Basically, penetration is only about the desire of the male who wants to get the female pregnant. Thus it is called rape because it doesn't really do anything more than that?Women can be sexually aroused by either the lust for orgasm or the lust for sexual intercourse, or both. In general, women much more lust for orgasm, than for being penetrated.
The lust for copulation originates from the need to reproduce. But since women do not obtain orgasm through being penetrated, the instinctive 'need' to reproduce is often translated into a 'rape'-fantasy, in which the woman mostly is only 'raped' by the man of her choice, and when and how she wishes.
Since females live in a group with other females with a dominant male, how do they control when and she wishes?
No wonder men sometimes 'dis-like' women or complain, their main objective is to penetrate.And sometimes women just want to cuddle, because there is no physical need for excessive oxytocin (too much oxytocin is bad too) and there is no lust for being penetrated either.
What do you think about women who enjoy penetration?
Or is that just fitting it line with what society (male-dominated) wants them do believe?
Plus, many women complain about not being satisfied too, so perhaps penetration is seen as the standard, but it isn't what females truly desire or need?
Are males made stronger and bigger to ensure procreation and survival of the species?The male sex-drive is based on aggression, to stimulate conquest, and if necessary resulting in raping the woman. A resisting female mostly enhances male arousal. Males therefore, are bigger and stronger, to be able to enforce sexual intercourse.
Potentially, all men are rapists.
Rape is needed to force procreation?
Why does rape enhance male arousal? Are we hardwired to feel that way, to satisfy that instinctual urge to penetrate/procreate?
True. But with our reasoning abilities couldn't men, at least some would realize, understand the nature of male/female relationships and be able to control their emotions, or at least maximise the happiness for themselves if they wished to be together?In nature, males are designed to produce as much offspring, and to mate with as many different fertile females as possible. And we do not need to tell you this is still true for humans today ; men are dogs, and nobody can deny.
This does happen, but it could lead to pent up agreession or perhaps seep into other areas of health? Kinda like how if females don't get reset then they too suffer from it?
I think all men definitely have the capability of being dogs, but not every male could act on these natural urges. What about monks?
What do you men by abuse?In nature, there are different methods to prevent overpopulation and abuse due to man’s sexual needs.
Rape?
In monogamous living animals, females are about equally big and strong as males, to prevent males from dominating females, and little offspring is born. Some animals live solitary, and they only meet when the female is in heat. In other animals the females live together in groups, protecting each other against sex-aggressive individuals.
I would like to read more about this!
So human females would/may have lived in groups and could defend sexual aggressors? Thus then only accepting the most dominant or desirable male to mate with. Thus ensuring only the best genes get passed on?
Interesting.Humans are not monogamous animals either ; man is physically stronger than woman, enabling him to dominate, and enforce sex whenever he wishes. To prevent overpopulation and abuse, by nature, humans do not live one-on-one.
Of course, you might say in our current society man cannot enforce sex anymore, for the woman is protected by law. True, but we can’t deny our heritage : it’s in our genes. Living monogamously, there always is, and always will be a sex-conflict ;
Woman needs her orgasms to reset her body, but does not want to be penetrated that much. And man is programmed to expand his territory ; to have sex with other women.
In our current society, woman allows her man to copulate with her more than she desires, to prevent her man from having sex with other women. But even that doesn't work, because by nature, man still is designed to expand his territory, through having sex with other fertile women.
So how does the alpha-male play a factor in this female group?By nature, human males live solitary, or in very small groups. Only the most powerful male then owns the right to impregnate women, who are living together in larger groups, like elephants and lions do. In females living together, the females protect each other against every sex-aggressive individual, and the most dominant male keeps away all his competitors. Like gorillas do.
Does he give them protection from other males in exchange for sex, as the females have somewhat of a desire for penetration/pregnancy?
Do they let him in the group to have sex when they desire so?Living in groups, women can have all the cuddling and grooming and clitoric orgasms they want ; as long as there have been women, they knew how to sexually satisfy themselves. Not until the seventies in the last century, women hardly ever were sexually satisfied by men. And if the women need to copulate, that one dominant, fertile, strong man is there. Living in groups, women do compete about ranking, but not about men, since that one man can copulate with all the females that are willing.
Women don't compete about men, is that because the dominant male is the most desirable?
With the power to communicate the many (males) could leverage power over the dominant male thus leading to marriage and 'equality' for men in terms of sex?Most men didn't and don't like this natural formula of course, having no chance on sex or offspring. When man learned to communicate more distinctively, women were divided amongst all men. To ensure sex and offspring for every man, this was later institutionalized in marriage.
Is that why perhaps women are more clingy or need someone to rely on?Men like to have sex with every attractive female they meet. Women only need one man, but he better be the most powerful, rich, handsome, intelligent and/or strongest of all ; if not, every setback in life is to blame on him not being powerful enough. We can't really live with (one on one), nor without each other.
I don't mean to be offensive about that statement and not all women are like that.
But also, with reasoning abilities we evolved into different beings since we could appreciate other virtues than just strength and power. However, I do agree that those attributes are perhaps the most strongest or guide females toward those men even today.
