Not sure what you mean. Online platforms give users unprecedented choice in responding to messages and selecting a partner.

My point was that online platforms allow women to choose men of a smaller size and stature that significantly reduce their ability/opportunity to physically overpower women.

I see your point, but I'm not sure if simply soliciting sex on an online dating platform necessarily corresponds with they type of alpha-male we are referring to. It would be great to see some data on that as well.

I think the commenter was asking that women understand that men don't view blunt solicitation of sex as rude or offensive. And there are a number of women that engage and appreciate in similar forms of banter and solicitation.

So, are you referring to the expected 'attractiveness' that men think they 'deserve' in a casual sex partner?

I'm only referring to the current mode of partner selection made by women, and know an average amount about historic and species-level selection by our ancestors. I'm referring to present-day, common practices of aggregate mate selection that favors dominant and violence-prone men by women who by and large wish to…

Wrong. The blame of sexual assault and rape belongs with the perpetrators.

Oh I totally agree. But I think that we might be outliers in the realm of my inquiry - we are among the minority that enjoy and pursue casual sex via online dating platforms.

I've never read any evo-psych while completing my doctorate at one of the most left-leaning universities in the country. And I'm certainly aware that the gender relations in our small sphere are not representative of the country at large, so I'm a bit confused by your point.

A valid response, at any time, would be appreciated. In no way have I explicitly or tacitly made any insulting remarks to you. In fact, I've tried to pose some serious questions that, while they may not reinforce the dominant line of thinking here, seem pretty valid to some people.

Your response confuses me, given its lack of context. But of course, any intelligent conversation must begin by people realizing that 'beliefs' can and should be continually modified through new information, provocations and discourse.

Valid points, all of them. But they seriously conflate one issue into many, therefore making it impossible to discuss a singular point among the many that you bring up.

Well, but that's not really the point. I was asking simply about the gendered differentiation in offered sex, not the separate issue of 'not taking no for an answer'.

That's a great start. And I think those fears are at times justified. But within the online dating sphere, women can remain anonymous and choose men that are unlikely to physically overpower them (size, weight, etc). And so the fears of societal judgement or physical overpowering can be sidestepped. Yet it doesn't…

Totally, but I wasn't really referring to your own personal experiences. I'm broadly discussing the disparity between how you (and many other women) view the sexual statement: "wanna come over and X my Y", versus how most men do not find that sort of offer 'gross' in any way and would be ecstatic to receive such an…

We might run in different crowds, but I think that there have been countless studies, surveys, etc that show men being vastly more willing to have frequent and casual sex. And on OKC and other sites, this truth has been reiterated by the massive amount of men looking for casual sex. I mean, the truth of my assertion…

Seems a bit sex-negative to me. Men and women alike should be able and willing to enjoy casual sex as well as romantic sex, and at any frequency they like.

But you might want to recognize that, any woman of average attractiveness asking if a man would like to 'come over and f*ck my p*ssy' would be met with a resounding YES.

I wonder if men would throw so much free penis around if women threw a commensurate amount of free vagina around.

...said the person who cannot speak for themselves, and therefore must legitimize their ill-formed critique by citing a 'celebrity' that spews platitudes to a mass public based solely on his status of dubious fame. I'd imagine that using the passing fame of someone else is quite a bit more frail as a basis of…