~ archived since 2018 ~

tl;dr: 75% of males will say yes if a hot stranger chick asked for sex. 0% of girls said yes if a hot stranger dude asked for sex.

[deleted]

November 14, 2010

70 upvotes

/r/seduction

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/e5sid/male_redditors_give_a_lady_some_tips_how_are_we/c15jdr6

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	tl;dr: 75% of males will say yes if a hot stranger chick asked for sex. 0% of girls said yes if a hot stranger dude asked for sex.
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	70
Comments	29
Date	November 14, 2010 5:01 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/seduction
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/e5yxz/tldr_75_of_males_will_say_yes_if_a_hot_stranger/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/seduction/tldr-75-of-males-will-say-yes-if-a-hot-stranger.1312961 https://theredarchive.com/post/1312961

Comments

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alexryane 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

To be honest the first thing going through my mind would be "is this some kind of gypsy con where her gang of friends rob me" and then "where's the hidden camera?"

I'm not so desperate that I wouldn't at least want to have a chat with her first, to check her out. And that's really what it boils down to when it comes to women:

Men can be scary, she might assume you're going attack her. Women are less scary to men.
Strangers are strange, its amazing how much closer you can feel to someone after some conversation

The whole research is meaningless because they didn't actually take it to conclusion. They just asked for a yes or no, they didn't invite the subject back somewhere and see if they would actually go through with it. They didn't see if the test subject would even follow them back somewhere.

Finally, everyone here ignores the psychological complexities of how women want to be wanted and how they want to be perceived.

[–]Mat_Cauthon 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRatRiverTrapper 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 19 points20 points21 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I respect Stephen Fry, and understand where he's coming from. When I was more sexually naive I would have agreed wholeheartedly as it does seem like a fairly logical conclusion from his standpoint. However I'm pretty sure he's completely oversimplifying something that has many factors and is somewhat nuanced, leading him to draw the rather odd conclusion of them bartering sex for a relationship.

Having actually had sex with plenty of women I feel I have greater authority (than Mr. Fry) to speak in this regard. I just can't come to the conclusion he has... Women (speaking in general) love sex. The more they have it the more they love it. Some are utterly insatiable, all enjoy good sex at least as much as men.

The variables that cause them not to act like us... not to overtly seek sex in a casual context consist of:

-Testosterone: on average women have much lower levels of horny-hormone. Thus on average have a lower libido. This is not the same as not liking sex, merely that they tend not to be as addicted or consumed with the idea of it. I liken it to chocolate and beer... I love them both, probably more than any other consumable item. When I see/smell them I get cravings. When they're out of sight however I'm not bothered by their absence. Testosterone is like a frequent biological trigger/reminder of sex. I don't believe myself to be anything other than a testosterone filled red-blooded male, but if I am frequently sharing a bed with a women, more often than not they are the ones who desire sex more often than I... though the onus is usually left upon me to initiate, which leads me to the second factor.

-Culture: patriarchy is deeply embedded in most human societies (though countries like Sweden, where I am now, are almost an exception). Slut shaming is almost integral to this. Idolising virginity, Victorian ideals of the pure female etc. (personally all sicken me). In a modern context I'll again liken it to the chocolate and beer analogy: in a public setting I may practice restraint with both of these because of the shame associated with alcoholism or becoming fat with gluttony. Women will tend to act a lot more promiscuous on holiday for example, or alone with someone who is holidaying in their community (who will leave very soon) and thus not have a chance of tarnishing their "reputation". The opposite is true for men, since patriarchy lends status to the promiscuous male, you'll find many in possession of artificially bloated reputations and libidos...

-Other biological factors and the relationship: This is a little muddier. From a reproductive standpoint it stands to reason that an element of security would favour survival of offspring. Sex is inextricably linked with reproduction, so an instinctual desire for security is no doubt influential in this behavioural dichotomy. To conclude that sex is somehow a trade-off for a relationship is total hogwash. Rather the relationship or security will tend to allow for greater expression of sexuality. It releases one from whatever cultural (or biologically influenced) hangups one may have.

To anecdotally put the final nail in the coffin: I have some (non-misandryst) lesbian friends who are an interesting study. They have sex, they are interested in sex and they frequently talk about sex... If not to impress males, what could possibly be their motivation?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

You make a good point... I'd add it in to my list of variables. Though if I could respond to some of the things

Very interesting to see a feminist here.

I wouldn't self-identify as a feminist though admittedly I agree with much of what sex-positive feminists preach. I commonly find the attitude among feminists distasteful. As if patriarchy is somehow men's fault, or that men actually end up benefiting from it at the expense of women. It negatively affects both genders (perhaps for men in a more sinister way), and is equally perpetuated by both.

Social ineptitude/loser-ness is to women what obesity/deformities is to men.

While certainly a factor it's hardly a hard and fast rule. In general yes apparent social status is a much more important attraction factor to women. Looks are too, though likely not as much as they are to men. Obesity and especially deformities are also pretty off-putting to women too... Similarly caste can certainly have an effect on what a male finds attractive. I'm digressing... anyway I'm sure you agree it's somewhat spectral.

I suppose you're right, in terms of sleeping with someone, women will take longer to judge a man. They can judge just as quickly as us whether a man is physically attractive, but perhaps instead of immediately categorising them as no/yes, they do it as no/maybe.

I don't know about you, but I'd certainly say no to someone unless I found them attractive.

Indeed, excepting in my most inebriated of moments...

I'm genuinely interested in hearing your critique of my argument if you'll indulge, especially since you agree with the conclusion. I was actually thinking of putting it (in an altered form) in a minor university publication. So please tear me a new one if you must...

Confession: I wasn't actually aware I was posting in r/seduction when writing the above... it's just one of the subreddits I subscribe to (and read). In saying that I don't know of any incompatibility between progressive masculism/feminism and seduction techniques.

Edit: also unfortunately I can't access the elaine hatfield study originally linked, so I can't really comment on its details.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]canlum 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]come2gether 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]silent_p 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_confuse_the_thread 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ladywonderlux 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]philosarapter -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link