bobquasit: (Default)
bobquasit ([personal profile] bobquasit) wrote2007-07-23 11:37 am
Entry tags:

Amusing myself this morning!

I just made a comment over in the [livejournal.com profile] advice community (I've been commenting there pretty often lately) which quite amused me. You can find it here.

The poster was concerned because the guy she's sleeping with (not a boyfriend, a f_ck-buddy) wasn't responding to her IMs, emails, and calls. Part of my response:

Now when I was a boy, if we wanted casual sex we did it as God intended - with cheap prostitutes. :D

And we didn't have to call them afterwards, either!

Do I need to note that I've never actually been with a prostitute? Probably.

Someone else later on in the thread had one of the greatest quotes I've ever seen on the subject of "Why doesn't he call me?":

"If he really wanted to talk to you, he would find a way to do it."

I totally love that. It would have answered about 60% of all the questions I saw back when I was on Advicenators. :D

[identity profile] aurora-lamour.livejournal.com 2007-07-23 04:35 pm (UTC)(link)
I learned the hard way that it is hard, probably harder for women than for men and I have been told that by some men, to truly ever keep things as casual sex for an extended relationship. I really thought things were just for sex once and part of my heart still wants that guy back and it hurts that he won't talk to me, especially back when I was working and he was around all the time. But, yeah, I had to realize that if he wanted me he knew where I was and he did not want me anymore.

BTW, your user name is not listed anymore on my gtalk list. Did you get rid of that?

[identity profile] bobquasit.livejournal.com 2007-07-23 06:35 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't know if you read the whole thread, but in a later comment I talked about the difference between the way that men and women look at sex: once a man has had sex with a woman his interest usually decreases markedly, while a woman's tendency is to have an increased emotional connection to that man.

That's just basic biology; the male wants to move on to procreate with new targets, while the female hopes to bond with the male so that he can guard and care for her and their children.

As I said, this is pretty much proof that God has a sick sense of humor - or, since I'm an atheist, that unthinking evolution plays cruel tricks on us.

I'm still on Gtalk - in fact, I'm on there right now. Do you not see me? I haven't been chatting much with anyone, mostly because only one person has been chatting with me at all and partly because I'm busier at work.

[identity profile] klyfix.livejournal.com 2007-07-23 11:19 pm (UTC)(link)
Hmm...

The 21st Century, barring Dubya blowing up the world just to have a legacy, will likely be the Century of Bioengineering. Including people. I could see fiddling with genes to balance the sexual attraction problem. I'd guess that the mod would be to make males more inclined to bonding rather than to make females more inclined to move on. I can see mothers wanting their sons to be good husbands but I can't see fathers wanting their daughters to be Hot To Trot.