Michael Douglas’ Dating History

[BadBoy89]

Michael Douglas, 82, put out a memoir.

https://people.com/michael-douglas-dating-history-12164369

1971 - Movie: Summertree - slept with costar Brenda Vaccaro for 6 years
1977 - Married 19 year Diandra Luker. He was 32.
1985 - Movie: Romancing the Stone- slept with writer of movie Diana Thomas (while still married)
1985 - Movie: Romancing the Stone - slept with costar of movie Kathleen Turner (while still married)
1991 - Movie: Basic Instinct - slept with costar Jeanne Tripplehorn. Fake slept with costar Sharon Stone 3 times (while still married)
1998 - Saw Catherine Zeta Jones in movie and said "I want to get that woman pregnant",

Catherine said "OK, you have to call the FIVE other women you are sleeping with and tell them its over" He said "OK" and did.

Forget the gym, Sosuave should tell men "Have great hair and be a movie star, you will get ANY girl you want."

-------------------------------

Thoughts?

 

[Cheeky_James]

Legend. CZJ was a babe .

 

[jhonny9546]

1977 - Married 19 year Diandra Luker. He was 32.
1985 - Movie: Romancing the Stone- slept with writer of movie Diana Thomas (while still married)
1985 - Movie: Romancing the Stone - slept with costar of movie Kathleen Turner (while still married)
1991 - Movie: Basic Instinct - slept with costar Jeanne Tripplehorn. Fake slept with costar Sharon Stone 3 times (while still married)

This is a bad thing for a man.
If you cannot commit to a woman, means, you've no self respect, nor respect for others, nor control over your own desire.

A man should be someone who is solid in control of his own desires.

 

[Hal9000]

Famous actors with great hair should never commit to one woman if they cant keep it in their pants because they are gonna have it thrown at them every single day.

 

[Cheeky_James]

Didn’t MD come out saying he was a s@x addict at some point when he was with CZJ? I do recall it was in the news at the time…

 

[BadBoy89]

If you cannot commit to a woman, means, you've no self respect, nor respect for others, nor control over your own desire.

If you commit to a woman, means, you have sex on her schedule, nor have sex with other women, nor control over your own finances.

 

[BaronOfHair]

Thoughts?

Dude's gotta a ways to go, before he's REMOTELY close to rivaling Robert Evans and Warren Beatty's kill count. In that sense, he's not that much different than the rest of us. Regrettable that MD's "acting" was never as noteworthy as these wild tales he's now regaling us with, in what really appears to be some warped bid at regaining a scintilla of the spotlight he enjoyed during The 20th Century's twilight

We forget today that, prior to Basic Instinct revitalizing his career

-The Streets Of San Francisco had become no less obscure to inhabitants of The 90s than Hanging With Mr. Cooper was and remains, once 2002 rolled around

-Wall Street

had become a punchline/written off as yet another relic of an outmoded era, more quaint than sythwave and graffiti coats

-Black Rain had flopped, despite actually being a nifty flick + A sorely overlooked entry in Ridley Scott's filmography

And that Mikey was widely viewed as a washed up Nepo Baby, who's scheme to capitalize on his status as a scion of Old Hollywood had faltered more pathetically than Gerald Ford's stab at overseeing America did

 

[jhonny9546]

If you commit to a woman, means, you have sex on her schedule, nor have sex with other women, nor control over your own finances.

Well, if you commit to a woman, you made sure she's a human being that respects you.
What you talk about are manipulative woman that keep men in relationship because they cannot satisfy their needs by themselves.

So by "woman" I might mean a "solid" "good" woman

 

[Bokanovsky]

Famous actors with great hair should never commit to one woman if they cant keep it in their pants because they are gonna have it thrown at them every single day.

Nor should they sleep with sixes, which most of the women on that list were even in their prime.

 

[Identikit_Radiohead]

Nor should they sleep with sixes, which most of the women on that list were even in their prime.

None of them were really stunners.
Good to see less Hoeflation by some on here, unlike that cesspit reddit that rates that ghoulish, eyebrow-less Mia Goth a 9/10.

 

[BadBoy89]

We forget today that, prior to Basic Instinct revitalizing his career

He had his agent phone the producers and tell them that his client would fake sleep with 33 year old Sharon Stone 3 times, and make out and rip off 28 year old Jeanne Tripplehorn's clothes for $33,250,000. Producers IMMEDIATELY agreed.

Laymen on Sosuave would have done it for free.

 

[BadBoy89]

Well, if you commit to a woman, you made sure she's a human being that respects you.

OK she respects the man at the beginning but later changes her tune. What does the man do then? He can't really leave without heavy emotional, financial, legal, and social costs.

So by "woman" I might mean a "solid" "good" woman

What is a solid good woman? Define it.

Is it a 18 year old virgin? Is it a older single mother who does all housework and pays half the mortgage? Is it a hot girl who can pregnant easily? Is it a fat woman who treats the man like a king?

There is no such thing as a "good" woman. Why? Because a woman's needs change over time. Her being "good" to a man depends on whether the man can fit her needs at that time. If he can't, she will be ruthless.

 

[Travel memoir21]

Lol didn’t Michael Douglas say he got a mouth std by performing Oral sex on a dude? That guy was on the down low as well lol

 

[BaronOfHair]

Laymen on Sosuave would have done it for free.

I could've been sold on Tripplehorn back then

 

[jhonny9546]

OK she respects the man at the beginning but later changes her tune. What does the man do then? He can't really leave without heavy emotional, financial, legal, and social costs.

Because a woman's needs change over time. Her being "good" to a man depends on whether the man can fit her needs at that time. If he can't, she will be ruthless.

This is true. It is what happens.
When needs are satisfied, a man is useful.
When she finds another man who can satisfy her needs, the current man becomes useless.
(This explains monkeybranching if you think about it. She doesn't let go of the vine until She makes sure to get the new one)

This is the view from her POV. But what is there instead from a man's perspective?

A man can live a life in which he becomes malleable and adapts to other people.
He becomes a people pleaser, focus on earning their trust, identifying their needs, and adapting himself to satisfy them. (if you think this is what a seducer would do)
He has now made himself useful and indispensable for those people.
Alternatively, a man can live a life in which he discovers his own needs, fulfills them, and lives according to his own pace.

In the first scenario, a man finds* a woman.
He must constantly re-adapt whenever her needs change with time and events in the relationship.
He is in a state of perpetual transformation, striving to please her and meeting all of her requirements.
(Who's holding frame? Easy answer for you guys)

In the second scenario, a man lives his life in his own "cave", with his own muck and his own pigs.
Granted, he isn't catering to a woman’s (or either other people) needs; instead, he focuses on his own, refusing to adapt or bend for anyone.

This is a black and white example.
There must be gray, in the middle.

But, at the core, a man must live and be like the second man.
It is certainly much harder for this second type of man to find a woman

So, are you choosing to live your life by selecting a woman, figuring out how to meet her needs, and transforming yourself into her "court jester"?
Or are you living a life where you pursue what brings you genuine enjoyment, without compromising for anyone, trusting that if a woman truly has an interest in being by your side and supporting you, then you might just have found a real partner?

Slow for a minute, Sit and think about it.
If you choose the latter path, you are effectively filtering out all those women in the dating market who are looking for men to adapt to their specific needs, while simultaneously attracting women who are a better fit for your own needs.

So, we might say, It is based on how a man lives his life that he experiences different outcomes.

This comes quite close to reality, though in reality, a man who lives his life in the second way may eventually soften and begin to bend a little, once he has been in a relationship for many years.

For a man, it is a constant challenge to decide whether to bend or to remain rigid.
Yet the deciding factor, the element that carries the most weight, is the type of woman who chooses him.
And she will chose either man 1 or 2

*it's not the man that "finds" a woman, but actually, the way he act in life, will bring him a certaing categories of people. so we might also say not find but he will be found.

 

[BaronOfHair]

@jhonny9546 "Alternatively, a man can live a life in which he discovers his own needs, fulfills them, and lives according to his own pace"

Serving your fellow humans, WITHOUT secretly craving a reward for doing so, is a key component of being a man. Admiration and affection are byproducts of this very activity

 

[jhonny9546]

Serving your fellow humans, WITHOUT secretly craving a reward for doing so, is a key component of being a man.

This.

There is a big difference in living like man 1 and man 2 in this regard.