The Coolidge Effect ... Does the theory mentioned apply to most of the men reading this?

Since I'm working through having a cold this week (and yes, it's miserable and I need a hug!), I'm spending some time reading about sexuality and other type of books.

Most of us know that (many, if not most) men like to pollinate different flowers, if opportunity presents itself. And monogamy isn't a natural state for any animal, including humans, except for the Gibbons monkey* (and the humans who TRY to be a one woman man).

So how do you factor in The Coolidge Effect with this world? Seems like they would be intertwined.

I'll go ahead and cut and paste a simple explanation of what this term means:

Basically the principal that men are more sexually attracted and aroused to new females after a certain amount of time. The term comes from an old joke according to which President Calvin Coolidge and his wife were at a government farm one day and were taken around on separate tours. Mrs. Coolidge, passing the chicken pens, inquired of a supervisor whether the lone rooster was sufficient, given the many hens in the chicken flock.

"Yes", the man said, "the rooster works very hard."

Mrs. Coolidge then asked, "Really? The rooster works very hard? Every day?"

"Oh, yes," the man said. "Dozens of times a day."

"Interesting!" Mrs. Coolidge replied, "Be sure to tell that to the President!"

Some time later the President, passing the same pens, was told about the roosters - and about his wife's remark. "Same hen every time?", he asked.

"Oh, no, a different one each time," the supervisor replied.

"Tell that," Coolidge said with a sly nod, "to Mrs. Coolidge."

The Coolidge comes into effect in the porno industry, where 'Fluffers' are used to get male porn stars erect before a scene, if they've been with the main actress so long.

-Urban Dictionary (Wiki was a bit more long winded with their explanation)
###

It has always just made sense that men like strange, which is why we have the term "strange." I've never known many men who didn't look at women walking by , even if they are in a committed relationship.

Thought the term was an interesting one to consider and would appreciate additional opinions and thoughts on the matter.

Hugs,
Elisabeth








*Info gleaned from the book, Sex at Dawn. http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Dawn-Prehi...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Guess it depends on the circumstances. In this business I've found there's an added erotic sense when I find a lady I feel safe with so I tend to stick with her. It's why I'm a serial monogamist.

Plus one for strange.
It's like a day at the candy store.

The primary reason is that men are capable of divorcing the sexual act from any actual intimacy. Sex itself is a biological imperative that gains emotional significance depending on the woman you are with.

Let me just say first, Elisabeth get well soon from your cold and here's a hug for you.

But back on topic, I'm always playing the field. I do like having regulars and enjoy seeing them, but I'll always have that sexual desire to see someone different. I guess it just human nature to a certain extent.

I would not seek another woman to enjoy fuckery with if that woman's desires/likes/kinks/freaks/etc. were highly compatible with my own. "New" does not drive my interest or arousal when being with a woman.

FWIW - I thought a fluffer was anyone who wasn't the main actor/actress in a movie that had a sole purpose of keeping them aroused during down time. Not because they were 'tired' of who they were with and needed someone 'new'.

Love the strange, but smart enough to not have a RW affair. I like the hobby because I can pick and get strange at anytime

strange +100

You should get better clients that can keep it up or do more doubles.

I am a descendant of that rooster in the Coolridge story. Only significant physical disability deters/defers the initiative.

The great former local radio philosopher, Greg "The Hammer" Williams, used to say, "It doesn't matter who the chick is, you'll find someone who is tired of her". The statement usually followed a story about a celebrity breakup involving a really hot woman.

The Coolidge Effect is most definitely real.

Great topic worthy of coed discussion. I know that "men" are conquerors and it is especially true with women. I hobby because I want what I can't have. I am always attracted to the opposite sex and in RW I know there are women I want that I just can't have. I believe as Hellion stated that men can detach the act from real intimacy. I can love a woman with all my heart, but that does not keeping from lusting after another woman.

The Coolidge effect is valid. There is also something to be said for seeing someone you've seen before and had a smashing good time with. It just depends on how the mood strikes me at the time.

Men (usually) need sex to have intimacy while women (usually) need intimacy to have sex. I heard that somewhere and it generally applies in the civvie world. But I think it explains why IOP is so important to men here.

...FWIW - I thought a fluffer was anyone who wasn't the main actor/actress in a movie that had a sole purpose of keeping them aroused during down time. Not because they were 'tired' of who they were with and needed someone 'new'. Originally Posted by FunInDFW

I agree. When I was trying to find a good definition of the term, nearly every one of the definitions mentioned "fluffers" and I sincerely don't believe that's accurate within the confines of the term's meaning.

But I included it anyway!

I'm glad that this topic is getting some responses. Thanks!