cock-block:
1. (n.) A result of a friend, stranger, or acquaintance making sexual relations or intercouse impossible (by accident or purposely) with a member of the same or opposite sex.
2. (v.) To make the act of having sexual relations with a member of the same or opposite sex impossible (by accident or on purpose.)
If women want to share their experiences of being cock-blocked (even if they don't have cocks), then go ahead.
To share one of my own, a couple months ago when at university, these two really hot cousins came up to visit. They were a year younger and still in high school, and came to visit their (unattractive) friend who happened to live on my floor. After talking to them a bit I could tell they were both interested in me and they ditched their friend. We went to a couple parties but neither one of them would leave me, or each other. Both were sending me those seductive signals but I couldn't make a move because the other cousin was always right there.
Anyways, the night ended with all three of us lying in my bed and they were all snuggled up to me but I couldn't do anything. The cousins cock-blocked me from each other and then they left for home the next day
Whether it be a drunken friend, ex-girlfriend, some time constraint, poor location, or the evil, dreaded mother hen, this is an epidemic that affects most men. The first step to recovery is to share; so please, my fellow men, let us share our most hurtful, frustrating, and hilarious cock-blocks together.
That's been on youtube for a long time, years. I think it's a mix of different games and the gameplay is from Guildwars I think. I really hope Diablo III looks nothing like this. The whole book thing brings me back to Hellgate: London, and that is a very bad thing.
I am not religious... lol... You just lost the whole argument with this. My views are based on personal observations. Your views are based on the animal world and they make no sense. You are just excusing yourself, trying to be an animal in the human world.
You denounce evolution, deny us as animals, say that African's are nothing but apes or animals, hate every female because they do not believe the same as you, and deny human nature. This debate is over for me.
Equinox your views are very extreme and based on faith of a book. This is a scientific issue, and I do not want to argue with your religious, racist, ignorant views.
Quote from "winstonthe4th" »
All I know about this is that I have never (in my recollection at least) experienced any polygamist feelings.
Affairs happen all the time. A mid-life crisis is nothing more than our polygamist nature finally breaking the constraints of our monogamous society. You may have not had enough time to experience the need to date or have sex with other women. Just the fact that people have tens to hundreds of relationships in their lives shows that they are polygamous. I am not saying that everyone is, or wants to be, a Mormon, Arab royalty, or Akon/Snoop Dog in that they have many wives.
You cannot use any arguments based on evolution, because you cannot say that evolution even happened, so if you do say that we are descendants of animals, you are instilling your view that we evolved at me, and I am pretty sure we didn't, or, at least, not in the form that Darwin and his descendants claim.
Oh please, evolution did and still is happening. By saying that you do not believe in evolution you are greatly damaging your argument by making yourself less believable.
Quote from "Equinox" »
Oh, please. Da Vinci was POOR. So where most other peolple with great accomplishments. They didn't do it out of boredom, or out of good life. They did it because their intelligence surpasses one of an animal to the point where they can have interest in things an animal cannot - culture, art, knowledge, technology. Animal hardly ever come close to the same level - maybe a few can repeat some simple beat, like the apes or African tribes.
I like how you put animals, apes, and Africans on the same level. Anyways, even poor people in todays standards have a much less consumed life. They do not need to hunt for food or worry about predators all of the time, and Da Vinci must have had a lot of free time to do all the amazing things he did.
Quote from "Equinox" »
One will also feel incomplete without children, without love, without food, without sleep. And others will feel incomplete without books, without programming a program all day long, without coffee, without driving a car, without playing a sport, without a high salary. Or, without drugs, without cigaretts, without alcohol. People feel incomplete for so many different unnatural reasons... it's all just chemistry, my friend. Chemistry, self-belief, personal psychology and personal viewpoint. And humans do have freedom in those areas. And sometimes a person may feel much more incomplete without driving, let alone without drugs, than without sex. And I know people (men) who don't even think about sex all that much, or who didn't have it up until 20-25 or even longer, and they don't seem to be worried, and they mention the topic of "I want to get laid" a lot less often, or even more rare, than people that did have sex. So is sex a necessity, or just something people pretend to put forward as a necessity to hide their total lack of willpower?
The chemistry you are presenting is addiction, not compulsion. Yes you need to sleep and eat, but that is the basis of survival. Survival and replication are the only true compulsions that we have. Many men have accepted the comfort of not being in relationships because of fear of rejection or personal self-doubts. They grow content with masturbating to porn or whatever and while may act fine, they are not as complete as they could be. Sex is not a necessity in the sense you need it to survive. But it is the strongest driving force in any animals existence next to survival.
Quote from "Equinox" »
Who's depressed? People that don't want to work. Those are the most depressed. Animals, lost in a society ruled by humans, still trying to go on with their animal lifestyle, find themselves unaccepted, despised, just as they should be. We do not give much credit to the dog. Because we are not dogs. We are humans.
Many many people are depressed. Suicide is the number one killer of teenagers in North America, the continent with the best lifestyle. Millions of people are on prescription anti-depressants.
Quote from "Equinox" »
You are making it personal. YOU are speaking for ALL males. You are saying that males are incapable of anything. You are spitting on every male that has ever accomplished something. You are spitting on every male who loved or loves. On every male who is not an animal, on every male who is human. I am not going to agree with you, not until you say "I am bound by those laws" instead of "all males are bound by these laws" because the second is not true.
I don't think you have the right definition of personal. You should have accused me of being 'general'. Because there are a few other aspects to life than mating (although often connected to), does not mean that what I am saying is false.
Quote from "Equinox" »
You have sex with people you don't know, and with people you don't love, therefore, you are a manwhore because you seek sex prior to any other feeling or purpose. Anyone who exercises casual sex is a manwhore in my book. A person who is such a loser he cannot live without sex.
Because I may have had a couple one night stands with people I know little about, does not make me a man whore. Sex is looked down upon extremely in today's Christian society. I won't go into religion, but having sex and spreading one's seed is natural.
Quote from "Equinox" »
Who the hell told you that?
Scientific fact. The fossil record dates back at least 4.6 billion years.
Quote from "Equinox" »
What does that even have to do with this whole discussion?
Because the natural world is a lot more beautiful and harmonious than the world we have created.
If you are trying to use NLP here, you understood it wrong...
Men are not natural polygamists, just as some animals like dolphins and others are not. This is due to the fact that human offspring needs support and protection - protection a female cannot offer due to being weaker. What's the point of a big amount of offspring, if it will all die? We are not frogs. In fact, monkeys, who are supposedly the species we originated from, live in families that support and protect each other.
I believe you are speculating on the origin of human direction based on nothing. I see no proof that males are loners and polygamists - I see the opposite, in fact, men want to love a woman, and they love their children. Are you basing this of the theory of evolution, something some scientist wrote, a certain family of apes, what? I never saw any proof that men are polygamists. And not all men have passion in sex - some transfer it, immensely, into other areas, such as science. Most of the best scientists are men, most of the best artists, anyone who requires enthusiasm, women are much less frequently encountered. Those men are not just animals, they are much higher than that.
I believe you are the one who is speculating based on nothing in order to uphold the ideals and ethics that modern society has instilled in you. I have taken psychology and anthropology courses and also heard many expert opinions from the fields of evolution, psychology, and pick-up analysis. All are consistent with each other, and all point to the reality that I am presenting.
If you wish to use the ape example, then maybe you should have done some research before saying that 'each male lives in a happy family.' Apes travel in packs of around 50-100. As with most animals that live in such numbers, the protection of the young is the responsibility of the whole pack. The leader of the pack is the alpha male. He is the strongest, most intimidating, usually one of the oldest, right to his pickings of the food first, and most importantly has the mating rights for all the females in the pack. He is often referred to as the grayback or silverback depending on species of ape. This male may have a hundred children if he remains the leader long enough, while all other males in the pack may have none. The leader is completely polygamist and while he protects the pack, he does not play any sort of father figure to families. All other male apes in the pack aspire to the role of leader and the chance to spread their genes.
As per your argument that we do more with our passion than sex, this is a subject that holds little relevance. We now have everything we want (in North America anyways) within our household: Permanent shelter, food, water, communication methods... Life is very easy for us and instead of our days being dominated by the search for wild animals to feed off of, we occupy it with other things. These interests are often conducive to our reproductive chances when one is making money, making powerful friends, meeting women, or developing social skills / higher value. While these things are nice distractions, one will feel incomplete if they have not addressed the relationship and mating aspect of their lives.
Quote from "Equinox" »
A human that cannot defy his animal nature is nothing but just another animal, who lives in a transparent cage of propaganda and conformist, and he meets humans similar to him, who also live by the same standards, squirming in their animalistic existence, remaining apes that they are supposedly originating from. I believe men are not all such apes, and I oppose your intent that all men are apes and are not able to defy their primitive nature - they are very well much are, except you aren't, and you bring in Freudian theories to describe your own weakness. You go have sex with random girls because you have no one to tell you it is incorrect, and you have no way to find an explanation for your wrongness, so you try to seek out proof that you are right, and so you come and try to teach people your baseless theories, pretending to know much, when you know nothing; saying men are this, when they are not - trying to explain YOURSELF, instead of realizing that some men are just way above your mind, your will, your purpose.
A human that cannot defy his animal nature is a human, a human that can is something else. We no longer live in this 'pack' society where one man holds all. Everything in our world is a lot more fair. We have laws, police, welfare, monogamous lifestyles... This is the world we have created for our self, and not the one that nature has. Our lifestyle, while maybe vastly 'better' for individuals in society, is a serious detriment to the process of evolution and survival of the fittest. I believe that the main reason for the depression and sadness in the world is because we are not doing what we are wired to do.
Do not make this personal Equinox. While I believe in these scientific principles I am not a man whore or making excuses for any wrongness I have done. You do not accept this reality because it conflicts with your more romantic, idealistic one. I do not believe we should destroy our technology and live in mobile packs. Or that we should have one leader that gets all the girls. Or that we should live in an anarchistic world. But this is the world that we are built to live in. And the world that we have created is very luxurious but at the same time is very destructive to our nature and the planet. Life has been here for billions of years. Who here honestly believes it will last another thousand? Evolution has died for us.
Obalobex, your theory is flawed by the amount of girls chosen by men based not on their looks but on their soul.
The world and society that we live in now is quite different then how it was before our technological advance. We live in a very monogamous world and we need to choose someone to spend many months or years with. Yes, I agree there are personality qualities that women need to have for men to want to have a relationship with them, but men's attraction for women is based 75% off of their looks. Men are natural polygamists (designed that way to produce as many offspring as possible) and so their natural qualifications for non-physical female traits are not as strict as women have for men.
The trick is to make the girl who you are meeting for the first time to think that you are not infatuated by her looks. By doing this you are telling her passively that you have a lot of attractive women in your life and are a high value man. Treat her like a little sister or friend, tease her and play with her but don't show attraction until her personality is given the chance to shine through. Generally the rule is to not indicate any interest sexually in the girl until enough rapport is built up that she shows it towards you.
edit: rapport means comfort level / interest (and the 't' is silent in rapport)
Your entire first paragraph is nonsense and bullshit, and I disagree with every part of it. I think it's gross when a girl displays herself as a hoar. It tells me that person has no self-respect and no self-discipline.
No, I am not as narrow and simple-minded as you. I base my attraction on a deeper and more comprehensive level.
And are you saying by your last statement that if some guy had an "evolutionary" trait that is positive (which, based on evolutionary theory, would mean helps one to overcome challenges and be superior, and thus be part of a dominate species- if you don't agree with this you're not an evolutionist or haven't seriously and critically read Darwin's The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life) a woman should be attracted to him? So if a guy has fuzzy, skinny black wings like a bat and ultrasonic sensing ears a woman should be sexually attracted to him? They would both be an "evolutionary positive trait."
No, that's a stupid thing to base attraction on. When you have sex, maybe muscle puts it up there for you, but once sex is over, it's back to real life and you have to love your partner on the basis of their wit and personality, because that is who a person is. A person is not a muscle-bound football player- that's their body. A person is what you can describe their views and personality by.
And animalism is a word, I just looked it up. But I think you might have meant naturalism, or atheistic naturalism, maybe Equinox? I could be wrong though, but I think that would be more relevant to what they're all talking about.
Girls displaying their evolutionary positive features (wide child-bearing hips, symmetrical face, ideal hip to waste ratio, physically fit, youthful physique and high/round/largeish breasts) are more attractive to us because we can more clearly see their reproduction value.
Small hairy black wings is a mutation, and not a positive trait. The energy and size of wings needed to levitate an average size human is tremendous and will never happen through evolution. A man with muscles generally exudes the feature of an alpha male (leader of men, protector of loved ones, high value) and so women will be drawn to him for that. Evolution does not happen over night. A positive trait in evolution we may see would be something like a bit more developed brain. An evolutionary step like this would aid the human in his life.
By animalism I think she was referring that the psychological workings of humans that I presented could not be accepted because we have somehow evolved beyond our circuitry in the last few millenniums through technology. We are still animals, smart animals who have grown beyond our 'natural' place in the world, but we still feel because we are programed to. The fact that you live in a 40 story building with a plasma TV and a stocked fridge, does not mean that attraction and compulsion triggers will not fire when in certain social situations such as around a high value man.
Third of all, why do you have to have it SO MANY TIMES, and with SO MANY DIFFERENT PARTNERS?
This is something that men are programmed to do, not necessarily women. Men are programmed to be polygamists and spread their seed in as many (attractive) women as possible to ensure that their genes are passed down. Women are programmed to find one good man who will provide her with strong children and possesses the skills and knowledge to protect her and her family. The only time in a woman's circuitry where she would want to diverge is where a man of greater value showed attraction to her.
However in today's society and our mainly male driven world, female promiscuity is somewhere between acceptable and encouraged (at least among people aged 15-25). Women do not generally look for a husband at this age range and so 'playing the field' is beneficial to their ability to get the man they want when they decide.
I am not unique. There are about 20 other girls in robotics just in my country.
Good point.
Edit: This is way off topic
I think I'm going to bail on this thread if it keeps becoming too personal. Recap: Men need to trigger women's evolutionary circuitry and demonstrate themselves as high value males to an attractive female before attraction and courting may occur. Boys should be taught at a young age the way social dynamics and talking to females works as so they do not end up in a lonely, depressing life.
You are jumping between extremities. maybe you should look at my picture. Can't say I have much of a fashion taste, but just because I don't show off my features doesn't mean I cannot wear pleasing.
And why can't I be big on robotics? Or are girls too stupid for that, is that your point here?
Most women - no, I don't speak for the mass that believes everything TV tells them. You're right...
My point is that through most of your personal statements about yourself, it is clear to me that you are quite unique among the female population. I'm not saying women are too stupid for robotics, just that most women do not find that so interesting. It appears you have many more male characteristics than female, and even you say that it is messed up how every other girl thinks. I really am not trying to insult you in any way Equinox; I'm merely musing that since you have separated yourself for the most part from most other women, your ideas about your own circuitry are not necessarily congruent with that of the norm.
0
1. (n.) A result of a friend, stranger, or acquaintance making sexual relations or intercouse impossible (by accident or purposely) with a member of the same or opposite sex.
2. (v.) To make the act of having sexual relations with a member of the same or opposite sex impossible (by accident or on purpose.)
If women want to share their experiences of being cock-blocked (even if they don't have cocks), then go ahead.
To share one of my own, a couple months ago when at university, these two really hot cousins came up to visit. They were a year younger and still in high school, and came to visit their (unattractive) friend who happened to live on my floor. After talking to them a bit I could tell they were both interested in me and they ditched their friend. We went to a couple parties but neither one of them would leave me, or each other. Both were sending me those seductive signals but I couldn't make a move because the other cousin was always right there.
Anyways, the night ended with all three of us lying in my bed and they were all snuggled up to me but I couldn't do anything. The cousins cock-blocked me from each other and then they left for home the next day
0
0
0
0
I'm so sorry. After watching that video again the thought of hellgate resurfaced from my suppressed memories. I think I'm gonna be sick.
0
0
0
Affairs happen all the time. A mid-life crisis is nothing more than our polygamist nature finally breaking the constraints of our monogamous society. You may have not had enough time to experience the need to date or have sex with other women. Just the fact that people have tens to hundreds of relationships in their lives shows that they are polygamous. I am not saying that everyone is, or wants to be, a Mormon, Arab royalty, or Akon/Snoop Dog in that they have many wives.
0
I like how you put animals, apes, and Africans on the same level. Anyways, even poor people in todays standards have a much less consumed life. They do not need to hunt for food or worry about predators all of the time, and Da Vinci must have had a lot of free time to do all the amazing things he did.
The chemistry you are presenting is addiction, not compulsion. Yes you need to sleep and eat, but that is the basis of survival. Survival and replication are the only true compulsions that we have. Many men have accepted the comfort of not being in relationships because of fear of rejection or personal self-doubts. They grow content with masturbating to porn or whatever and while may act fine, they are not as complete as they could be. Sex is not a necessity in the sense you need it to survive. But it is the strongest driving force in any animals existence next to survival.
Many many people are depressed. Suicide is the number one killer of teenagers in North America, the continent with the best lifestyle. Millions of people are on prescription anti-depressants.
I don't think you have the right definition of personal. You should have accused me of being 'general'. Because there are a few other aspects to life than mating (although often connected to), does not mean that what I am saying is false.
Because I may have had a couple one night stands with people I know little about, does not make me a man whore. Sex is looked down upon extremely in today's Christian society. I won't go into religion, but having sex and spreading one's seed is natural.
Scientific fact. The fossil record dates back at least 4.6 billion years.
Because the natural world is a lot more beautiful and harmonious than the world we have created.
0
If you wish to use the ape example, then maybe you should have done some research before saying that 'each male lives in a happy family.' Apes travel in packs of around 50-100. As with most animals that live in such numbers, the protection of the young is the responsibility of the whole pack. The leader of the pack is the alpha male. He is the strongest, most intimidating, usually one of the oldest, right to his pickings of the food first, and most importantly has the mating rights for all the females in the pack. He is often referred to as the grayback or silverback depending on species of ape. This male may have a hundred children if he remains the leader long enough, while all other males in the pack may have none. The leader is completely polygamist and while he protects the pack, he does not play any sort of father figure to families. All other male apes in the pack aspire to the role of leader and the chance to spread their genes.
As per your argument that we do more with our passion than sex, this is a subject that holds little relevance. We now have everything we want (in North America anyways) within our household: Permanent shelter, food, water, communication methods... Life is very easy for us and instead of our days being dominated by the search for wild animals to feed off of, we occupy it with other things. These interests are often conducive to our reproductive chances when one is making money, making powerful friends, meeting women, or developing social skills / higher value. While these things are nice distractions, one will feel incomplete if they have not addressed the relationship and mating aspect of their lives.
A human that cannot defy his animal nature is a human, a human that can is something else. We no longer live in this 'pack' society where one man holds all. Everything in our world is a lot more fair. We have laws, police, welfare, monogamous lifestyles... This is the world we have created for our self, and not the one that nature has. Our lifestyle, while maybe vastly 'better' for individuals in society, is a serious detriment to the process of evolution and survival of the fittest. I believe that the main reason for the depression and sadness in the world is because we are not doing what we are wired to do.
Do not make this personal Equinox. While I believe in these scientific principles I am not a man whore or making excuses for any wrongness I have done. You do not accept this reality because it conflicts with your more romantic, idealistic one. I do not believe we should destroy our technology and live in mobile packs. Or that we should have one leader that gets all the girls. Or that we should live in an anarchistic world. But this is the world that we are built to live in. And the world that we have created is very luxurious but at the same time is very destructive to our nature and the planet. Life has been here for billions of years. Who here honestly believes it will last another thousand? Evolution has died for us.
0
The world and society that we live in now is quite different then how it was before our technological advance. We live in a very monogamous world and we need to choose someone to spend many months or years with. Yes, I agree there are personality qualities that women need to have for men to want to have a relationship with them, but men's attraction for women is based 75% off of their looks. Men are natural polygamists (designed that way to produce as many offspring as possible) and so their natural qualifications for non-physical female traits are not as strict as women have for men.
The trick is to make the girl who you are meeting for the first time to think that you are not infatuated by her looks. By doing this you are telling her passively that you have a lot of attractive women in your life and are a high value man. Treat her like a little sister or friend, tease her and play with her but don't show attraction until her personality is given the chance to shine through. Generally the rule is to not indicate any interest sexually in the girl until enough rapport is built up that she shows it towards you.
edit: rapport means comfort level / interest (and the 't' is silent in rapport)
0
Girls displaying their evolutionary positive features (wide child-bearing hips, symmetrical face, ideal hip to waste ratio, physically fit, youthful physique and high/round/largeish breasts) are more attractive to us because we can more clearly see their reproduction value.
Small hairy black wings is a mutation, and not a positive trait. The energy and size of wings needed to levitate an average size human is tremendous and will never happen through evolution. A man with muscles generally exudes the feature of an alpha male (leader of men, protector of loved ones, high value) and so women will be drawn to him for that. Evolution does not happen over night. A positive trait in evolution we may see would be something like a bit more developed brain. An evolutionary step like this would aid the human in his life.
By animalism I think she was referring that the psychological workings of humans that I presented could not be accepted because we have somehow evolved beyond our circuitry in the last few millenniums through technology. We are still animals, smart animals who have grown beyond our 'natural' place in the world, but we still feel because we are programed to. The fact that you live in a 40 story building with a plasma TV and a stocked fridge, does not mean that attraction and compulsion triggers will not fire when in certain social situations such as around a high value man.
0
This is something that men are programmed to do, not necessarily women. Men are programmed to be polygamists and spread their seed in as many (attractive) women as possible to ensure that their genes are passed down. Women are programmed to find one good man who will provide her with strong children and possesses the skills and knowledge to protect her and her family. The only time in a woman's circuitry where she would want to diverge is where a man of greater value showed attraction to her.
However in today's society and our mainly male driven world, female promiscuity is somewhere between acceptable and encouraged (at least among people aged 15-25). Women do not generally look for a husband at this age range and so 'playing the field' is beneficial to their ability to get the man they want when they decide.
0
Edit: This is way off topic
I think I'm going to bail on this thread if it keeps becoming too personal. Recap: Men need to trigger women's evolutionary circuitry and demonstrate themselves as high value males to an attractive female before attraction and courting may occur. Boys should be taught at a young age the way social dynamics and talking to females works as so they do not end up in a lonely, depressing life.
0
My point is that through most of your personal statements about yourself, it is clear to me that you are quite unique among the female population. I'm not saying women are too stupid for robotics, just that most women do not find that so interesting. It appears you have many more male characteristics than female, and even you say that it is messed up how every other girl thinks. I really am not trying to insult you in any way Equinox; I'm merely musing that since you have separated yourself for the most part from most other women, your ideas about your own circuitry are not necessarily congruent with that of the norm.