took the backspace key off my keyboard, back in the day.
See, I realized that the biggest thing slowing me down was that I'd go back and correct misatkes right when I made them -- so, I just made that... not possible lol. As soon as I did that, I got a lot better at typing long strings of uninterrupted text much faster. So, pass that on to yr mom (and try it yrself too, if you haven't already)

[redeyemindtricks]

that is the aoeu. eu typing test by the way

[Smmyskittles]

<3 " WOMEN are ABSOLUTELY NEVER willing to lower their standards for a casual sex partner -- and, in fact, most women have substantially HIGHER standards for casual sex partners than for anything else (which makes sense, given the risk involved on a fundamental level)." ^^ Agreed, for myself and what I consider 'my standards'. & Since you know what I like... and how I like it ;) I have to have trust, so I do get easily attached. Not immediately, but with time. So, that's why FWBs in the past have ended after such a short period of time with me. Buuuut, with all the sexual frustration, I just take it out on myself at the gym.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Smmyskittles Tx for yr input <3 Srsly tho... Women don't "slum it" to get laid, guys do. This is the most important variable here BY FAR, and it's damn weird how often it's just totally ignored. Although women can definitely close this gap by... getting better at (1) seduction, and (2) talking sexy. By #2 I'm not just talking about dirty talk in bed, I'm also talking about learning how to say little things that will literally drive a guy to distraction all day long thinking about them. <3

[Fearless_banana]

I recognize that but I don't recognize that overpowering the others... The logic behind why I say that is because you are isolating that as if you are negating everything else when each of those sort of directly branch off to each other equally. You would probably say okay

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Well, we'll never be able to isolate these variables anyway, so, beyond this point it's kinda like Thomas Aquinas debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Point is, all these variables are variables, and they ain't going anywhere soon. Another point in favor of starting long-term relationships from sexual flings. <3 Looks like I did life right, lol

[Fearless_banana]

You would say okay.. But they all stem off the reason of women have higher standards and sort of look at something as a factor tree where everything derives off of that for it trumps everything else. But the truth is not all women are not all the same and therefore their reasoning for their actions are not the same. I other words there is no genetic sequential order and that's why I think it's not the most important variable. People are much more complex than that.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Annndd ya lost me there bud 😂😂 "factor tree" "genetic sequential order" ahahah no idea what any of that meansssss Remember dude, I am good at life, but I am not "book smart". You gotta talk to me like I'm 9 years old (and on speed).

[Fearless_banana]

Also a lot of these women are using their sexuality in attempt to garner an emotional relationship eith a guy that is perceived to be out of their league. in theory they are prostituting themselves and their feelings for emotional validation. They are using their sexuality with ulterior motives hoping that the guy will want to change for them. They feel that's all they have to offer. That happens all to frequently and is literally the embodiment or epitome of insecurity. I think that's why I have such a strong opposition on this topic. I' clearly tell women what my intentions are from the start and never lead her on to her thinking it will be something more. Same shit 8/10 times. " yeah that's cool I just want sex and want to fuck.. I'm different" then she will start to make attempts in manipulating me and my feelings towards her. It won't work because I can see past their bullshit. Me not reacting to her games causes a build up of resentment and then it urns toxic...

[Fearless_banana]

Then I end being some asshole womanizer which is fucked up and not true.

[Fearless_banana]

I do find girls that don't do this but more or less on a rare occasion. I know you and Sammy are legit but I see this all too often. I could have anunfair bias because of my experiences but I just thought I'd share my opinion.

[Fearless_banana]

I meant to type generic not genetic lol

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Nah that's fair -- I'll think for a bit, on what you could do to prevent that. I mean, the obvious solution is just "Don't keep going back to the same girl multiple times", although when the gettin's good it's hard not to, huh... 😂😂😂😂 #beenthere

[Fearless_banana]

Lol exactly and that's the issue. Ideally the best possible scenario... Find a girl you have sexual chemistry with that doesn't get overly attached. One night stands are fun but if I went as at her as aggressive as I wanted to with a one night stand I'd probably end up on the news getting charged with rape or some shit lmfao 😂😂. One night stands are generally more or less vanilla. Sexual chemistry and trust need to built up over time and that's where the real magic happens.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Actually, the best possible scenario is that you end up in (gasp! horrors!) a RELATIONSHIP with a girl, where BOTH of you are attached... and then all the rest of that. "Sexual chemistry and trust need to built up over time and that's where the real magic happens." ^^ Yeah, exactly. Which is why you'll find that being in a relationship is more fulfilling than... not being in a relationship. What are you afraid of?

[Fearless_banana]

1.., I don't like the idea of commitment 2.., I don't like the idea of someone's emotional well being dependent off of me 3... I'm extremely picky when it comes to a no billshit full fledged relationship., truthfully I can get bored as fuck with people very easily. I look at it as their fault if they couldn't impress me enough to keep me interested. 4.. Terrible with any affection. I don't hug or cuddle or hold hands., most chicks take that as an insult and it can turn toxic 5.., I feel it would take away from my goals and I'm not sacrificing my grind for someone else. Late twenties to early thirties I'll have finished school. Hopefully be close to the IFBB. I'll be established and be able to offer some sacrifices but I come first right now. The cons outweigh the pros in comparison to what I'm doing now. Plus I still have an innate desire to fuck multiple women despite what I said.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana hahah boy, yr gna fall HARD someday... that's all I'll say.

[Fearless_banana]

Lmao why do you say that. I'm just looking at it from a logical perspective. it just makes more sense. Not really looking for someone to convince me why I should. Just answered. I'm not completely opposed it's just what makes sense

[redeyemindtricks]

@Fearless_banana Just... trust me. LOL I hate trying to explain all this shit explicitly Most 23-year-olds with "options" aren't even at the point yet where they would ever write something like "Sexual chemistry and trust need to built up over time and that's where the real magic happens". So, you're already way ahead of the curve there. Just give it a few years, and you'll get to the point where yr eventually like "been there, done that" with the variety. If you have a scary experience or two with a psycho stalker chick... that will accelerate this process by a few years. Just wait for it. You'll see. <3

[Fearless_banana]

Lol I'll stick to tinder for now.
https://i.imgur.com/rOFWbfA.png

[Smmyskittles]

@Fearless_banana "The image is no longer available or is not publicly accessible."

[Fearless_banana]

@Smmyskittles Lol lies.

[Bandit74]

Redeye: "but you know damn well that the "leagues" for men, broadly speaking, go way way WAY beyond the physical." But what about leagues pertaining to just casual sex? Aren't those pretty much all physical? I can understand other characteristics being considered when a girl wants someone to settle down with but for just sex I dont see why anything other than looks, confidence, and maybe charm/skills would matter.

[Tarvold]

hmm... you guys make some valid points, but at the same time are all missing out on some key ones. I'm going to need a coffee before joining in.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Bandit74 ahha it's pretty close for me... but, like I said earlier, I am basically a gay man trapped in the body of a woman. I mean, I'm not gna try to write a formula or anything, but simple observation will tell you that it's more than just those factors. If you think about how things "go viral" on the internet, the appeal of popularity works a lot like that -- it's an "information cascade", where Z person decides that something/someone is cool or attractive or desirable because X and Y people already think it is. This happens to men, too, to some extent. (You'll hear men say that Alessandra Ambrosio is "hot" -- but, honestly, this is mostly because she's a VS angel, and everyone tells guys that VS angels are supposed to be "hot". In reality, Alessandra has a super masculine face -- she could practically break bricks with that jaw of hers. Also, hairy pussy was "sexy" back in the '80's, and now it's anything but -- this is one area where the media have ABSOLUTELY shaped men's

[redeyemindtricks]

tastes, beyond any fraction of a shadow of a doubt.)

But, in general (again there are always exceptions), this tends to happen to a much greater extent with women.

And there are other factors, too. Like being able to make everyone comfortable -- which isn't really an issue for guys, because there's no risk asymmetry inherent for guys seeking casual sex.
I wrote about this here, about my little brother. In his case, honestly more than anything else, it's his ability to make EVERYONE feel absolutely comfortable and at ease -- the way anyone else would need to ply people with 6 stiff drinks to do -- that really does the bulk of the work for him.
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q2047748-have-any-guys-on-here-been-able-to-hook-up-with-young-girls-as-they

[Tarvold]

Wow, that was a long coffee. Oops. Anyway, I agree with everything you've said in your opinion, but what you've said only pertains to partner selection, and everything that happens before getting into bed. The point I think you've missed out on is the perceived quality of the sex. Now, I have no idea what you're like in the bedroom, but you seem like the kind of person that'll have no problem looking after yourself and going for what you want. Not every woman is like that. Also, not all highly desirable guys know what they're doing in bed either. If you put a girl in bed with a guy with substantially superior technique and equipment than what she was previously accustomed to, then it'll be hard for her to let him go. When a guy truly satisfies a woman sexually, it almost doesn't matter if she thought he was out of her league before, he is now.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Tarvold That can be another factor, yeah -- but, that's only going to reinforce everything that I already said. Right? Like, any nonzero probability of that happening just makes it EVEN MORE likely that a casual sex partner will seem "higher league"/hotter/more desirable than other guys. If girls occasionally "slummed it" but the slummy dudes could work their way up to her level through amazing fucking, THEN that could have an interesting effect here -- but the problem is, 99.5 percent of the time those hook-ups won't happen in the first place.

[Tarvold]

You're right. On the 0.5% chance that a girl would have slummed it with a guy that just happened to be the top 1% of fucking technique - it's a tiny tiny tiny probability. Just saying that its theoretically possible.

[redeyemindtricks]

@Tarvold (:

[kaylaS91]

Because women can get pregnant, have to carry a child to term, then raise this child. We're more hardwired than men, from an evolutionary standpoint, to remain as a pair so that one can be in charge of raising the child while the other, usually the man, is in charge of gathering food plus keeping his family safe.

(That's obviously from our hunter-gatherer days. Which in no way goes to say that 100% of women will become leeches just because they got some dick, nor does it mean that all men dream of nothing but to stick their dick in anything while throwing out any standards. That's simply an evolutionary tendency.)

[Smmyskittles]

With the 1 ONS I've had, no. No feelings, deleted his number and his texts after.

With my sexual partners besides that, yes. 2 were friends with benefits and the other 4 were relationships.

- All you need to do is tell the man you're with (unless it's a relationship) that you have feelings. End it.

Aaaand move on. Plenty of other men out there. :]

[MrOracle]

It's biology/evolutionary. Though we like to think we are so advanced, so much of our base behavior and instincts are quite primitive.

Any species has 2 main objectives:

- Survive
- Reproduce

If the environment is harsh, priority goes to survival. If it's less harsh, it goes to reproduction. And men and women's differing roles in reproduction are a big part of our evolutionary instincts.

Men are pollinators - we can impregnate a woman in 5 minutes, and we could potentially impregnate several a day, every day. Thus, our role is potentially limited and this is reflected in our instincts. Men are not only attracted to having lots of sex, but also attracted to VARIATION. This helps widen the genetic pool, so a disease that most of his village or family is susceptible to might not harm or kill his children with a woman of a different genetic background, and thus his (strong/biologically superior from a species survival point of view) line will live on.

Reproduction affects women much differently. While conception may only take 5 minutes, it leaves her pregnant for 9 months, and quite physically vulnerable in the months leading up to birth and potentially for long after. A woman is almost always the primary child raiser until the child is old enough to be relatively self-sufficient - generally 3-5 years of age at least.

Women, thus, needed the protection and provisions men could provide so that she and her child could survive birth and infancy. But how to get men to want to keep her around and provide for her? If she emotionally bonded to him, then her drive to please and support him emotionally would help to encourage him to choose her to protect and provide for, potentially over others.

This base, animalistic set of instincts still drives us today, and is the reason for much of our behavior.

[redeyemindtricks]

dude... okay, I'm used to simplistic reductionist nonsense, but, from YOU?
https://www.reactiongifs.com/r/fr.gif

Yes, most women are "programmed" to want a man with the protector and provider qualities... to seduce into raising her (not necessarily his) children.

Are women hardwired to want to FUCK men with these qualities?
Hahahhah ahahha hahah hahah ha.
Srsly?

Dude, you know that there are, like, thousands of studies on this sort of thing, right?
When we're ovulating -- when we're actually likely to get pregnant from fucking -- most of us aren't attracted to the protector/provider type AT ALL. Most of us are pretty well repelled by that type, and are attracted to... well, the type of man who's good for cheap thrills.
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/272697.php -- say hello to the ugly reality of reality. #ohshitmoment

If women are "programmed" to do anything, THAT is what it is. We're programmed to fuck the most imposing, most masculine, most bad-ass progenitors of future

[redeyemindtricks]

bloodlines... and we're programmed to shamelessly, backstabbingly take advantage of yr beloved protectors and providers. To protect and provide us and those children that may or may not belong to them.

I mean, you know that this is also why all babies (of a given race) have pretty much evolved to look the same, right? Yep... so that prehistoric women could get away with fuckin' the bad boys and stickin' the "providers" with dat dere responsibility.
<3

One recent bestseller that does a decent job of summarizing this work is "The Red Queen", by Matt Ridley. You should read it, if you haven't alreday.

In chapter 7 of that book, Ridley summarizes the current state of research regarding all this nasty filthiness:
s30.postimg.org/.../...16_03_04_at_12_54_28_AM.png

Yep, even ORGASMS are evolved with this neat little duality in mind. Life is grand, ain't it?

The author summarizes thus:

s16.postimg.org/.../...16_03_04_at_12_51_56_AM.png

I gotta

[redeyemindtricks]

say I agree. I don't think it's cynical at all, to UNDERSTAND this system -- and to learn to hijack it like a motherfucker (literally, ha ha haw). I mean, when you REALLY understand the base desires at the heart of female sexuality... THAT's when you can really learn to rock the shit out of a woman's world. You keep telling yourself pretty lies -- well, that's never gna happen. __ Also, I mean, come ON, people. Recognizing that we're hardwired to act a certain way DOES NOT mean that we're resigned to that fate. Civilization. Society. Culture. These things are not stories of helplessly giving in to our basest motives -- nor of whining about them and giving up at the game. Nope. These things are stories of MASTERING our primal urges, and building upon them to create bigger and better

[redeyemindtricks]

things. The same can happen with sexuality, too. I mean, you can hijack the fuck out of this system. Think about the natural system of female beauty -- roughly speaking, a bunch of random fertility signals. Now, think about all the ways we've learned to hijack that system. Everything from hair extensions to breast implants to high heels. Now... ... think about which effect is stronger. What do most men fantasize about, when they fantasize about raw sex? Some 18-year-old barefoot chick with no makeup? (18 is the age of peak fertility) Or... something substantially different, that WE humans have created, by tweaking the fuck out of that attraction system? Yep. Same thing here. This system is what it is. But, there's like 100000000 cheat codes and mods and custom expansion packs, as it were. (gaahhhh I'm a nerd) so it's like... shut up and learn to play the fucking game. __ Finally, there's the reality that I wrote in my opinion.

[ShyGuyLikesWomen]

@redeyemindtricks one thing I don't understand. Wouldn't the most masculine person also be the best protector and provider?

[redeyemindtricks]

@ShyGuyLikesWomen ahha you've got a lot to learn Try to put yrself into a woman's shoes, and think about... • ... the type of guy you'd fantasize about a no-strings fuck with • ... the type of guy you'd try to marry, if you had a lower sex drive Not the same guy.

[MrOracle]

@redeyemindtricks My answer was simple because I was answering the question given. Like you, I've read about this stuff extensively, and everything you've said is correct. But having to type it all out every time gets old... :)

[redeyemindtricks]

(: xx

[ShyGuyLikesWomen]

@redeyemindtricks but in ancestral times, the aggressive man with the large muscles (the one that women fantasize about at ovulation time) is also the one who would be the best provider. The only difference I see is that in today's world, men provide by working office jobs and computer nerds can be millionaires. But in ancestral times, wouldn't the two categories be one and the same?

[redeyemindtricks]

@ShyGuyLikesWomen Societies have ALWAYS been ruled by a priestly / brahmin / noble class, and never by muscle.

[ShyGuyLikesWomen]

@redeyemindtricks homo sapiens have been on the planet for 200,000 years. Civilization first occurred about 6,000 years ago. What about the 194,000 years before that in the world of no laws. Also, even as civilization progressed, it wasn't long before warlords took over from the priests. Warlords ruled from almost the very beginning up until democracy thousands of years later. Think tribal Africa. Christianity in Europe doesn't count.

[redeyemindtricks]

@ShyGuyLikesWomen still, common sense best providers = older best warriors/fuckers = younger c'mon now son read that Ridley book!

[ShyGuyLikesWomen]

@redeyemindtricks what Ridley book? And I don't really care, but just for the sake of continuing this. In primitive societies, not only did people not live to be that old, but many elderly people committed suicide when they could no longer provide because their body wouldn't let them. Not to mention the fact that money didn't exist and there was no way to store value let alone keep it safe in a bank. But, in 2016, there are handguns, police protection and Viagra, so every old man should be a warrior and sex stud. Lol.

[redeyemindtricks]

@ShyGuyLikesWomen The book that I literally took excerpts from, and posted them as picture files earlier in this same opinion thread. Title and author are there. Really, you should read it -- it's a fascinating book, regardless of whether reading it has anything to do with *this* particular discussion. And you can very easily hijack the knowledge in there to help make yr OWN relationship stronger. Obviously, the situation of the 21st century has nothing to do with *evolved* psychological schemas -- but, again, we can all take advantage of that wiring to turn ourselves on and solidify our own relationships.

[Miezko]

Oxytocin, it's a hormone that causes us to get attached. Our brains release it when we see a friendly face or shake someone's hands. Our brains also release it during sex, and during sex it releases it in very large quantities.

[Miezko]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/oxytocin

[tinyclit]

I'm not out having sex with guys I barely even know, so I can't answer that. I'm one of those people who only want to have sex with someone I know well. The feelings come first, then the sex. Girlfriend and boyfriend first, then lovers. The sex enhances the already existing attachment. But there's all sorts of people in the world and I'm not going to bash your personality type unless you're a sociopath or something.

[madiangel]

this is definitely not what I observe. I think you are making generality of few experiences.

[itsallover]

Because sex is a very intimate act, and there's a certain vulnerablity that comes with being sexual with another person. It's the closest you can physically get to someone apart from a woman being pregnant with a child.

It's perfectly okay to not want casual sex. You know what's right for you.

[Berethor]

Sluts get attached less, but women tend to be more romantic then men, also I heard that it has something to do with the fact that letting someone in you" gets you more attached to him, while for men it's more of an outside experience.

[Alex88F]

women gets more attached if they sense you can provide them a good life not only a good time. that's what i feel at the moment

[NJ_Casanova]

I think "in general" women get attached more "emotionally" than guys do. I think sex an women opens up more (emotionally/spiritually) than a guy does (excluding nice/hopeless romantics).

[teawrecks]

I guess I'm kind of attached in the sense I'm contemplating a fuck buddies situation with him even though he was garbage our first hookup.

But I'm not attached in the sense that I have feelings for him, because i don't know him. I just know he's easy dick.

[SovereignessofVamps]

Did you want a relationship with the guys in the first place? You could be a relationship only type.

[Mesonfielde]

They would like their investment to pay off in some way or another

[WalterRadio]

Not all women do, but many do.

It is physiological. When a woman is being intimate, there are hormones being released, among them oxytocin, which has the nickname of "bonding hormone" or "cuddle hormone".

A guy (or a girl) who knows what he is doing can manipulate the feelings of a woman without getting involved himself. If you get her close to you, quiet, and without a top on (works with less too), just fiddle with her nipples. She will start to feel attached. This is an evolutionary response that is necessary for a mother to bond to her newborn child.

Yes, it really is like a switch, it is chemistry in your brain.

If you don't like it, then don't let a guy touch your nipples and see if that helps (I don't know if it would or not, since women's biology is complicated).

[kittykatbrat]

Tbh, I don't know because I have always had the exact opposite problem.

[Oxi112094]

I'm in the same boat, girl. I can't be intimate without there being feelings. Thats why im fucked when it comes to friends with benefits situations. I've never done that and could never do that.

[orphan]

because you're allowing someone else inside of you. it's the closest you can physically be with another individual.

[somedaylove]

they were attached before sex. women usually have sex only if they already feel attached.

[Polocrew]

Lol dude I've had like 19 chicks who didn't cslled me bak after sex because it was hella bad for them bahaha not that I tried to call em doe bahaha

[takumii]

Damn you leave that ass rather sore , don't you. XD

[Polocrew]

@takumii ur dad leave my ass sore fgit

[takumii]

Do you have to homo everytime? What a gay.

[Polocrew]

@takumii how the fuk is ur dad banging me gay u idiot? Wtf is wrong with u

[Alex88F]

cos is what other girls do and when someone is having what they want doing something you can do too... well, shit happens

[dudegrt09]

I know many who don't

[alor1an]

really? how? cause it's never been that way for me.

[dudegrt09]

Don't know how, I have hooked up with women who never got attached, at least it seemed like it. Women are into one night stands, you cannot generalize based just on yourself

[dudegrt09]

But this woman I've been with is in her mid forties so that must also be a factor. Women around that age are hardly looking for anything serious.

[Sabretooth]

it's more emotional for girls

[Anonymous]

The fantasy they build in their head of the guy. Same as guys (you see them on GAG) who fall in love without even talking to the girl, for example.

It's easier to fall in love with a fantasy and a possibility than an actual person, honestly. Because they have no flaws. But wise people realize this And keep their heads.

[Opinion Owner]

The oxytocin thing, IMHO, tends to only factor in after prolonged exposure to a guy, not a one night stand. I'd say falling for a ONS should take consideration about why you're sleeping around to begin with. Are you hoping for a rescue, validation, someone to take care of you, or what?

[Anonymous]

I dont think thats true

[Anonymous]

You're putting too much emotion and expectations in to a brief relationship. Take the emotions out of it and you won't get attached. It works.

[alor1an]

how do you do that?

[Opinion Owner]

Do what the guys do. Come for the D, stay for the D, leave when you're done with the D. Acknowledge that there's plenty of other D out there if one can't perform. If casual sex is what you want, accept the person the D is attached to is only temporary. You can still be considerate and show him respect and kindness, but deep down the ultimate goal is satisfying sex.