Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/6/2015 5:34:23 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
Update-had a conversation the other night with my friend that is on AM. We logged onto her profile and she let me poke around. She made sure to tell me to check out her blocked list. There, as plain as day, was her husband.

She confided that she had given him her blessing regarding seeking sex outside of the marriage. That part of her marriage was dead, but they had other reasons to stay together and she didn't want him to be in the position of either forgoing sex entirely or resorting to cheating.

Of course, he did not offer her the same option. Didn't even occur to him that she may feel the same way. Why? Because he doesn't think that the sorry state of their sex life has anything to do him. Rather it is because...


wait for it...



are you ready for this?




...she is just no longer interested in sex.

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 12:19:53 PM   
crumpets


Posts: 1614
Joined: 11/5/2014
From: South Bay (SF & Silicon Valley)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
That part of her marriage was dead, but they had other reasons to stay together and she didn't want him to be in the position of either forgoing sex entirely or resorting to cheating.

Only tangentially related, I had a long discussion with a half dozen very intelligent people over lunch yesterday, where I was appalled at the bigotry of the gay rights activists who feel that a marriage has nothing to do with religion; a marriage has nothing to do with morals; a marriage has nothing to do with ensuring long-term financial support; a marriage has nothing to do with, heaven forbid, love. And, certainly, a marriage has nothing to do with families.

No. To their bigoted gay-rights view, a marriage is to obtain the same RIGHTs as married heterosexual people enjoy.
What shocked me wasn't that these gay-rights activists discriminated against all other rationales for marriage; what shocked me was how closed-minded their view was.

My concept of marriage is far more open minded and non-discriminatory, as it excludes nobody and doesn't need to destroy anyone's current meaning, in order to fulfill the needs of everyone.

But, the gay-rights activists would have none of these open-minded ideals; they would only accept a supremely narrow bigoted definition of marriage that discriminates against all others, yet, conveniently, includes theirs.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
he doesn't think that the sorry state of their sex life has anything to do him


I can only guess at the figures, but, if you took a million marriages, and if this was the sorry state of affairs in a statistically meaningfully number of them, then, it would be arguably true - that the sorry state of affairs of "that" marriage probably had absolutely nothing to do with "him" (or with "her").

However, if his marriage was one out of a million, then, indeed, it would then be a tenable argument that there was something either about "him" or about "her" that brought them to this state.

The fact that there are over 30 million men on AM alone, implies the former, and not the latter.

< Message edited by crumpets -- 9/7/2015 12:21:46 PM >

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 12:21:33 PM   
longwayhome


Posts: 1035
Joined: 1/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

...she is just no longer interested in sex.


There could of course be all sorts of reasons for that, but even taken at face value, it only relates to that couple and says nothing general about women's attitude towards sex or sex drive.

Indeed it is easy to quote situations where both men and women have sanctioned sex outside of their primary relationship for all sorts of reasons.

I.certainly have no reason to doubt the situation you have recounted but I am struck by the thought that not wanting sex anymore is not necessary a simple matter.

< Message edited by longwayhome -- 9/7/2015 12:42:29 PM >

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 12:25:09 PM   
crumpets


Posts: 1614
Joined: 11/5/2014
From: South Bay (SF & Silicon Valley)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I am struck by the thought that not wanting sex anymore is not necessary a simple matter.


I am not a psychologist, so, this single cherry-picked anecdote is only a single datum, worth very little, except to provide an example of a "frigid" woman (yes, I know it's not a PC word).

I have intimate knowledge of a woman who is married, yet, has NEVER been intimate with her husband, and who has NEVER felt the need to play with herself or to own a rabbit or to even provide a simple charity blow job to her husband.

She has absolutely no sexual desire whatsoever.
He, on the other hand, is out of luck - but he stays married - for religious and family reasons.

Of course, he finds a way, as life always finds a way to locate water in a desert.

(in reply to longwayhome)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 12:39:53 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
married or not, "romantic" to me is seeing two old farts (in their 70's, 80's, 90's) holding hands as they walk down the street and still looking at each other with love in their eyes.. For some reason that used to exist, where couples thought of the other first, not themselves first, but society has changed, people have become narcissistic and self-absorbed carrying around their selfie stick and cell and tweeting about their superficial experiences.. when people are like that, of course life-long monogamy isnt realistic.. heck, 1 week of monogamy could be asking too much!


There's a lot of assumptions in this paragraph.

1. That older couple may be just dating. Or hooking up. The largest growing population of STIs is in the senior crowd, as more people are outliving their spouse and still enjoying dating and romping in the sack.

2. It used to be that getting a divorce was MUCH MUCH harder. so, people stayed married. Divorce used to require that you dragged your spouse through the mud and prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they were a despicable human being who deserved public shame and dishonor. Today, people who are unhappy because of their marriages divorce, so are no longer married. 60 years ago, people who were miserable in their marriage stayed married.

3. You are assuming love. That was not always (or even more often) the case. It was practicality, legality, and often, the inability to function without each other, eventually. Especially for the woman, who would get no alimony, no child support, had to leave without job prospects or an education, etc.


of course I am making some assumptions, in some/many cases my assumptions are correct, in other cases maybe not but then if i see such a couple walking in the park i am not gonna go up to them and ask them if they are really in love/been married for decades or if they are just hooking up!!!!

Not that they are "old farts" but I think Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick have that kinda romantic long term relationship.. yes, i am making certain assumptions there too, such as that they really are in love and tweeting about being happily married for 27 years isnt just a PR campaign..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to NookieNotes)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 1:03:52 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
married or not, "romantic" to me is seeing two old farts (in their 70's, 80's, 90's) holding hands as they walk down the street and still looking at each other with love in their eyes..

If only most relationships would work out this way, the world would be a better place for all of us.
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
For some reason that used to exist, where couples thought of the other first, not themselves first, but society has changed, people have become narcissistic and self-absorbed carrying around their selfie stick and cell and tweeting about their superficial experiences.. when people are like that, of course life-long monogamy isnt realistic.. heck, 1 week of monogamy could be asking too much!

I think it exists.
But I also think that men need "more" sex than one woman gives them (define "more" any way that makes sense).
It's just a biological fact, which I only know from observation.

We've been down this road though, so, I will state that many people will say that I'm wrong (mostly women but some men), so, I may be wrong - but - it's my very humble opinion that men will ALWAYS cheat (in general) simply because the woman that SHOULD satisfy him sexually, does not satisfy him sexually (for whatever reason, I'm not making a judgment call).

If this wasn't true, then the numbers would be different.

I dont know about most women but I know one of the reasons i kicked my hubby to the curb was that he stopped wanting sex.. in hindsight I always was the initiator and wanted more sex than him.. And I will say that for me, sex wasnt just about sex, it was a bonding thing and without sex, eventually love simply dies.. there needs to be intimacy and bonding to keep love strong..

I think a lot of relationships have a mis-matched couple where one wants it once a week and the other wants it once a day.. but people fall in love with each other usually before that becomes an issue and the mis-match known to them.. as a result, before meeting guys, I have asked (online) men how often they like sex.. if the difference is too great then why meet/date? While differences in how a couple spends money is the most cited reason for divorces, imo sex differences are probably the second most cited reason...

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 1:32:34 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets
Only tangentially related, I had a long discussion with a half dozen very intelligent people over lunch yesterday, where I was appalled at the bigotry of the gay rights activists who feel that a marriage has nothing to do with religion; a marriage has nothing to do with morals; a marriage has nothing to do with ensuring long-term financial support; a marriage has nothing to do with, heaven forbid, love. And, certainly, a marriage has nothing to do with families.

No. To their bigoted gay-rights view, a marriage is to obtain the same RIGHTs as married heterosexual people enjoy.
What shocked me wasn't that these gay-rights activists discriminated against all other rationales for marriage; what shocked me was how closed-minded their view was.

Who are these gay rights activists exactly? You are speaking about them in a very general sense, it seems, yet this is not what any mainstream activists that I have ever heard speak about.

Yes, they do speak about wanting the same rights as heterosexual couples. But when talking about what those rights are, they generally speak of having the right to live within their own moral framework, having the right to build a financial future with their partner without having to worry about how the legal status of their partnership could hinder that future, having the right to express their love the same as heterosexual couples do, and having the right to build a family that has the legal protections that marriage affords heterosexual couples.
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

I can only guess at the figures, but, if you took a million marriages, and if this was the sorry state of affairs in a statistically meaningfully number of them, then, it would be arguably true - that the sorry state of affairs of "that" marriage probably had absolutely nothing to do with "him" (or with "her").

However, if his marriage was one out of a million, then, indeed, it would then be a tenable argument that there was something either about "him" or about "her" that brought them to this state.

The fact that there are over 30 million men on AM alone, implies the former, and not the latter.


So the sorry state of my friend's marriage has nothing to do with him or her? Seriously?

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 1:44:34 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
There could of course be all sorts of reasons for that, but even taken at face value, it only relates to that couple and says nothing general about women's attitude towards sex or sex drive.


Agreed, but there has been a bit of discussion in this thread about the assumption that is often made about women, regarding sex drive. That if a women does not want a man, then it must be because she isn't interested in sex. That it could not possibly have anything to do with the woman not being attracted to that particular man. I thought it interesting that that is exactly the assumption that is being made by the husband in this case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I.certainly have no reason to doubt the situation you have recounted but I am struck by the thought that not wanting sex anymore is not necessary a simple matter.

I'm not sure what you are responding to here. I was pointing out that my friend's husband believes that her not wanting sex is the issue, but that it is not the case. In reality, she is seeking it out, just not from him.

(in reply to longwayhome)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/7/2015 2:01:52 PM   
longwayhome


Posts: 1035
Joined: 1/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
There could of course be all sorts of reasons for that, but even taken at face value, it only relates to that couple and says nothing general about women's attitude towards sex or sex drive.


Agreed, but there has been a bit of discussion in this thread about the assumption that is often made about women, regarding sex drive. That if a women does not want a man, then it must be because she isn't interested in sex. That it could not possibly have anything to do with the woman not being attracted to that particular man. I thought it interesting that that is exactly the assumption that is being made by the husband in this case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I.certainly have no reason to doubt the situation you have recounted but I am struck by the thought that not wanting sex anymore is not necessary a simple matter.

I'm not sure what you are responding to here. I was pointing out that my friend's husband believes that her not wanting sex is the issue, but that it is not the case. In reality, she is seeking it out, just not from him.



Apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 5:34:35 AM   
NookieNotes


Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
That part of her marriage was dead, but they had other reasons to stay together and she didn't want him to be in the position of either forgoing sex entirely or resorting to cheating.

Only tangentially related, I had a long discussion with a half dozen very intelligent people over lunch yesterday, where I was appalled at the bigotry of the gay rights activists who feel that a marriage has nothing to do with religion; a marriage has nothing to do with morals; a marriage has nothing to do with ensuring long-term financial support; a marriage has nothing to do with, heaven forbid, love. And, certainly, a marriage has nothing to do with families.

No. To their bigoted gay-rights view, a marriage is to obtain the same RIGHTs as married heterosexual people enjoy.
What shocked me wasn't that these gay-rights activists discriminated against all other rationales for marriage; what shocked me was how closed-minded their view was.

My concept of marriage is far more open minded and non-discriminatory, as it excludes nobody and doesn't need to destroy anyone's current meaning, in order to fulfill the needs of everyone.

But, the gay-rights activists would have none of these open-minded ideals; they would only accept a supremely narrow bigoted definition of marriage that discriminates against all others, yet, conveniently, includes theirs.


Marriage for gay people is about getting the same rights.

Perhaps you can open your own mind, because to me, it is incredibly closed. You are not accepting their point of view, you are judging it is wrong and narrow-minded. You are suggesting their version of marriage is out to destroy others' current meaning.

Let's take a look at the fact that gays have NOT be allowed to legally marry, and the things you think are part of marriage:

religion: Gays have had or not had religion without marriage for the history of time.
morals: Gays have had or not had morals without marriage for the history of time.
long-term financial support: Gays have had or not had long-term financial support without marriage for the history of time.
love: Gays have had or not had love without marriage for the history of time.
families: Gays have had or not had families without marriage for the history of time.

What they have NOT HAD AT ALL is equal rights.

And marriage gives those to them. In fact, let's look at non-gay humans:

religion: Many people have religion without being married.
morals: Many people have morals without being married.
long-term financial support: Many people have morals without being married.
love: Many people have love without being married.
families: SOOOO many people have families without being married.

And, as another point, taken from many dictionaries:

mar·riage
ˈmerij/
noun
1. the legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship.
2. the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law
3. the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
4. The legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship

So, as you can see, while these definitions speak of legality and agreements/states, they do NOT speak of love, morality, religion, families, or long-term support.

You are the one trying to force your own erroneous assumptions onto others, and getting indignant that they don't support your false view of the world.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
he doesn't think that the sorry state of their sex life has anything to do him


I can only guess at the figures, but, if you took a million marriages, and if this was the sorry state of affairs in a statistically meaningfully number of them, then, it would be arguably true - that the sorry state of affairs of "that" marriage probably had absolutely nothing to do with "him" (or with "her").

However, if his marriage was one out of a million, then, indeed, it would then be a tenable argument that there was something either about "him" or about "her" that brought them to this state.

The fact that there are over 30 million men on AM alone, implies the former, and not the latter.


So, to use your logic in another area, because there are millions of fat people, it has nothing to do with "him" or "her," since, obviously, individuals aren't to blame when there are such numbers. It's not how the people eat or think. It's something else, to absolve them of personal guilt.

Your logic is so incredibly flawed.


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
married or not, "romantic" to me is seeing two old farts (in their 70's, 80's, 90's) holding hands as they walk down the street and still looking at each other with love in their eyes.. For some reason that used to exist, where couples thought of the other first, not themselves first, but society has changed, people have become narcissistic and self-absorbed carrying around their selfie stick and cell and tweeting about their superficial experiences.. when people are like that, of course life-long monogamy isnt realistic.. heck, 1 week of monogamy could be asking too much!


There's a lot of assumptions in this paragraph.

1. That older couple may be just dating. Or hooking up. The largest growing population of STIs is in the senior crowd, as more people are outliving their spouse and still enjoying dating and romping in the sack.

2. It used to be that getting a divorce was MUCH MUCH harder. so, people stayed married. Divorce used to require that you dragged your spouse through the mud and prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they were a despicable human being who deserved public shame and dishonor. Today, people who are unhappy because of their marriages divorce, so are no longer married. 60 years ago, people who were miserable in their marriage stayed married.

3. You are assuming love. That was not always (or even more often) the case. It was practicality, legality, and often, the inability to function without each other, eventually. Especially for the woman, who would get no alimony, no child support, had to leave without job prospects or an education, etc.


of course I am making some assumptions, in some/many cases my assumptions are correct, in other cases maybe not but then if i see such a couple walking in the park i am not gonna go up to them and ask them if they are really in love/been married for decades or if they are just hooking up!!!!

Not that they are "old farts" but I think Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick have that kinda romantic long term relationship.. yes, i am making certain assumptions there too, such as that they really are in love and tweeting about being happily married for 27 years isnt just a PR campaign..


I'm not implying you should ask. Nor am I saying that thinking long-term marriages/relationships are amazing is a bad thing.

I'm just saying that projection is one of those things that can cause poor logic.

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 8:49:37 AM   
crumpets


Posts: 1614
Joined: 11/5/2014
From: South Bay (SF & Silicon Valley)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
I think Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick have that kinda romantic long term relationship.. yes, i am making certain assumptions there too, such as that they really are in love and tweeting about being happily married for 27 years isnt just a PR campaign..


I'm pretty scared when any argument uses a fairy-tale life, written, produced, and directed by their respective agents and/or full-time media managers, as the canonical example...

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 8:59:03 AM   
crumpets


Posts: 1614
Joined: 11/5/2014
From: South Bay (SF & Silicon Valley)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
he stopped wanting sex.. in hindsight I always was the initiator and wanted more sex than him..


I must admit, although it dilutes my argument somewhat, that I too know of women who tell me their husbands no longer "want sex" from them. I won't say how I met these women, but, let's just say a certain ad brought the two of us together for a quiet tête-à-tête at a local coffee shop, so, I would have to clarify that I only heard one side of the story in those few cases.

In each case, I was glad to oblige the lady, all the while being shocked (and perhaps somewhat disingenuously professing more shock than I would normally feel under the circumstances for theatrical purposes) at the dismal state of affairs that the lady outlined.

HOWEVER ... I have always said that my statements are about the BIG PICTURE.

Specifically, this thread is about male-to-female ratios on Ashley Madison, which, we can assume, means that men-cheat-on-Ashley-Madison-at-a-greater-rate-than-women-cheat-on-Ashley-Madison!

[EDIT: That statistic doesn't, all by itself, imply that married women don't cheat, because it's entirely possible that they do cheat, but that they just cheat in a less-Ashley-Madison way.]

Here are the only two facts I can state that are on topic:
Ashley Madison, as far as I can make out, is a cheater's web site.
The ratios, we all must agree, are VASTLY skewed.

But, as I've previously admitted, I can't think of a single place or thing that I do that isn't 100:1 men to women, so, it may very well be simply that women cheat in a different way, in a different place, and in different ratios than do men.

Certainly, if there aren't 100 men for every woman in the State of California, then, the women must be hanging out SOMEWHERE. Perhaps that's where they do their cheating. I don't know. (I never professed to understand women, and, for once, I doubt many of you will disagree with my point.)

But I don't think that comparison topic was the point of the OP in opening this thread.

< Message edited by crumpets -- 9/8/2015 9:09:22 AM >

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 9:20:34 AM   
crumpets


Posts: 1614
Joined: 11/5/2014
From: South Bay (SF & Silicon Valley)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
Marriage for gay people is about getting the same rights.

I know. I understand the entire gay-rights argument.
That's why I know it's bigoted.
They discriminate, for example, against people who feel that marriage is NOT ONLY about rights.
They brush off anyone who feels, as I do, that marriage is critical for having children (and protecting them).
They conveniently forget that other people have DIFFERENT feelings about marriage.

In short, gay-rights activists are nothing but bigots who don't even realize how narrow-minded they are.

Just to give you an idea of how "P" type "I" am, I feel that marriage consists of EVERYTHING that everyone feels it is.
That includes religion.
That includes family.
That includes divorce-law protection.
That includes the right to pull the plug.
That includes hospital-visitation rights.
That includes rights of survivorship.
That includes estate rights.
That includes health-insurance coverage.
That includes citizenship rights.
That includes FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES (this is the big kahuna!)
etc.

In short, marriage isn't JUST about the selfish attitude that it's "just" about rights; and marriage isn't just about the bigoted view that it's just about sexual orientation. Gay rights activists are the biggest bunch of bigots I've ever met because they don't see themselves for who they really are.

Personally, they hate "MY" idea of marriage, which is that it is everything that it is to everyone (why else would a Kentucky clerk be in jail right now, if it wasn't for what it meant "TO HER!").

To me, marriage confers RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES, and PRIVILAGES which should be offered to any number of human beings of any sexual, religious, and political orientation whatsoever, of any age (yup, any age - unless otherwise forbidden by law); and, get this, since it's inescapable, I believe that each country acts as a CERTIFYING AUTHORITY that the rules of marriage have been followed, and therefore, EVERY OTHER COUNTRY needs to ACCEPT the certificate that the CA provides (much like how we do banking security on the web where a TRUST system is set up).

You see, marriage is complicated.
The selfishly bigoted gay-rights activists prefer to "conveniently" simplify it down to a single component.
They are the biggest bigots of all.

Funny though, I'm in favor of all people getting married (my only caveat is that I wish marriage to be limited to the same species).
But, I think we went a bit off topic ...

(in reply to NookieNotes)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 9:52:43 AM   
NookieNotes


Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
Marriage for gay people is about getting the same rights.

I know. I understand the entire gay-rights argument.
That's why I know it's bigoted.
They discriminate, for example, against people who feel that marriage is NOT ONLY about rights.
They brush off anyone who feels, as I do, that marriage is critical for having children (and protecting them).
They conveniently forget that other people have DIFFERENT feelings about marriage.

In short, gay-rights activists are nothing but bigots who don't even realize how narrow-minded they are.

Just to give you an idea of how "P" type "I" am, I feel that marriage consists of EVERYTHING that everyone feels it is.
That includes religion.
That includes family.
That includes divorce-law protection.
That includes the right to pull the plug.
That includes hospital-visitation rights.
That includes rights of survivorship.
That includes estate rights.
That includes health-insurance coverage.
That includes citizenship rights.
That includes FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES (this is the big kahuna!)
etc.

In short, marriage isn't JUST about the selfish attitude that it's "just" about rights; and marriage isn't just about the bigoted view that it's just about sexual orientation. Gay rights activists are the biggest bunch of bigots I've ever met because they don't see themselves for who they really are.

Personally, they hate "MY" idea of marriage, which is that it is everything that it is to everyone (why else would a Kentucky clerk be in jail right now, if it wasn't for what it meant "TO HER!").


Well, I don't know your friends, but I'll just trust you that they HATE your idea of marriage, which is nothing I've ever experienced before from any activists, but hey, you were there.

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 12:24:29 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
I think Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick have that kinda romantic long term relationship.. yes, i am making certain assumptions there too, such as that they really are in love and tweeting about being happily married for 27 years isnt just a PR campaign..


I'm pretty scared when any argument uses a fairy-tale life, written, produced, and directed by their respective agents and/or full-time media managers, as the canonical example...

well, most people know who they are.. and I expect they do their own twitter stuff, not have some agent/manager do it for them.. I would not say their life is a fairy-tale.. not everything has gone swimmingly for them, they lost a lot of money with that whole Madoff debacle, after all.. I for one am happy that they have a great marriage.. quite frankly, its nice to see that and the few other high profile marriages that last decades and are based in reality, and not on glamour and glitz and phoney smiles for the camera.. Their industry is an especially hard one on relationships, if ya hadn't noticed..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 12:39:26 PM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
he stopped wanting sex.. in hindsight I always was the initiator and wanted more sex than him..


I must admit, although it dilutes my argument somewhat, that I too know of women who tell me their husbands no longer "want sex" from them. I won't say how I met these women, but, let's just say a certain ad brought the two of us together for a quiet tête-à-tête at a local coffee shop, so, I would have to clarify that I only heard one side of the story in those few cases.

In each case, I was glad to oblige the lady, all the while being shocked (and perhaps somewhat disingenuously professing more shock than I would normally feel under the circumstances for theatrical purposes) at the dismal state of affairs that the lady outlined.

HOWEVER ... I have always said that my statements are about the BIG PICTURE.

Specifically, this thread is about male-to-female ratios on Ashley Madison, which, we can assume, means that men-cheat-on-Ashley-Madison-at-a-greater-rate-than-women-cheat-on-Ashley-Madison!

[EDIT: That statistic doesn't, all by itself, imply that married women don't cheat, because it's entirely possible that they do cheat, but that they just cheat in a less-Ashley-Madison way.]

Here are the only two facts I can state that are on topic:
Ashley Madison, as far as I can make out, is a cheater's web site.
The ratios, we all must agree, are VASTLY skewed.

But, as I've previously admitted, I can't think of a single place or thing that I do that isn't 100:1 men to women, so, it may very well be simply that women cheat in a different way, in a different place, and in different ratios than do men.

Certainly, if there aren't 100 men for every woman in the State of California, then, the women must be hanging out SOMEWHERE. Perhaps that's where they do their cheating. I don't know. (I never professed to understand women, and, for once, I doubt many of you will disagree with my point.)

But I don't think that comparison topic was the point of the OP in opening this thread.

well duh.. no one knows for certain what the ratio is (other than the website itself) and I was giving my experience and view point..

while you think men on AM cheat more than women on their do.. I would say that men on AM try to cheat more.. it is questionable just how successful they actually are, and how many end up having to pay $$$ for it instead.. I think how someone (men, women) cheat depends on where he/she is in their life.. when i was young i was active and out doing things, i would always be meeting new people (easy to cheat), once you "settle down" you sorta settle into a rut of the same activities, same boring people which imo makes it harder to cheat, hence where the internet fills the gap.. But that is no different than if you are single and trying to date.. you do it differently at different stages of life, imo..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 2:39:13 PM   
sexyred1


Posts: 8998
Joined: 8/9/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crumpets


quote:

ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar
Reversely, the guys who know what they're doing in the sack never seem to have any complaints at all about female sex drives... interesting how to works...


We've been down this road before.
If you actually believe that the average female's sex drive is anywhere near an order of magnitude of the average male's sex drive, then you don't fundamentally understand men.


No, it's YOU who does not understand women, which is obvious from your myriad postings on men vs women's sex drives or reasons for cheating. I don't understand why you are not hearing that women are telling you that we love sex as much if not more than men. And when we have satisfying sex partners, our horniness is off the charts. I feel bad that you never encountered a woman like that.

I won't even get into your comment that there are no women on the Internet in other areas, that is insane.

Let's get real about AM, dating sites, cheating, etc. we now live in a world with Tinder. Everyone under the age of 30 is on Tinder for one thing only, hookups. The men are thrilled because they get to fuck women with no dating, courtship, or getting to know them. The women on Tinder are on there because they claim that's where their age group goes. Even on college campuses, which is amazing.

A recent article in Vanity Fair went in depth on this, and when asked if those on Tinder (and OKCupid, Match.com, almost every dating site) wanted to find love and companionship with eventual marriage and commitment, 100% of the men said no, it was too easy not to have to date when women so easily fucked them. 100% of women, young and old said, yes, they wanted love, a boyfriend and future marriage and commitment, but couldn't find men to actually date, so they just went with whatever happened. I am talking about attractive, intelligent men and women here, not desperate people.

None of these women were happy about being fucked and dumped. Interestingly, none of them would admit that it was their fault for not valuing themselves more and making men get to know them. Even if the women had great sex (which most of them did not), when they wanted to see the men a second time the men refused, so the women ended up faking a bravado that masked how used they felt.

Our society lets men and women treat each other as disposable and interchangeable. People are lazy and don't value their relationships or respect each other.

You can all argue endlessly about this, but the answer lies in the ease of technology and how it actually destroyed interpersonal relationships and mutual respect.

I never thought I would be so happy to be older. At least I had real dates, real relationships and a real marriage where we worked on it, and no, we didn't cheat.




< Message edited by sexyred1 -- 9/8/2015 2:43:11 PM >

(in reply to crumpets)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 3:44:33 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
There could of course be all sorts of reasons for that, but even taken at face value, it only relates to that couple and says nothing general about women's attitude towards sex or sex drive.


Agreed, but there has been a bit of discussion in this thread about the assumption that is often made about women, regarding sex drive. That if a women does not want a man, then it must be because she isn't interested in sex. That it could not possibly have anything to do with the woman not being attracted to that particular man. I thought it interesting that that is exactly the assumption that is being made by the husband in this case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome
I.certainly have no reason to doubt the situation you have recounted but I am struck by the thought that not wanting sex anymore is not necessary a simple matter.

I'm not sure what you are responding to here. I was pointing out that my friend's husband believes that her not wanting sex is the issue, but that it is not the case. In reality, she is seeking it out, just not from him.




Apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

None needed. The more the merrier!

< Message edited by Wayward5oul -- 9/8/2015 3:45:18 PM >

(in reply to longwayhome)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/8/2015 7:04:34 PM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
Fast reply...

cloudboy, what have I been telling you for years???

Chicks don't need an internet site to get laid!!!



If I just wanted a one-off, I'd go to the bar.


_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison - 9/9/2015 3:48:24 AM   
NookieNotes


Posts: 1720
Joined: 11/10/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

If I just wanted a one-off, I'd go to the bar.



Or just text random dude in my phone who's been begging for it for years.

_____________________________

Nookie
--
https://datingkinky.com

I Write! A few of my books on Amazon: http://amazon.com/author/msnnotes

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Male to Female Ratios -- Look at Ashley Madison Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125