Do men naturally visualize women naked? - Page 5

70s_guy · 12-08-07, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

Circumlocution. Do you have a point, sir?
If so, I suggest you make it.

Thanks you for making my point by responding with a vague pointless simplistic denying one liner. -dave

CaptainCourtesy · 12-09-07, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 70s_guy

The difference is of course one's point of view isn't it? What you and others are so dismayed and incredulous about with such flowery adjectives are obviously controversial in our culture. You play the card that this or that study or expert supporting your position is so compelling that the subject isn't really a controversy or debate at all. Look you lurkers on the sidelines, their extreme position is simply invalid and nonsense to any that might investigate because I can provide this study or that expert that says so. All the while knowing there are formidable arguments on both sides. Of course its standard practice to dismiss God as an expert even though zillions of us put a lot of value with His book. But its a game of course on public forums. This isn't a courtroom where the judge would skewer lawyers resorting to such tactics. We see the same thing when people debate abortion and other such controversial social issues on public forums. Each side has loud zealots lost in the language of absolutes and extremes flowered with name calling and ridicule. -dave

And yet your inaccurate assertions continue to pollute your posts. Your 'dismiss GOD' is possibly the most laughable, since I am probably one of the more religious posters on this site. I just don't follow the dogmatic, closed-minded view of HIM that some here seem to have, using HIS name to substantiate their prejudice. Further, it is dismaying that some will reject logic and science when making assertions. This is only irritating in the sense that I would hope that people here might challenge their own convictions when presented with evidence to the contrary. Some, I suppose, are too set in their own beliefs, even when proven to be unsustainable. And yes, there are formidable arguments on either side of many arguments, here at DP. Abortion is certainly one. But there are aspects of each debate that are non-arguable. How one uses that information is subjective, but the information is not. For example, it has been proven, time and again, that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. This is objective factual information. What one does with this information is cause for debate. It is a fact that, at the moment of conception, the embryo is biologically a unique human. Again, what one does with this information is cause for debate. This is why your dismissal of factual information is not debating. It is DENIAL.

Leftist Protozoa · 12-16-07, 09:02 AM

I actually do think porn has that effect on men. These days my schedule is full with work, family, errands, etc. But it wasn't always that way; and I had time to look at porn.

It is an extremely addictive thing. Given enough exposure, it can trigger some sort of Pavlovian hyper-libido response to women. It's like pouring heroin on the sex drive part of your brain.

I would still vote that men visualize women naked; much more so than the other way around. But the original post refined the question to focus on porn. I'm not anti-porn. However, casual "use" of it is much different than being addicted. Addiction will take you to some miserable places, and it definitely affects your relationships with other people.

metreon · 12-19-07, 05:01 AM

On page 91 of "The Female Brain" by Dr. Louann Brizendine:

"Males have double the brain space and processing power devoted to sex as females. Just as women have an eight-lane superhighway for processing emotion while men have a small country road, men have O'Hare Airport as a hub of processing thoughts about sex whereas women have the airfield nearby that lands small and private planes. That probably explains why 85 percent of twenty- to thirty-year-old males think about sex every fifty-two seconds and women think about it once a day -- or up to three or four times on their most fertile days."

Ok. So men think about sex about every minute and women do so usually once a day. However, like any cognitive process, that frequency can be modified by useage.

Engaging ritualistically in any line of thinking will reinforce it. People who have worked in routine businesses then worked in the porn industry report this: simply being around porn situations all day and frequently thinking about it with respect to themself, reinforced it and caused it to be ghosted upon other events and interpretation of those events in their life. So even women also report increased incidents of sex thought and arousal by being around it more. On average though, the gender norm suggests a lop-sided amount of ritual sex thought in the minds of men.

Getting to the question at hand (...eh..hem): given the prevalence of pictoral porn and the natural tendency of men to gravitate toward visual stimuli to gather and interpret information about the world around them, plus the statistical frequency of sex thought in men, - any benign image of a woman, whether in a picture or in the flesh therefore would have a high likelihood of being overlaid by sex thought, which typically is visual in nature in men.

I am not saying sex thought is statistically driven, though. The approximation of a neutral scene to a preexisting erotic memory in the man's mind undoubtedly increases the likelihood of that a sexual thought will glom on. In other words, if a woman shows a lot of flesh and looks like Pam Anderson or any half-memorable girlfriend, the sex thought pops up, and it is sticky, - it wants to stay there. In other words, the more visual characteristics a scene shares with a pornographic or other erotic scene, the more likely that association will pop up and linger, - repeated getting laid, repositioned, then laid again over the situation looking for a gratifying visual joining of the two.

But that is not really breaking news to most women, is it?