I've abstained from pornography and wanking for two months and counting now, but I'm still not horny or desperate enough to bang the 5/10 slam pigs I encounter in clubs. How long does it take until my standards are sufficiently lowered?
>>70875 Not at all m7. When I was watching porn I was having a wank 5+ times a day, and when I abstained from porn and used just my imagination, I was still wanking 1-2 times a day. Now that I'm exprimenting with abstaining from both I have so much energy it's unreal.
Not referring to people as "5/10 slam pigs" would be a good start. Attractiveness is not one-dimensional. You've been enculturated with a crude, reductive sense of aesthetics akin to junk food. Skinny blondes with big tits and drawn-on eyebrows aren't at the top of some imagined hierarchy, they're just the aesthetic equivalent of chicken nuggets - easily palatable but ultimately unrewarding.
Get back on the porn, but explore the likes of AbbyWinters, GirlsOutWest, AuntJudy's and PlumperPass. Refine your tastes, learn to perceive different kinds of beauty and the world is your oyster. While you're at it, eat some oysters. They're good. Wash them down with a pint of Guinness. Listen to Albert Ayler. Read Joyce's Ulysses. Open yourself to the possibility of surprise.
Given that this is /iq/, I'll add that you're obviously a poofter and you should just give in to your hunger for cock.
After a certain amount of leaving it, you get diminished returns. I have done a few no-fap months in the past few years, and it's that first week where you're biting the furniture and twitching uncontrollably. After a month, I could probably do another week with no effort at all, and then another one even more easily after that, and so on presumably indefinitely.
If you're so fucking cool and handsome that you're too great for these women, send them my way and I promise to ejaculate a little cough of dust into every last one of them.
So are you proper randy all the time and just ignore it, then? Do you have a prostate the size of a golf ball with all the unspent spunk? boner you can hang a hammock off? what happens if you are forced to engage in coitus with a beastly femoid gynoccubus?
I've never gone longer than two weeks and I have a literal orgasm denial fetish, for fuck's sake.
>>70877 I know it's crude terminology but it instantly gives you an idea of the kind of women coming up to me. In real life I categorise women very simply: shaggable and unshaggable.
If this abstention doesn't pan out then the next phase of my plan was to try to condition myself to wank to more 'realistic' women, so we're on the same page there.
I do have a thing for femboys and gender benders but they're far rarer in reality than shaggable women are, so there's no way to scratch that itch without paying for it
There's an easy way out of this lad. You can have your cake and eat it- wank as much as you like without having it warp your expectations of real life women.
Furry porn. You know it makes sense. Come to the dark side.
Have you tried talking to them; I'm an ugly bastard (and a bit of a cynical prick) so the kind of lass I can pull is limited but I usually feel attracted to them at the end of a first date, for their part it might be in the second as I'm a good listener.
Of course if you were really into blokes we wouldn't tell you to stop watching porn and get a fat slag would we: Why aren't you getting the woman you want? Do you think you need to work on your fitness, appearance or simply do the things that have you interacting with the woman that's your type?
"Shaggable" and "unshaggable" are value judgements on your part, not objective facts. A lot of women you'd consider shaggable would probably be quite unattractive to me and vice versa. You can broaden your taste in women, just as you can broaden your taste in food or music or literature. That doesn't mean lowering your standards, just taking a more nuanced approach.
For the record, I'm one of the resident chubby chaser lads. I didn't even consider the possibility of shagging a fat lass until well into my late twenties. I didn't lower my standards out of desperation, I just slowly realised that I'd been trained by society to believe that fat automatically means ugly; my standards weren't mine, they were just something that had been subconsciously indoctrinated into me. As I grew out of the self-conscious worries that plague younger people, I grew into a taste for big jiggly tits and arses.
A lot of the porn cliches that used to turn me on just seem sad and needy to me now - the shaved fannies, the fake tits, the "perfect" physiques that are inevitably the product of self-loathing and self-denial, the obvious daddy issues. If a nubile young starlet offered herself up to me, I honestly doubt I'd be interested.
It's weird to me that the mainstream, "conventional" kind of beauty is what it is. is that honestly what the majority of people like, or is it just a pavlovian response at this point? It's honestly never done anything for me.
I remember when I was about 16 and me and a mate sneaked onto the computer at night (early 2000s) to look up some porn, and at that age obviously it turned me on- Anything would have turned me on. just the very idea of a fanny got me going at that age. But ever since I first got my fingers up a real girl's gash (which, by the way, is the true coming of age. nevermind losing your virginity, your first fingering is what counts), I gradually lost my taste for the stereotypical blonde haired, big titted, baywatch babe archetype.
It's just plain. boring. They're not even ready salted for me, they're a pack of salt 'n' shake that's missing the salt.
I've taken shit over saying this before, but I'm not sure why considering you're all chubby chasers. i just think conventional attractiveness is overrated. the girl i'm working on getting with these days honestly looks a bit like a goblin, and I dunno. I think she's dead fit. she has this sly little grin that's cute as fuck. like one of those sexy goblins people draw for dungeons and dragons.
>>70887 >IT'S WEIRD TO ME THAT THE MAINSTREAM, "CONVENTIONAL" KIND OF BEAUTY IS WHAT IT IS.
For women, effort is the important thing. Men will shag any woman, but every woman wants, on some level, to be the sexiest woman in the room, or at least to have that option when she does want it. So since the dawn of time, women have been telling each other that they can control when they are, and are not, attractive. The reality, that we either fancy them or we don't and there's not much they can do to control that, is a much harder sell. Harder even than OP probably is right now.
Try gender-swapping it: if I wanted to rely on my appearance instead of my autistic frightened charm to attract women, I would go and lift weights. Why? I tell myself that it's to be useful, but when did you last need to lift something that other people couldn't lift? It's a fairly worthless skill. It's as much a waste of time as dieting and tanning and shaving your fanny is, from a utilitarian perspective. And women don't go swooning when they see me carrying a 24-pack of Dr Pepper under each arm in the supermarket. Being strong, honestly, has minimal sex appeal. If I lift weights, it's for myself. But if a woman said she really loved weak men, who need help to carry shopping, I would just ignore her. I wouldn't believe her. Even if she thought that, I would assume she must be the only person who thinks that, and it's not a good idea to try to appeal to that. Exactly the same as women who just ignore you and even argue with you when you tell them it's absolutely okay to be fat.
So somewhere along the way, it was women themselves who decided what defines a "sexy" woman. And there are enough men who agree with them (gays) that their misconception is reinforced and it spreads throughout society. And women just won't hear reason on this, any more than I will ever believe that physical strength isn't both rad and hot.
>>70879 I channel the increased energy into exercise, meditation, going out on the piss more times than normal, and creative pursuits. It's easier to manage in the colder months when the clothes are far less scanty.
I don't see how I could conceivably be forced to spill my precious bodily fluids. I don't get boners to people I'm not attracted to, and if I'm attracted to them, then it isn't against my will innit.
>>70883 Where do dates come into it? If I were dating instead of clubbing then I could probably overlook attractiveness if our personalities gelled.
>>70884 I had my first lucid dream during this abstention. After I got over the shock of realising I was in a dream, I willed Bedazzled era Liz Hurley into my dreamscape and the rest of the story is...predictable. I later engaged in the usual lucid dream cliche of flying around like an eagle. Fantastic experience.
>>70885 There are many things that we think are our own beliefs, but are really the product of a shaky scaffolding erected in our minds by the societies we live in.
I've dismantled much of this scaffolding by recognising and investigating it in contemplative practices, but I think sexual attraction has a deeper, genetic component that is hard to shake off even if you recognise it. If you look at r/K selection theory, most humans are wired to pursue quality over quantity when it comes to producing offspring. Selective fucking vs fucking anything that moves. I say most because there are stories of Belgians happily spreading their seed all across North Africa, other Europeans doing the same in SE Asia, etc. I don't mind lasses on the thick side but bonafide obesity is a sign of something going haywire in both men and women. You can extend the theory further and apply it to fit birds with terrible personalities - who wants to invest in raising quality offspring with a woman you don't want to spend time with outside of the bedroom? It's all a tricky human balancing act I suppose.
I'm sceptical of ev psych explanations of sexual attraction, because so many people are attracted to things they can't actually produce offspring with - people of the same sex, fursonae, Carol Vorderman etc.
I'm equally sceptical of people with a very specific "type", because it strikes me as like going to a buffet and only having one thing. You might just really like that thing to the exclusion of everything else, but it seems more likely that you've got some sort of eating disorder.
Historical and cross-cultural standards of beauty are so weird and varied that I'm not sure if we can really say that anything is truly innate.
No, I get that, but my point was more what if your missus wants a stag more than every two months? She'll drain you of your precious bodily fluids and you'll lose your magic source of potency and virility. This is why women are evil. They make you spaff, and they know exactly what they're up to.
Do you just not cum during intercourse, in that case? What if she really likes creampies and/or facials? You'll be obliged to follow through with it then.
I don't know enough to really challenge most of your post, but when it comes to obesity, surely back when we were developing these genetic predilections, being fat as fuck would have been a sign of extreme abundance of food, the ability to survive harsh winters and so on? Ancient fertility icons are often very fat women too.
i wouldn't quite call muscles the equivalent of the Generically attractive vanilla blonde woman though, in fairness. it's more of a specific taste, and it seems to attract a rather specific sort of woman. Usually slightly vapid slags, if I'm being honest, from second hand observation- but that's at least a personality, not just beige.
For the generic default attractive male equivalent of that leggy blonde model type, I would say you're looking more at Leo dicaprio when he was young, tom hardy up to a few years ago, that kind of thing. middle of the road, tall but not lanky, handsome but not too rugged or too effete, toned but not too muscular. stands to reason, it's like otherlad with the mcdonalds comparison.
horses for courses Innit. i suppose the truth is that most people are just really fucking boring. i swipe through tinder all day thinking "who the fuck is interested in these fucking geordie shore wankers?" but then I remember there's a thousand equally geordie shore looking lads who think they're the pinnacle of beauty, because they can go to nandos together and order the mild sauce. meanwhile, I only match with mental slags who used to self harm, because I'm the sort of lad who asks where to find knee height boots on an anonymous imageboard.
Back when we were developing these predelictions we were all mainly shagging our cousins. what were early human tribes other than big families? part of our evolved urge is to diversify the genepool, because you know what inbreeding does. The fresh genetic material came mainly from either when we conquered other tribes and raped all their women, or when those tribes fell apart due to disease or starvation etc and we had to take them in. probably worth thinking about for a bit before you start ascribing aesthetic tastes to some kind of biological determinism.
>>70909 The proof is in the pudding m9. I'm horny enough to be putting myself in a position to get lusted over by slampigsinoffensive looking, slightly portly women, and I'm getting the numbers of birds I want to bang. Things fizzle out when we text, but at least progress is being made.
So what are you going to do when you get with a lass, spaff up her, then it takes you two months of chastity to be able to go back on the hunt?
What are you going to do when you get a girlfriend and paint her interior walls white for the first time in six months, then realise you don't want anything to do with her, but your mind was clouded by having seminal ducts backed up to the point of needing medical intervention?
you're getting into dangerous territory here mate. if i were you i'd make sure your search takes place on fetlife, so when you do find on at least she'll be willing to keep you in a chastity cage and only let you out for a bi-annual prostate milking.