How to Pick Up Girls

[Pietro]

 

The enormous difference between male and female sexual behaviour may be explained, in animals at least, by a tiny organ in the nose rather than by any gender difference in brain circuitry.

 

So say investigators in the United States, who admit to being stunned by the finding and the implications for the understanding of sexuality.

 

In a study published by the British journal Nature, the team engineered female lab mice so that the rodents lacked a gene called TRPC2, effectively short-circuiting the so-called vomeronasal organ.

 

This tiny organ in the nose is packed with receptor cells that pick up pheromones - primitive scents that trigger aggression and sexual responses in land-dwelling vertebrates.

 

To the scientists' surprise, the mutant female mice behaved like men at a Seventies disco night.

 

They sniffed and ran after females, flounced their pelvises, mounted and thrust at male mice, issuing ultrasonic squeaks of the kind that males emit to show lurv.

 

The behaviour was not all-male, though. The engineered mice mated with males in a female-typical manner.

 

And unlike normal males, they did not attack other males.

 

But when their babies were born, they again became feckless males, insouciant about raising their offspring and keen on having more sex.

 

Usually, female mice spend around 80 per cent of their time in their nest nursing their newborns and while lactating will attack male intruders and reject any attempt at a cuddle.

 

But for the mutant mother mice, it was party time.

 

'Flabbergasting' results

 

Just two days after giving birth, they started to wander away from the nest and eventually abandoned the babies altogether and when a male showed up, they were docile and receptive to courtship.

 

"These results are flabbergasting," Catherine Dulac said, a professor of molecular and cellular biology at Harvard University and a researcher with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, who led the work.

 

"Nobody had imagined that a simple [genetic] mutation like this could induce females to behave so thoroughly like males."

 

To check whether there could be any factors in the mutant mice that could induce this dramatic behaviour change, the scientists surgically removed the vomeronasal organs from the noses of normal female mice and the same thing happened.

 

The findings are important, because they amount to a massive blow to those who for decades have looked for underlying differences in brain structure to explain why sexual behaviour between males and females is so dissimilar.

 

The answer appears to be this: in the mice at least, there is no difference. The hard-wiring of the brains is the same.

 

"In the big picture, it suggests that the female brain has a perfectly functional male behaviour circuit" which is repressed by signals from the vomeronasal organ, Professor Dulac says.

 

Seen from the perspective of developmental biology, "the finding is very satisfactory", she says.

 

"It means you only have to build one brain in a species and that the one brain is built, more or less, the same in the male and female."

 

- AFP

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/08/06/1997168.htm

 

 

Thanks for the interesting story.

 

Of course mice and human beings are quite different. At least in most cases.

 

Second the genotypical distance and the phenotypical distance can be quite different. In other words you can have something that are very close at the cause level and very different at the effect level.

 

You can induce a tiny variation in the gene and have an animal have an extra pair of legs, this does not make the animal with the extra pair of legs be 'similar' to the animal with the normal pair of legs. Because the distance at the genetic leve is tiny but the distance at the phenotypical level is huge.

 

Some years ago they were discussing if they were to expand human rights to primates too, after all 97% (or more, I don't remember) of the genetic material is in common. SO they said, shouldn't we provide them with 97% of our rights?

A scientis asked? Banana have 50% of genetic material in common with human beings. Should we give them 50% of our rights?

 

Beside all this when did you said that your diet also induced variations in your nose?

 

Sorry, you are still not a man.

Pietro

[witch]

"the scientists surgically removed the vomeronasal organs from the noses of normal female mice and the same thing happened."

 

It's not genetic, female sexual behavior (in mice at least) is different from male sexual behavior only because of that organ, not because of any genes.

 

This question is, as you say, of mice and men. Time will tell.

[Wayfarer64]

of mice and men was a good tale... but the corolation seems dubious to me in this instance

[Pietro]

"the scientists surgically removed the vomeronasal organs from the noses of normal female mice and the same thing happened."

 

It's not genetic, female sexual behavior (in mice at least) is different from male sexual behavior only because of that organ, not because of any genes.

 

This question is, as you say, of mice and men. Time will tell.

But if a woman was feeling as a man, she would still would have the whole world reacting to her as to a women, which would make a huge influence on her world view.

It is not just the horniness,

not just the frustration,

but the sensation that nothing short of rape or suicide would solve it definitly.

And the second more than the first.

A terrible corner to which your modified woman with male sensations would never be pushed.

And if she was, like inside a marriage, she knew she could still walk away.

 

It is a bit the difference between a person who is fasting and a person who is hungry. The physical sensation might be similar but the psychological torture has all sort of interesting colors that the first lacks.

Beside inside most celibate marriages you still have hugs and actions of affection which (you teach me) release oxytocine. Not all the beta have that luck.

[witch]

You don't know what I lived through in my marriage. Sometimes walking away really isn't an option.

 

As for men's options, rape, suicide, and you left out hookers and beating off to porn.

Edited August 8, 2007 by witch

[Pietro]

You don't know what I lived through in my marriage. Sometimes walking away really isn't an option.

Might have been horrible, and you have my full sympathy.

This still does not give you permission to define my ethical values.

 

As for men's options, rape, suicide, and you left out hookers and beating off to porn.

beating off to porn does not release oxytocin, and honestly I have tried hookers a couple of times and always left with a bad taste, figuratively speaking.

 

Boy goes into a pub:

-a lemon juice, as I just had my first blow job.

-A lemon juice? Here's a whisky! Offers the house.

-No, no if the lemon doesn't dispell the bad taste, nothing will.

Edited August 9, 2007 by Pietro

[witch]

Oh now men need oxytocin. Beating off to porn releases oxytocin if you do it right.

 

Oxytocin is a female thing too--we are even stephen there.

 

And just because you had a couple bad experiences with hookers, that means they couldn't possibly satisfy the biological sexual needs men experience.

 

You aren't talking about your personal ethics, you are saying that science objectively supports the idea that no woman could possibly understand how much men need sex. I agree with you that most women don't. But when I assure that I do, instead of having an open mind about biological outliers, particularly when deliberately influenced by a radically different approach to nutrition, it isn't about science anymore, it's about me defining your ethical values.

 

Ethical values are inherently subjective. If in your own personal belief system you believe that women couldn't possibly be as sexual, need sex as much as men, I'm not going to fight that. Heck, I believe in Hathor the cow goddess! Just don't drag science into it.

[Eric23]

While hookers may take care of the physical urge, most of them are energy vampires. There are a very few who really try to provide a theraputic service rather than the usual empty the horny guy's wallet. The typical aftermath is that the guy walks away from the experience wondering why can't he have the great sex (if the hooker is a good actress) all the time with his SO, wife or any normal woman for that matter.

[Trunk]

While hookers may take care of the physical urge, most of them ...

I would think that a survival skill in that profession is to shut down emotionally and energetically while having sex. Very different from two people who meet and want to smile, touch, kiss, share, open, explore, have fun together.

[witch]

Well of course, but Pietro is talking about the simple physical urge that distinguishes men from women. If we are taking about energy or emotion, women have those needs as much as men, and science can't be used as an arguing point that men's needs are so much more overwhelming than women's needs. Men's biological urge caused by differences in hormones, etc., should be able to be physically satisfied by seeing a hooker. That's my only point. He was saying men's biology forces them to feelings of rape or suicide, and I was pointing out that's a straw man argument.

[Trunk]

I haven't followed this thread in detail, so I don't know vs you & Pietro, maybe a segue, loosely related.

 

Men's biological urge caused by differences in hormones, etc., should be able to be physically satisfied by seeing a hooker.

Generalizations of men are true to some extent, but I think that's a very simplistic view of what's satisfying - even for men.

 

Honestly. What's satisfying? Take out genuine affection & fun, the make-out session, sleeping together.. Satisfying sex is a rich & complex thing... enough that most people are at least a little puzzled, I think, even about their own.

Edited August 9, 2007 by Trunk

[Pietro]

What I claim and what I repeat is that for most beta men the need of sex is so bad that it is not trivial by any standard. That hookers (at least the one available for a normal wallet in our wetsern world. I don't know about others) will not satisfy that. That yes we need oxytocin. That porn does not release enough of it (or at all, since oxytocin have as a side effect to cause temporary amnesia, and I have that after a good kiss, but not after a wank). That in the light of all this people who need sex are doing the right thing to learn PUA, and most techniques to solve their problem.

 

Now you come, and sais that you have the sexual desires of a man, had similar experiences as a man regarding being frustrated, you are so similar to a man that you react in the same way, that you have a de facto 'same point of view' so now you can see (obviously better than me, since you teach me) what is trivial for me (and for other men) and what it is not, and because of this you define what my ethical values should be.

 

If you had such a similar experience you would come to similar conclusions. The fact that you do not makes me doubt our presumed similarity. Honestly, you are out there, and flapping your hands, hopeing to fly.

 

We are different, you can't define what is important for me and what is not.

 

 

Men's biological urge caused by differences in hormones, etc., should be able to be physically satisfied by seeing a hooker. That's my only point.

You simply haven't got a clue how it is to be forced to pay for some bad, timed, sex. While as a woman you can have all the sex you want.

 

He was saying men's biology forces them to feelings of rape or suicide, and I was pointing out that's a straw man argument.

 

Male suicide is double female one. Men tend to rape more, too (I am sure your coven-sisters will agree on this). Why do you think this is so?

[Pietro]

Oxytocin is a female thing too--we are even stephen there.

We are even on the effect not on the social possibilities to get it.

 

And just because you had a couple bad experiences with hookers, that means they couldn't possibly satisfy the biological sexual needs men experience.

 

It is so fucking different, and you know that!

But getting a girl through PU gives you untimed real sex, not the fake one that hookers give you.

 

Beside, if I had to pay a girl for all the hours I fuck her it would empty my wallet. You know how much does a girl ask for the whole night? I am a taoist, I am not one of those fast in, fast out, click clack, guys out there.

 

You aren't talking about your personal ethics, you are saying that science objectively supports the idea that no woman could possibly understand how much men need sex. I agree with you that most women don't. But when I assure that I do, instead of having an open mind about biological outliers, particularly when deliberately influenced by a radically different approach to nutrition, it isn't about science anymore, it's about me defining your ethical values.

I think I clarifed above how that claim becomes a claim about ethical values. I fully support your diet (for what I have seen so far), but don't use it to pontify what is good and what is not for me, pardon us male.

 

I believe in Hathor the cow goddess! Just don't drag science into it.

The cow goddess? I thought you followed Circe!

[witch]

Well you have contradicted yourself. If hooker sex is trivial, then a type of sex is trivial. I'm not sure where the big difference is between some one-night stand stranger and a hooker, from a male biological need point of view.

 

My point is that in the same way a one-night stand is superior to hooker sex, so is full on complete energy exchange tantric sex superior to a one-night stand. That's the only way it's trivial, in comparison. I'm not saying being a PUA is bad.

[Trunk]

Well you have contradicted yourself. If hooker sex is trivial, then a type of sex is trivial.

If you are implying that Pietro said that hooker sex is "trivial", you ought to re-read or search the thread. Certainly the last few posts have been about that it's not nourishing (for either party, I bet). You oughta quote what your commenting on, so it won't sound like you're twisting things out of thin air.

Edited August 10, 2007 by Trunk

[Pietro]

If you are implying that Pietro said that hooker sex is "trivial", you ought to re-read or search the thread. Certainly the last few posts have been about that it's not nourishing (for either party, I bet). You oughta quote what your commenting on, so it won't sound like you're twisting things out of thin air.

 

Thank you Trunk. I said before (jokingly) that you were responsible for me loosing 1 hour of work, but now you gave me back one hour of vacation. Me so grateful.

 

Yep, sex obtained through PUA is not trivial, and it is nourishing.

Hooker sex? Not my department, sorry, although virtually all my tai ji teacher told me I should use them.

 

I'm not sure where the big difference is between some one-night stand stranger and a hooker, from a male biological need point of view.

 

And that's where the knot is. There is a difference, and without getting into the hairy damp land of defining exactly what that it, trust me on this, and accept that your vast experience never touched this.

 

A 1-night stand gives you something that no hooker ever gave me.

[witch]

Thank you Trunk. I said before (jokingly) that you were responsible for me loosing 1 hour of work, but now you gave me back one hour of vacation. Me so grateful.

 

Yep, sex obtained through PUA is not trivial, and it is nourishing.

Hooker sex? Not my department, sorry, although virtually all my tai ji teacher told me I should use them.

And that's where the knot is. There is a difference, and without getting into the hairy damp land of defining exactly what that it, trust me on this, and accept that your vast experience never touched this.

 

A 1-night stand gives you something that no hooker ever gave me.

 

I've been with hookers. I have a man's libido, and hookers don't get demented about you afterwards. Happy?

[Wayfarer64]

I have been sexually active with many women in many different types of social situations. The "paid for" sex of a high-maintenance American "girl friend" is in many ways more contrived than the "paid for" sex with a Thai "hooker" who ends up staying weeks with you for food and board and the soon very natural interactions such as taking her whole family to the movies every so often etc...

The sex is what you make of it with every person you have sex with. I paid for sex with professionals in Amsterdam who gave me GREAT sex and I left energized and renewed as I would with any "loving" sex...-There were also lousy paid for experiences there and else where -and some long-term affairs where the sex just wasn't too good...

 

Of the dozens of longer-term relationships I have nurtured and been nurtured by, there are very few viable comparisons... each was different and I gave/took very different things from each...

 

this whole argument is just not real to me...

 

each of us deals with our sexual partners in unique ways EACH INDIVIDUAL TIME we have sex not just in the differences between lovers...

 

But as an individual having individual experiences I will not doubt Witches claims -extraordinary as they seem to be...-They are not typical in my experience not odd or outlandish -just not typical...

 

But in my experience there was a "paid for" woman in BangKok who did cut up her Thai (ex)boy -friend when he came to take her away from me... she wanted to be with me and didn't give a shit what he or anyone else wanted... So I did become alarmed at her passion and determination to be with me...I took great cares not to make her angry-(the sex was incredable)... but there ya have it - some "hookers" do get attached and can be like any other lover when passions arise and take hold...

Edited August 10, 2007 by Wayfarer64

[Oolong Rabbit]

I read that some of the old Tao masters advocated intercourse with prostitutes as much as possible. It didn't have much to do with feeling good or getting off. They were conidered receptacles full of Yang chi that one could absorb. Probably not such a wise practice in the STD era.

[mwight]

I have always had an extremely high libido. I have always also been in tune with my partners needs sexually, rhythms, pressures, unique areas for stimulation, etc.. I have always prided myself in knowing my stuff in the bedroom dept, pleasing my partner was always my highest priority.

 

I have never really had much trouble getting pretty much any woman I wanted. Even now I still have ex's who call me up on a regular basis to try to persuade me out of celibacy.

 

I have been able to strongly feel the flows of energies inside my own body, and use that to generate a charismatic radiance. I could usually turn this up and burn brighter and get any female I desired.

One thing I have noticed is that after sex I was drained, no not tired, but my energies were drained. It took about 1-2 weeks to be at my peak again.

 

I have noticed that woman seem to crave this energy, almost like vampires. And during orgasm they actively extract it from you. Since I have found qigong/neigong I have realized just how bad this REALLY is for male cultivators. Celibacy including masturbation is imho pretty much a requirement. It is not such a big deal when you learn to focus on draining and redistributing the sexual energy from your genital area, to the rest of your body.

 

 

I could also see where sex would be of huge benefit to a female cultivator, they have a pretty much unlimited supply of this energy available and waiting to be given to them. It is such a crule irony.

[witch]

I've got to take another break from this place. I get too angry.

[mwight]

I've got to take another break from this place. I get too angry.

 

Witch,

 

I hope I didn't offend you. I was merely commenting on my own personal observations. I didn't intend to offend you. I believe women have a huge advantage in the energetic development dept. over men, if I could be born female knowing what I do now I would most likely do so.

Edited August 10, 2007 by mwight

[witch]

You didn't offend me! Just frustrated me, that's different. Calling a woman a vampire is like calling a baby a vampire. Men are made to give women their energy, it's in their fundamental nature. And it makes sense evolution-wise, even a one-night stand a woman could get pregnant, thereby expending tremendous amounts of energy on the baby. But the thing I just don't get here, with the men all protective of their chi or jing or kundalini or what-have-you--women have a similar biological need to unload and a similar pathway to it. If you open up your heart chakra you can take as much energy as you like from women--we give it away, the need is as strong as a man's need to ejaculate. I mean, look at your avatar--what do you think that stands for?

 

I can understand celibate taoist practices to develop the sixth chakra, so a man has two ways to give a woman his energy instead of one, but developing it simply to hoard it?

 

I know, I know--built up at the third chakra it gives tremendous physical power and strength of will, and built up at the fifth chakra it is as you say, a man becomes a silver-tongued devil or a PUA and can attract any woman and can persuade, and spilled out at the seventh chakra there is a loss of self and a mingling with the cosmos, but I think it's meant to be passed back and forth like a ball, like a 8.

[mwight]

You didn't offend me! Just frustrated me, that's different. Calling a woman a vampire is like calling a baby a vampire. Men are made to give women their energy, it's in their fundamental nature. And it makes sense evolution-wise, even a one-night stand a woman could get pregnant, thereby expending tremendous amounts of energy on the baby. But the thing I just don't get here, with the men all protective of their chi or jing or kundalini or what-have-you--women have a similar biological need to unload and a similar pathway to it. If you open up your heart chakra you can take as much energy as you like from women--we give it away, the need is as strong as a man's need to ejaculate. I mean, look at your avatar--what do you think that stands for?

 

I can understand celibate taoist practices to develop the sixth chakra, so a man has two ways to give a woman his energy instead of one, but developing it simply to hoard it?

 

I know, I know--built up at the third chakra it gives tremendous physical power and strength of will, and built up at the fifth chakra it is as you say, a man becomes a silver-tongued devil or a PUA and can attract any woman and can persuade, and spilled out at the seventh chakra there is a loss of self and a mingling with the cosmos, but I think it's meant to be passed back and forth like a ball, like a 8.

 

I agree that is the natural process yes. Women and children are not evil for taking energy. Lions are not evil for hunting their prey either. It's how nature works.

 

In my view though it is also natural to die and then be reborn again into another body. That process is what

I am hoping to stop. So I guess my goals are a bit un-natural to say the least.

 

In my own observations giving in and sleeping with a woman just one night can easily obliterate months of practice. Weeks worth of training are lost for masturbation. It just seems silly to me to throw all that time down the drain, just repeat the cycle again in another few months.

 

The point I am trying to make for a serious male cultivator is that sex sets you back so much it isn't worth it.

 

The Buddha called his own son, Rahula or "chain". He also said:

 

"He who loves 50 people has 50 woes; he who loves no one has no woes." -- Siddhartha Buddha

 

In my opinion emotional energy is easy to obtain via metta (universal compassion, loving kindness) meditation.

 

You can even remove your own excess pent up sexual energy and move it to the heart area to convert it to metta energy directly.

 

The only point I am trying to make is not that women and babies are evil, only that they pose a significant roadblock to male cultivators at least in my opinion.

[witch]

I am not talking about emotional energy. Women can return the exact energy to men that is lost, if the cultivator opens his heart chakra and is able to absorb, and the woman has developed the ability to ejaculate the energy from the heart chakra. I would be willing to demonstrate to a taoist here this outpouring (which can be done fully clothed from a regular hug), although right now I have to conserve my energy for what I have to do the next few months. There is no depletion of cultivation energy, or whatever you call it. It is fully returned.

 

And I also suspect this energy rises faster when returned back to a man, than a man pulling his own up by his bootstraps, so to speak. But I'm not sure about that.