Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
I'm saying that.
But you're saying it just to be an asshole. That does not count.
Your venting has nothing to do with what I actually said or what I actually do when I study this stuff.
You clearly fail to grasp that persons are just conduits for ideas about phenomena and cause and effect relationships. You totally missed it when I indicated that I agree with Vaknin when what he says makes sense based on testing it against other ideas I already know. And that I disagree with most of what he says. Not because he is an odd character, which was always my starting point, but because some things I know better than he does.
You're just an ill-behaving jerk on the Internet who thinks that persons are everything, so you haven't offered or countered a single idea and clearly think that personal attacks equal proof or disproof. Also, you are the same asshole to almost everyone on this site, so I'm not even particularly singled out here.
Enough of this psycho babble...
Could you please read the topic?
It's visual stimulus causing a pleasurable physical response...
Why does that particular visual stimulus cause a pleasurable physical response in some men but not in others? This was the question all along, and now we are back to square one. To get anywhere from there, we could maybe start with some psychobabble (which by the way is a compound word).
Dopamine and erections
Dopamine does not explain anything. Everything you see on your computer screen is a signal. But calling it a signal does not explain why it has this particular form or information content. Dopamine simply indicates that you crave for something. It does not even indicate the object of craving, because that is your mind's interpretation for the sensation of its release.
—Why are you going to the grocery store now?
—Gas pedal and miles per hour, you know.
—But why grocery store and why now? What is the psychological reason?
—Ah, I need milk and cheese.
It is obvious that to some individuals, especially those with violent masochistic fantasies or no social skills to ever meet a muscular woman, this is a fetish (some isolated signal turns them on) or a perversion (something gets turned into its opposite). But I have always kept in mind that there also exists ordinary promiscuity within which muscular women are some kind of deluxe version.
The reason why some people are so appalled by Vaknin is because he quotes statistics and enumerates behaviors in a way that challenges this idea of successful, healthy and life-enhancing promiscuity. Statistics can be faked and taken from questionable sources but when you enumerate something, or in other words, list all the different kinds of it, you get a far clearer idea of what the actual behavior is.
Answers like yours belong to a discussion like "why are you visiting this site?"
It would be a discussion with the last answer repeated a hundred times and nothing else. The only reason you gave your answer is because I gave mine first.
He's baaaack...
This seems to be a thread he thinks he excels in. Maybe it's time for this to be locked. I'm tired of seeing it bumped.
I believe it's mostly genetic. I know a couple of guys that do research into genetics at a local university and more than you think is determined by your genes.
Behavior is rarely only caused by genetics. In most cases people inherit a gene cluster that predisposes them to behaviors that are triggered by environmental factors.
The GWM members all have a range of reasons for liking buff women. But, we also show a wide range of preferences within this community.
Zarklephaser has valiantly championed the psychological emphasis as well as quite narrow factors and some of that may be true. However without some genetic basis, growing up in specific environments leads to a range of outcomes and preferences.
Bottom line, both genes and environment caused us to prefer buff women. I think generally, psychology always considers biological and environmental factors even when describing the origins of mental disorders.
Some time ago I learned not to engage in a battle of wits with that zarklephaser guy.
He truly has a dizzying intelect.
I believe my attraction to FBBs is primarily rooted in trauma. When I'm feeling good, and in a healthy mental space, I find myself attracted to the more traditional beauty standard. However, when I'm in the dumps, I crave a roided FBB to ruthlessly dominate me and turn pain into pleasure.
I also feel I inadvertently conditioned myself to sexualize muscles and power by not exposing myself to porn at a young age. As a result, I sexualized biceps and strength over traditional sexual acts and pleasure.
But I have noticed that if you take a short pause from this, the moment you are ready to come back and catch a glimpse of some muscular female body, the horniness can be overwhelming. But if you take a longer break, you will get an opposite effect and will need some kind of push to rekindle the thing or flip you back into it.
I've experienced this as well. I'm initially repelled by the sight of muscular females after cutting myself off for an extended period. It takes time to reignite the attraction. I'm also at a loss as to the reason why that is. My guess is that we have to suppress our natural instincts as males to be attracted to female muscles. Our natural instinct is that females should be feminine and submissive; the male is the sole dominant figure. A female shouldn't be able to challenge our physical prowess. Etc. Thus, it requires some form of conditioning to supplant those instincts. Conditioning that can be lost after a significant time away.
That being said, it's also worth pointing out that everything is relative. For a jacked 250lb guy, all FBBs will be dainty and submissive to them, which is why you primarily only see FBBs with massive guys. The roles are still traditional from both perspectives. But that's not the case for me, at 6'2, 180-190lbs.
It’s sexy that these women are focused and dedicated to exercise and their bodies.
Bingo. To me, that is simply the truth. But it might not be for everyone, I guess.
However, when I'm in the dumps, I crave a roided FBB to ruthlessly dominate me and turn pain into pleasure.
What I am going to explain may not necessarily concern your situation, but thinking on from my previous messages I realized something new.
So first a child is born helpless and from his viewpoint the mother is all-powerful. If the child does not by the age of two get out of this setup, he will start faking internalizing the mother's omnipotence. Then later the child, youngster and adult will maybe try to grow out of this and "integrate" this helplessness and omnipotence to some degree.
A funny thing happens when a son like this meets his mother and the mother does something abusive or humiliating, maybe embarrasses him or causes a scene or in some other way ruins his day. In this situation the son will attempt to defend against this sense of helplessness and unease by internalizing and idealizing the very mother who caused the humiliation. So the abusive real person and the first mental representation of omnipotent safety are actually the same and this creates an interesting mental short circuit.
On one hand the ruthlessly dominating bodybuilders are the mother, on the other hand they are not. Only thing that is real is the initial abuse, which causes a scramble for comfort and safety. But the comfort and safety are first imagined and then imagined to be abusive. But the essence of the scramble is that a person feels down and helpless and is used to solving the problem by idealizing an omnipotent figure, of whatever kind that is best for the job.
One possibility is that the abusiveness was in the initial childhood experience. Another possibility is that the abusiveness is necessary to convince the individual that the figure is in fact omnipotent in the relationship. "I don't trust you, I don't believe in you unless you prove yourself by smashing me first." A third possibility is that very few people have the luxury these days of idealizing a powerful but non-abusive figure, which in turn could lead them to stop idealizing anyone altogether and start integrating their personality.
As a result, I sexualized biceps and strength over traditional sexual acts and pleasure.
Traditional sexual acts are difficult to do without at least some intimacy creeping in. By intimacy I mean knowing and trusting someone and caring about them at least a bit. So if there never was such intimacy between the son and the mother, avoiding traditional sexual acts and also pleasure could be explained by avoidance of intimacy, of emotional closeness and reciprocity. Simply because it is possible to find trust and care confusing and alarming.
In the kind of porn where men degrade and humiliate women it is obvious to the man that there is no intimacy to speak of. But if a man watches porn where men are hurt and humiliated by women, it is somewhat possible to mentally twist the sights, touches and words into an ersatz intimacy. Especially if the woman is more happy than angry when torturing and humiliating the man. "She likes me! She enjoys my company. She cares about me."
There used to be centuries during which there was no what is today considered vanilla porn at all. No videos, no magazines, no photos. Barely stories and drawings, for those who could read and could afford them. But no widespread or any sexualization of muscles or power that I've heard of.
It creates an extra layer of confusion that being intimate has become an euphemism for having sex. Intimate friends are not friends with benefits.
My cousin said one thing to me that stuck with me for 30 years. He said his professors could say anything and you would believe it. Not to quote the professor, but this what he said it was like.
"The molecular frasm of the circulatory is quite irregular".
Every time I see your silly posts, I think of him...
Before this thread turned into a blog, Zarkle said, "Big boobs signal generosity." It's like Schmoe Astrology.
Simple: muscular women look damn awesome naked and most ain’t afraid to show off. And for those of us who’ve managed to bed a hardbody Amazon, there is no going back to ‘normal’ afterward. It ruins you—in the best way possible.
My exact words to my wife, "You've ruined me forever"
Before this thread turned into a blog, Zarkle said, "Big boobs signal generosity."
Sometimes simple people are confused even by simple answers to simple questions. I also thought that I already explained this.
But I agree that it sounds as silly as saying that muscles signal confidence or muscles signal dominance.
The context was, as well as I can remember, that attraction to muscles or boobs is something equally mysterious and inexplicable. And the meaning of my remark was that no, there is an obvious biological reason why someone would be attracted to boobs. Especially if he has been breastfed as a baby.
So like a good ankle-biter you are trying to intentionally misunderstand something that can hardly even be intentionally misunderstood.
"As a result, I sexualized biceps and strength over traditional sexual acts and pleasure."
By that, I meant I'd much rather see my favorite FBB deadlifting 500 lbs than do anything in the nude or explicit. But this is probably getting too far into the weeds because it isn't something common among those who like female muscle.
The mother-son relationship is an interesting perspective, but it assumes too much. IMO there are too many factors at play for one relationship to be the driving force.
Sometimes simple people are confused even by simple answers to simple questions. I also thought that I already explained this.
Sometimes unadulterated nonsense is unadulterated nonsense. It was not a question. Here's the actual context: Someone wrote,
"More muscles = more curves. Big arms and legs are just as eye-catching as big boobs and butts."
Here were your nonsequiturs in response to not-a-question:
"Big boobs signal generosity. Not that the woman would want to sleep with everyone but that once you are with her, she will be all about you."
It seems evident to me that you make things up as you go along and tread in mostly unfalsifiable claims. The loose connections and associations run through standard conspiracy "thinking," Freudianism, and, of course, astrology. The amusing scattered praise is amusing -- like a mark responding to a hit from a cold reading.
So like a good ankle-biter you are trying to intentionally misunderstand something that can hardly even be intentionally misunderstood.
All one has to do is compare what I wrote to what you wrote. But, yeah, this has been fun.
Well let me get this straight a second time.
The topic is "What's the psychological reason why a man might be attracted to a woman with muscles?"
One suggested but oversimplistic answer was "More muscles = more curves. Big arms and legs are just as eye-catching as big boobs and butts."
Or in other words that "muscles are just curves, just like boobs and butts". Synthol is known to give you even more curves. Not to mention silicone.
"Big boobs signal generosity. Not that the woman would want to sleep with everyone but that once you are with her, she will be all about you."
The point I made with this is that you fantasize about different things when you fantasize about muscles versus boobs or butts. Therefore boobs or curves are not a good answer to the original question, which was "why muscles?" On average and in fantasies muscles are about the woman, how strong and self-sufficient she is. And boobs are about the baby which is the man.
I said it once and I still mean it, in exactly the same way. I was the one rejecting a loose connection and association there.
"As a result, I sexualized biceps and strength over traditional sexual acts and pleasure."
Caressing a muscular woman, in an intimate situation...her muscles become my hot spots, during foreplay. I've been with a couple buffed women who got very aroused, knowing it was their muscles that excited me. Others probably thought I was odd for focusing on their arms instead of their boobs, for example. However, as long as I took care of their needs, they gladly let me have my fun. I've been enamored with girls and women with muscle my entire life. I have no idea what the psychological reason is...maybe I was wired this way? Honestly can't recall any event that would or could have caused it. I also find the strength aspect of a woman, very exciting as well.
Now continuing from my previous recent ideas. Say someone has a narcissistic parent. One symptom of narcissism is envy. This means that whatever good there is in the world, it must be somehow either part of the narcissist or sanctioned by the narcissist or under the narcissist's control or at least presented or represented by the narcissist in the moment.
One part of the sufferings of a child of a narcissist is that you are not allowed to have initiative or aspire to become something unless mommy told you to. Or mommy always put down your ideas and then gave them to you anew, as if they were hers. In other words, the child of a narcissist is not allowed to have an independent self.
The catch with porn and drugs and such rebellious youth stuff is that your bodily sensations are undeniably yours. Sex, booze and tobacco are effective ways to rebel and effective ways to have something that is undeniably your own. The problem is that anything more complicated than bodily sensations, for example relationships or studies, will run into the barrier set up by the narcissistic parent's envy.
"Johnny, you're not allowed to become what mommy did not tell you to. Johnny, are you abandoning your poor old mommy by becoming all independent?"
This is one part of the equation.
The other part is that a child like this will feel depleted and will often mimic the behavior of the parent. That is, he is uninterested in or even disdainful of good things that are not part of himself or under his control. Better said, he is very envious. He is not already someone who is looking for something to do. He is nobody who is looking for something to make him into somebody.
Muscular everything seem like people who already are something and are doing something. So that easily makes them a target for his envy. Sexual fantasy and sexual union are possessive acts, ergo temporary cures for envy. How could I envy her? I slept with her! How could I envy her? I orgasmed looking at her semi-naked body.
A girl who flexes and flexes for you is basically seeking your approval. That technically turns the tables on her. Your desire for strength and the associated envy has been superseded by her desire for approval for her displays of her body.
With peacocks it goes that males display and females choose. But on this site you have an endless stream of females displaying and males choosing.
Also, finally, to enact a most powerful cure for envy you do not want it to be about something cerebral or complicated. Sensual, simple and exaggerated things work best here, mostly because they combine the problem (envy) and the solution (sexual short circuit) into one.
(Added later:)
If a nerdy girl in school got an A- while you got a B+ to cure your envy you can bonk her brains out only figuratively. This is probably why "nerdy girls with best grades" would do badly as a fetish site.
Masochism can also be explained by bringing it under this umbrella. Logically in this case a person envies those who hurt him, so he overcomes this by uniting with them sexually. Also, "unless you hurt me I can't envy you so neither can I desire you".
In the most extreme case all sexual oddities could be motivated by this same envy mechanism, including the whole rainbow alphabet.
Finally, a sadist could be envious of the vulnerability of his victim. Except that probably neither role is entirely voluntary or chosen: The sadist can not let go of control even if he wanted to. The masochist can not achieve control even if he wanted to.
So why some person remains addicted to these things is because he thinks he has a sexual problem that has a sexual solution, instead of a self-image problem that would require a self-image solution. The whole sexual revolution could maybe be summarized as sexual solutions to self-image problems.
Enough of this psycho babble... It's visual stimulus causing a pleasurable physical response... Dopamine and erections