And after all, what do you mean 'morally superior'? Doesn't mean a thing to me. Have you ever had your hormone levels checked?
I care as much about my hormone levels as you care about your moral standing.
You should care, buddy! Could lead to lots of negative health effects if you have no testosterone at all.
Heterosexual male sexuality is of great importance to heterosexual females. They have a dog in this fight too.
Heterosexual female sexuality is of great importance to heterosexual females.
This idea that we all orbit around straight male sexuality is kinda ridiculous.
Of course the great majority of heterosexual females orbit around male sexuality, as their own sexual desires, if any, are so minimal (whether naturally or culturally sublimated I cannot say) that what remains to them is gaining non-sexual benefits from catering (as parsimoniously as possible) to male sexuality.
Say what. Women have minimal sexual desires? I really don't think that's true.
As for my other comment I was primarily thinking of HockeyDude and Memphis. Certainly not of Antonio or Nathan and not really of you or Grumps either.
The idea is that there are alpha males and beta males. And then there are nice ones and nasty ones. So cold or negative alpha males are classic bad boys. Negative betas are basically neurotic and geeky misogynists and I sense that we have a lot of those on Atlas.
I'm not exactly fond of this whole alpha/beta/whatever classification, since I like to think that, flawed as we are, we're not complete animals.
But yeah, "alphas" probably don't post on internet forums...
You don't think humans are animals? Ugh...
Gustaf, are you trying to say women have the same level of sexual desire as men? I don't think that is true (doesn't mean they have no sexual desire), and neither is it true in most mammal species. Women also tend to be more nurturing of children, just like in most mammal species. This women=men argument you guys are making is ridiculous, though no doubt quite popular in your humanities classes.