Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Flag Next Entry
i'd do her
basic concept of Guyness* came-up in conversation with welfy over the holiday and we've returned to it a few times. I've tried explaining it to her and she "gets it" but I don't think that she fully believes it to be a rampant, widespread Guy phenomenon. I don't believe that every dude does this, but I would wager that a good majority do. So, I thought I would prove/disprove it with an informal, totally unscientific polling of my f-list.

It's a concept called "I'd do her"**. It's usually said that way, and often offered with a shrug.

The gist of the concept is that men will consciously categorize any woman into one of two categories based solely on physical attributes that they deem desirable. It is my contention that men do this on at-least a sub-conscious level immediately upon seeing any woman for the first time, but that's a lot harder to prove. It has nothing to do with personality. It has nothing to do with feelings. It has nothing to do with present circumstances. It's a blue-sky, fantasy-world of carnal desire that is hard-wired into the male psyche. It's the difference between specific attraction and general attraction. It means that, if given an ideal set of circumstances as it applies to the individual's inner ethics and morality, that they would "do her". Maybe it'd have to be in wedded bliss, maybe it could only be a hook-up because the thought of her personality is so distasteful. You can argue all you want about where it originates, nature or nurture, but the fact remains that it exists.

This may seem terribly obvious. Of course if everything was sky-blue fantasy: if I didn't think she was annoying, if I wasn't married, if I... you can go on forever. But my point is that Guys have cut through the chaste to the chase and developed a concept and phrase which captures all of that, and nothing more needs to be said. It's understood universally by all other guys.

"I'd do her".

To make it a little easier, here are come basic scenarios:

Scenario 1: Guy One mentions his attraction for HOT CELEBRITY. Guy Two makes a face and says he never thought she was that attractive. Guy One challenges Guy Two with "You wouldn't do her?" It now has nothing to do with specific attraction but general attraction. Chances are that HOT CELEBRITY isn't morbidly obese or severely disfigured, so the honest answer will almost always be yes. A variation on this scenario is that Guy Two doesn't "like" HOT CELEBRITY for whatever reason (undesirable public persona, dislike of her entertainment value, lack-of entertainment value, etc.) but when challenged would have to admit he would indeed do her. This is the way that most guys feel about your musical-pop-tart flavor-of-the-month-diva at the height of their hype. Another variation of this scenario has an era delimiter ("I'd do 60's-era Eartha Kitt").

Scenario 2: Two guys are having lunch at a food court in a mall. To fill the silence between them, they play a casual game of "I'd do her" directed at anonymous ladies passing-by. There are variations of this game, but it's the same basic concept.

Scenario 3: A guy's girlfriend has an attractive mother/sister/daughter. This stands to reason since the guy is attracted to his girlfriend, but not universal. Obviously the ages of mothers and daughters weighs heavily into this. Under the rule of "I'd do her", he'd have to admit to it. Ladies, don't ask your guys this question unless you truly understand this concept and can handle what you'll hear. This is assuming of course that he doesn't lie to you, which he probably will.

o where's the question in this? I'm glad you asked. While I don't think it's universal, I'm sure it's very, very common. So guys, I want you to think of work (or school). It's a place there are likely females you see on a daily basis and have had lots of time to consider.

My question is, do you already have a mental inventory of who you would or would not do? As a side question: is there a hierarchy? In the blue-sky fantasy you could only "do" one, only once, and never any of the others, ever. Do you already know who it would be without thinking?

*This is not to to say that it is a purely Guy concept. I've known many females who do the same thing.
**This is not intended to exclude those of homo/bi sexual persuasion and I presume it is also applicaple with the third-person pronoun of your choosing.

What lossfound said.

Also, around here there's the sub-game, "I wouldn't do her with X's cock, Y pushing, and Z taking the blame."

Heheheh, well, I haven't heard it done quite that elaborately, but I have heard the converse of "I'd do her" in the form of "I wouldn't do her with X's dick" or some such....

penis's don't fall in love. :D Pretty much boils down to that.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Wait - so that conversation I thought I had with you about Natalie Bassingthwaite was actually with someone else?

I'm a straight female but I still think women are attractive. I play this game. The only time it gets weird is when I play it with a boyfriend or (even stranger) an ex.

Sometimes it's not even a spoken thing on his part. I'll see him looking at or glace at a girl. That's about the time I comment 'Great set of tits, totally would.'

And he either gets the game or it throws him off his game. Or he wants to see about a 3some (in which case, he loses).

Ahhhh, the elusive threesome. If there is another nearly universal facet of Guyness involving sexual desire, it's that almost universally, every guy wants a three way, with two girls. Just once. I know I do.

The fantasy in this is that the two girls have sex with each other heaping various levels of affection simultaneously upon the guy.

Of course the reality is that the guy has two women to satisfy and have performance anxiety over.

Because of the fantasy, I think I'd want to once. I think the reality though would be too awkward and self-conscious unless the other two people were very comfortable with each other and also very comfortable with me. I think creating a mixture of three people in an intimate encounter where 1 person has never beeen intimate with the other 2 and the other 2 HAVE would be intensely awkward. Ideally, I think, there would've already been coupling along three edges of a triangle before coming together as a threesome.

being someone you barely know of,

i would say this has a solid history in that the modern man is crafted in large part from the leftover gears and pistons of an ancient engine.. its toil and torgue crushing bone and tearing flesh.. suffering, death and rage, fueled by rape and booze.

buuuuut.. i wouldn't say that in front of my mom. which is proof enough that we are not.. anymore. yes. maybe like a really onery lawnmower, powered by boners or something.

who knows.

Re: being someone you barely know of,

I definitely agree that it's the result of eons of evolution, both biological and social. I guess the question becomes, is it one or the other? Is the continued objectification of sexual desire by men the last bastion of male dominance (social, politically correct view) that should be eradicated or is it genetically hard-wired as a result of being on the male side of the equation in sexual reproduction (biological).

I think the most telling example is in the case of homosexual men. They too, objectify their desire and it has nothing to do with gender. More importantly, it has nothing to do with any sort of dominance in the social construct. Finally, it's men who are the objects and if asked, most would probably say they don't mind.

I know I don't mind being treated like a piece of meat. I'd venture to say most guys wouldn't mind. I think it would only become tiresome if that's ALL my value was and that it would be wrong if that were used to devalue my total social worth. It's that beef with objectification that I can understand and that when it DOES operate in a social context where there is disproportionate power it can present a problem.

But what about those of us straight guys who have rellinquished that power? We aren't fueled by rape and booze, we consider everyone's worth as a person in addition to that natural proclivity to objectify. We can make the distinction between our hard-wired response and the rational self.

Or am I making one big rationalization for a behavior we would do well to resist and eradicate?

Weird that I'd just said that about Natalie Portman like, twelve hours ago.

I'd totally do her.

I've never really understood people's attraction to Natalie Portman. Don't get me wrong, I'd do her, but she doesn't really light my fire, so to speak.

Yeah we all do play this game, some more than others. and some will admit and of course some wont. but every now and then sitting in the food courtt at the mall, you can almost tell who else is playing. Now i've watched/heard it happen. A girl noticed another girl watching, she just came up and statedd "I'd do him, but what about him (pointing in opposite direction)". first girl agreed, then proceeded to introducec themselves talk a lil, then back to "I'd do him" within minutes it wasnt just guys they were looking at. Just the girls they picked they would give reasons to why and why not. but no reasons for the guys. Cant say im astownded by it, sincee I can jokingly sit with a girl and play the game on guys. usually while speaking with a lisp. but then she can play the game back with girls. so i do believe we all do it, guys or girls.

But im gonna mention something else, we all also will subconsiously think of "do er/em" with our friends, SOs, GF/BFs, InLaws, etc etc.. Example, Welfy.. I'd do her :-p Tracy, Josh's SO..Do her, My sister's friend thats a stripper at Platinum..not do her (wierd for a stripper but still no couldnt do it), Hell if i were gay, I do ya. Just to see what all Welf's gettin LOL..
Going with the gay thing and celebrities.. i would not do Mr Depp, Cruise, Sheen (either of the two), Hanks, or Pitt. I just dont see it, but a number of gals I know have some affliction for one or more of that list. However Sean Connery can be my Bond, James Bond anytime if I were MoneyPenny. LOLOLOLOLOL

I think I need to go back to sleep or something

The gettin's good, let me tell you that.

I'd do you, Nathan!

Way to go with the Hunter S.-looking icon!

I'm a straight female and I do it with impunity.

I am sick of being a goddamn asterisk. This is not specific to men. I don't know why you felt the need to put that part about men and women and/or their sexual orientation in a smaller font and as an aside, but the very fact that you did irks me to no end.

On a lighter note, my British friends say, "he'd done for a poke if the telly were broke," and "I wouldn't kick him out of bed for farting," in many of the same scenarios you described.

sometimes i wish i was a guy so that i could find myself surrounded by men i consider doable. unfortunately, and i guess its b/c im girl wired, i cant think of ANY guy on a purely physical level even for a split second. he has to also be at least funny and smart for me to be at all interested. he could be johnny depp gorgeous - but if hes dumb or boring - ew. cant think about touching him.

I remember hubby having this conversation with a buddy in college and I considered them both disgusting. But apparently not too disgusting to end up marrying him.

Although I'm sure hubby still does it, he does it quietly and without notice.