BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Unread 07-02-2014, 04:57 PM
muki's Avatar
muki muki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
MysteryMonkey
You gotta change that DLV nick brah...its kinda AFC
You will not close any HB with that...
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Unread 07-02-2014, 05:15 PM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

Since this has gotten pretty off topic and we're now on genders anyway... what I find kind of interesting is the discrepancy in female to male attraction and male to male attraction.

There's individual preference and commonalities, but in general it seems being a short male tends to have much stronger negative stigma as viewed by women. As viewed by gay men it seems to much more varied (height is netural, short is positive, short is negative). Also being a slender male ("twink") seems more popular among gay men than straight women ("scrawny").

Quote:
Oh for goodness sake. Because it makes people feel good about themselves. You look at yourself with pride rather than loathing. It doesn't always have to be about everybody else. Sometimes it can be just about *you*. Because you've achieved something, probably something that most others have not achieved, yet they too may regard it as desirable.
Well said

Last edited by noah_k : 07-02-2014 at 05:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Unread 07-02-2014, 06:13 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muki View Post
You gotta change that DLV nick brah...its kinda AFC
You will not close any HB with that...
Waving around cash gets you to DDB faster than the rest of that nonsense.

And Monkstery was the funnier answer.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Unread 07-02-2014, 06:16 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah_k View Post
Since this has gotten pretty off topic and we're now on genders anyway... what I find kind of interesting is the discrepancy in female to male attraction and male to male attraction.

There's individual preference and commonalities, but in general it seems being a short male tends to have much stronger negative stigma as viewed by women.
Relatively worse genetics, women want to feel protected and a man shorter than them can't adequately do that.

Quote:
As viewed by gay men it seems to much more varied (height is netural, short is positive, short is negative). Also being a slender male ("twink") seems more popular among gay men than straight women ("scrawny").
Many gay relationships would seem to be nothing but a typical hetero coupling with the same genitals.

You commonly see a bully dyke lesbian with a femme for example. The dynamics are IDENTICAL to a typical hetero coupling, there's just no penis. One is butch, manly, controlling, the other is little, feminine, controlled. I've seen this at bars and it might as well be a dude and a girly girl for all it would matter.

Same thing here I suspect in the gay community. Bear/twink dyad is just a big hairy guy with a small hairless....turns out to be a dude. But you could put a female in that role (twinks are usually bottoms in the same way women are the penetratees) for all it would matter. There just happens to be the same genitals involved.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Unread 07-02-2014, 06:33 PM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

Then how do you explain dominant twinks, submissive short swole guys, and super common twink/twink pairings! Nor does it cover the bisexual who goes for androgynous or butch women but feminine men. I get what you're saying but I believe it's a hell of a lot more nuanced than that.

To go with that, lot of androgyny or sex-opposite masculinity/femininity is suspected to come from just personal identity completely independent of sexual attraction. Maybe it happens to be a lot more prevalent because of a social culture that doesn't stigmatize it as much. A lot easier to give into certain tendencies or inclinations than as a straight guy who is deliberately keen to play a masculine role (and ignoring / not embracing anything to the contrary).

Quote:
twinks are usually bottoms in the same way women are the penetratees
As a reliable rule, that would make things a lot simpler
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Unread 07-02-2014, 06:51 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah_k View Post
Then how do you explain dominant twinks, submissive short swole guys, and super common twink/twink pairings! Nor does it cover the bisexual who goes for androgynous or butch women but feminine men. I get what you're saying but I believe it's a hell of a lot more nuanced than that.
I claim no expertise of gay sex practices.

But little girls can be dominant over men too so I'm not sure what your point is.

I also did not say that was the ONLY type of bisexual pairing. Note the words "You commonly see a bully dyke lesbian with a femme for example."

Commonly. NOT exclusively. See, words mean things. They are funny that way (they mean what they mean, not what you heard) and I was not talking in the absolutes you seem to have heard.

As i had it explained to me years ago, there are many categories of dyad

butch/femme
sporty lesbians
another that is similar to sporty but called something else but where there is no really 'clear' distinction between male and female roles
femme/femme (lipstick, usually bicurious or experimenting girls).

And I'm sure there's even more variations on that theme at this point in time. And there are simlar variations among hetero dyads. And I would presume homosexual male dyads. None of which changes the majority dynamics or anything I said.

But this isn't an argument for this site or this thread so feel free to keep your self-righteous indignation at what you think I said (but in no way did say) to yourself. You clearly have some emotional investment in this by your mis-reading what I actually wrote and responding to what you actually heard.

I'm not interested in debating the nuances of gender theory or dynamics since what goes on among what is a minority clearly has fairly little relevance to the dynamics of the majority (even if that minority is just godawful loud in yelling that they aren't just a tiny minority but they are objectively incorrect in this).

Let's talk about furries instead. At least that's interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Unread 07-02-2014, 07:16 PM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

Quote:
At least that's interesting.
This isn't interesting? It is to me..

Sorry if it came across as self-righteous or critical, that wasn't what I was going for. Wasn't making a debate or argument out of that, or argue some emotionally invested social cause. I just find it curious, possible discrepancies from what I've noticed. Not conclusive proofs of a greater theory or argument as a whole. Interesting as in like you say "I'm sure there's even more variations on that theme at this point in time." Not something from what I've.. studied at length or so.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Unread 07-02-2014, 07:19 PM
Brambles Brambles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 261
Default

+1 on the glutes. Women's glute affinity seems to be generally underrepresented. Given that 1) most lifting men somehow miss leg day 2) most men don't go out of their way to show off their butts (wrt to fashion) and 3) mens clothing isn't designed with flattery in mind as much as womens; it must be a rare and impressive thing for a straight woman to see a guy with glutes she likes.

Men are assailed by countless women with leggings and such. There has to be a difference in the "perceptual sensitivity" between the genders; along the same line as showing the lower leg being considered racy many years ago vs our sensitivity today.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Unread 07-02-2014, 09:15 PM
yksin's Avatar
yksin yksin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
As i had it explained to me years ago, there are many categories of dyad

butch/femme
sporty lesbians
another that is similar to sporty but called something else but where there is no really 'clear' distinction between male and female roles
femme/femme (lipstick, usually bicurious or experimenting girls).

And I'm sure there's even more variations on that theme at this point in time.
Yes, there are.

There was once a private social organization here called OPAL, standing for the Organization for Professional Alaska Lesbians. I was never invited to join it. I guess I was just too much of an amateur to get paid.

— Mel
__________________
Progress log (RFL cat. 3) Blog
5-1/4" (160 cm), 55, female, insulin resistant
Restart 17 Mar 2014: start 198.2 (89.9 kg) > current 180.8 (82.0 kg) (post-diet break) > goal 140 (63.6 kg)
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Unread 07-03-2014, 03:26 AM
muki's Avatar
muki muki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
And that's probably all nonsense anyway, because we're never satisfied with our physiques regardless of how we look.
True, but I would say that is the way it should be. You should never be fully satisfied with your achievements so far, in any area of our life. Instead you should always try to improve yourself...to make that additional step, regardless how small, but still a step forward.
It does not matter weather it means gainining that 1 pound of muscle in next 3months, pulling additional 5pounds at BP, learning a new language or ideally all of them. This is how I think a healthy mindset should be set. A strong foundation for confidence and solid self esteem... and a strong attraction factor at the end of the day

Going to another extreme, setting yourself with unrealistic, unachiavable goals or comparing your achivements exclusively with achievements of others (who btw do not have the same predispositions nor conditions) is a one way street to frustration.

Last edited by muki : 07-03-2014 at 03:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.