And as usual, the men are thinking about getting laid and the woman (me) is thinking about having a relationship.
Another crucial difference. What one wants, the other doesn't. What one wants, one doesn't get. What one can't get, is what one wants.

A relationship is the last thing I want. Erotic exchange with trust is the only sexual experience I'm interested in. The thought of a man crowding me gives me shivers. Yeah, for the first five minutes all is grovvy, then the stuff starts to happen.
I don't trust myself not to fall into the trap nor do I trust men not too. I'm programmed a certain way around men I'm intimate with, too late in life to trust it still doesn't control me.
My husband put all his emotional needs onto me, it was burdensome and boring. If some men can't share some of their intimate lives with their friends, I don't see why I have to cop that deficiency.

I watch it with my 29 yr old son and his girl. He's a builder, used to hours and hours a day being physical. They're home till my daughter's baby arrives, then they return to the round Australia in a van picking fruit etc adventure.
So he's been on set at home for hours and hours a day. No respect for my siesta time or anything. He tries it on telling me what housework I should be doing. Mind you I would be close to being the world's worse housekeeper, and I'm quiet proud of that. I saw how fussing about a house sent my mother slightly mad. No, my time is better spent, when I'm not out, reading, some art work, constant attempts to clean up my studio.
I shrug him off. His girl however, not so easy for her. It's good she helps him, I see she enjoys that. She's not trained like he is though, and she's a wondrous artist.
His male force is strong. I admire his development, he no longer tips baskets of washed clothes thru the verandah window onto the kitchen floor requesting, in his way, for anyone to put the clothes away. No, he's becoming a gentleman overall. He's still setting the pace and she's letting it happen.
I must suggest to her to take a day alone a week and he's not allowed to suggest she do anything.

#104 - The point of the first essay that you linked to was all about women rejoicing not just in hookup culture, but reveling in controlling it. From that and other postings on SL, and podcasts like Guys We Fucked, one doesn't get the sense of hookup culture being something women are dragooned into, more that women don't like how many men approach the game.

Re people in their 50's, it goes back to which woman, which man. What are their jobs/debts/education/health/future prospects? A sea change goes on re who is chasing and chased, around 30-35, but I repeat that anyone who thinks the average 50-year old man is living Clooney's life watches too much tv.

#105 - Whatever are you on about?
You posted links to two essays - One in which the author brags, in unseemly fashion if you ask me, about how desperate guys are to get up in her cooch, how clumsy most of them are and how she has her pick of masses of them, the other in which she decries guys' overly exacting standards. Unless we're off that particular track, neither of them came across as a plaintive appeal for a real relationship/Twue Wuv.

. No place like the present. Fronted son and gf, suggesting she take a full day to do whateverthefuckshewanted, not in those words. It went down ok initiatally. Ten minutes later son comes back with such bullshit about the work that has to be done , how the rest of us are so lazy... It was on. We had a civilized argument. He actually said to me ' don't come on with all this feminist stuff'
I pointed out a few home truths about his controlling behaviour and how that sort of shit loses you friends and lovers. He heard. They are now having a D&M.
I'm patting myself on the back for furthering the minute breakdown of patriarchal thinking🎉

It is sort of true CatB. Fifty yr old men, in good condition, have an edge. The maturity coupled with the fact they still are in working order is attractive.
The man just has to wear it.

...And when I mentioned said attractive 50-year old, I was grumpy not for not getting to Hit Dat, but because, on short acquaintance, mind you, she seemed to have several of the qualities that you can’t buy nor inherit. That’s the kind of woman I’d like to end up with, longterm.
As I and multiple other people have mentioned, getting off is one thing that young men drive towards more than young women, in general. And when that drive is corralled, a lot of women, perhaps our essay writer here will be among them, are extremely indignant.

@105. I wish we knew each other irl

@108: I think you and I read the same essays and have vastly different interpretations of them. I couldn't disagree with your reading of that "Dickonomics" essay more.
I also don't think your point about people trying to punch above their weight and George Clooney not being like most 50-y/o men and 5s or 6s thinking they can have 7s or 8s has anything to do with what I'm talking about.

I also don't understand a single word of your comment @111, but I am willing to chalk this up to a case of we're not going to understand each other.

The only thing I will say is that I think the two essays I linked to are related, in that the forces that have led women to believe they have to have chill at all costs, as well as to be the "Cool Girl," are the same forces that have led men to believe they can treat women with zero respect as human beings in pursuit of a quick lay and that women will tolerate it. Alana Massey is simply pointing out that women don't need to put up with being treated like crap.

Lastly, it sort of amazes me that men haven't figured out that they would get more pussy if they approached women as people, rather than as detached pussies. I'd think that considering how sex-driven they apparently are, some would realize that there is a better way to accomplish your goals than to be dicks or douchebags to women.

@112: I'm sure we'd be great friends. Do you like tequila?

I think I'll avoid reading those articles. It's Friday13th here, that's enough to cope with.

Nocute @ 85
I’m willing to cut you some slack due to what you described as a somewhat early act of intoxication- I had mine a whole hour later- yet I’m somewhat surprised you refer to this article as “really good, illuminating essay.”
I may be once again using Venn’s name in vain, but it also read like a YGG-induced piece: “writer who regularly entertains the Twitter masses with her unapologetic analyses of toxic masculinity and her praise of amazing female-identified people.”
I hope part-timers are also counted as amazing, at least part-time, though I suspect I will be labeled as yet another weirdo, one who wears a skirt on occasion. Besides, “dick is abundant and low value” so who cares anyway.

Nocute again
Your @ 113 “the forces that have led women to believe they have to have chill at all costs, as well as to be the "Cool Girl," are the same forces that have led men to believe they can treat women with zero respect as human beings in pursuit of a quick lay and that women will tolerate it” puts things in perspective and does make sense.

Yet the argument is similar to the one we had a while ago about CFNM parties, in which you said that empowering women should not be an act of mistreating men, even for those who crave to be “mistreated” as opposed to abundant dicks on the dating site.

Supposedly, just talking to an attractive woman will increase a man's testerone levels. Don't know if there is medical proof of this, but when I was in my 20's I sure felt that it was true. For many men this is also true over the next few decades.

Ms Cute - It's funny; I've been mulling over a post mentioning how you sometimes make me think of the flip side of John McEnroe, who famously did not support equal prize money at majors until he had a daughter. Then suddenly the years of lectures from Billie Jean King finally clicked. Once or twice, I've wondered once or twice if/how your life would be different had you borne a son as well as the Miss Cutes, and I was going to canvass what difference you might think having a son might have made to or in you.

I'm prepared to take your word for it about straight or possibly bi males, but that first essay (I didn't feel up to trying the second) is exactly the wrong thing to be drumming into gay boys (the way they're turning out these days, they fall all over themselves to put other gays down to show all the str8z how cool they are, a theme with which you are well familiar, but the feminist solutions for this sort of thing are only designed to work for women - understandably, as we can pin down Miss Bingley as a prime example). I had such a good day at tennis that I'll allow you to retract your *all* or add an *OS* without the standard deduction.

[Alana Massey is simply pointing out that women don't need to put up with being treated like crap.] Fine and agreed as far as it goes. Whether the reader is supposed to infer that men do/ought to is open to interpretation.

@114. Ooo tequila does not love me. But you can have the Margarita, and I will do the rum and coke.

At forty I find myself discarding all the stereotypes about male female sexuality. I donno. What held true - or what I thought held true - in my twenties seems inapplicable to today. Perhaps it was never true.

I do think women are slower to bed than men and I think Dan put his finger on it. Not so much sexual violence - although Dan is entirely intune to that- but the consequences are higher for women all around.

But beyond that? Ehhh. I was off the .... market for quite a while. I mean as moving through the world as a sexual woman rather than as Mom or Wife or Employee. I am obviously taken, but I now am out independent of kids or husband. So while I wear the ring, people are starting to see Woman, rather than Mother or Wife. In fact, I had to send a guy packing when the friendship crossed the line. I am attractive, look younger than my age, a bit pudgy, but still active. I say all this to be clear: I am nothing special, but I've had guys suddenly interested, but not just for the lay. They shouldn't be right? I am drifting toward invisibility. So many people seem to want to be touched. But more than sex. Sex has become a proxy for something else. I wish I could explain it. But tonight is my nine year anniversary. Maybe I just want to see him in leather pants.

@nocute: This is why feminists say that feminism benefits everyone

Not to start a whole big thing here, but I think you've entirely missed the point.

Men, in particular progressive men, would benefit from being able to share, with their own voices and from their own experiences, the pain that oftentimes comes with being a heterosexual male, and to, you know, speak for themselves about their interests. We should all want this for them, as it would make them better men. Feminism, which by definition focuses exclusively on female perspectives (otherwise it would call itself "humanism"), and which in practice has a habit of discounting male perspectives, does not provide a forum for men to talk about what it's like being men. Feminism is not the solution - it's arguably part of the problem.

As I see it, the current conversation about how men and women should relate to each other socially, romantically, economically, and politically, is dominated by progressive women on one side and conservative men on the other. Meanwhile, conservative women are expected to let the men handle the thinking, and progressive men are expected to just shut up and support their women.

It seems I am in disagreement with all the penis-havers today.
So be it.
Maybe we'll be more in concord next time.

I read both essays. I get the point of the first one. When a woman has enough experience dealing with quick come-ons, whether in person or online (but particularly online, since the amount of time to make a first impression in that environment is miniscule), the smart ones develop an intuition for it, and can easily assess the motives of most men. There are certain indicators, phrasing, and other approaches that come with obvious tells to the woman who has become adept at spying them.

Yet the essay left me sort of rolling my eyes. I wouldn't have finished reading it, if I didn't feel I needed to, in order to comment fully here. At some point, it felt more like the woman you run into in the club's ladies room who, as she reapplies her make-up, tells you dating horror stories that most other women have, too. Only she's psyched because she adopted a somewhat dismissive phrase to use when she tells her stories to you and the next dozen strangers that step up to wash their hands or apply lipstick, and it's expected you will high-five her mental acuity before your exit.

The second essay sounded to me like humble bragging. Oh, the poor dear, she had to deliver her chill speech to SIX different men! Hopefully, someone was waiting with a towel and cool beverage when she was done with her acrobatics. If, as we are told, she really is looking for love, I find it difficult to believe she was casually dating six damn men, all at once. If she were my friend, telling me her Big Chill Revelation, my two cents would be that it wasn't something that begins and ends with a definition of a word that is the problem. The author's direction and goals themselves seem to have shifted, which means she made a choice to stop being chill, or stop pretending to be, so as to feel accepted (and what else was she doing, if she was dating six different guys?). To me, that's more about changing her approach in order to achieve her goal, rather than a real need to rant about the definition and application of an urban dictionary entry.

No Sean. Progressive men are not expected to just shut up and support their women. They are expected to work with their women as the women are expected to work with their men.
Seems like there has been many times here, where men have been able to express their pain. Where they might get jumped on is the blame the woman card, which is whipped out to try and solve a problem.
Predominately, wife won't fuck me like I want to be fucked. All her fault.
I see lots of women jump in trying to tease out such a simple go to conclusion and point out other variables that are contributing to this dynamic.
Shout your pain, if you need witnesses. Just look at situations in their complexity. Most of us don't have much wiggle room re jobs, spouses, kids.. So to blame women because men are in pain is too simplistic and closes down the creative avenues that can be used to lessen pain for all of us.

What is this chill? Some sort of performance ritual.
Maybe this hookup culture is not serving some people enough on a deep level for genuine intimacy to occur. All dating sites invite some sort of spin, from both parties.
Females redressing perceived problems by seeing men as objects is just following the scripts a lot of men use. Where's the appeal in that?

Nocute @ 122
Yes, I noticed the broad coalition myself. My guess is we all sensed the article writer only sees us through her worthy-or-not-penis prism.

The Zoo @ 123
“it felt more like the woman you run into in the club's ladies room who... tells her stories to you and the next dozen strangers... and it's expected you will high-five her mental acuity before your exit.”

I’ve only witnessed the make up; maybe it’s time to broaden my clubbing horizons.

Poor, poor LW1, can't have the kinky sex he's been having for almost 14 years because 3 kids under 10 has made his sex life vanilla!
So he cuts off the boring sex unilaterally and tried not to think of it (i.e. sulk) for two months. But then 💡, a great idea strikes, DAN will give him a free "cheat without being the biggest A-hole" card. Alas, alack, Dan is a responsible father, a good husband and a decent human being, he remembers the exhaustion of those parents-with-young-kids years, and refused to give LW the excuse he wants to cheat. Le sadz!

Dude, if you have 3 kids under 10 and still got enough energy after work to want foursome kink games with porn, sex toys, ETC., then you are NOT doing anywhere near your share of parenting. THIS is why your sex life has changed. Since you've only been going without sex for a couple of months ( I'm assuming this, because I can't imagine - from what you wrote - that this situation has been going on for long, or you would have tried Dan earlier), that means your wife has been GGG with your sex preferences, kinks, swing and all for at least 13 of the 14 years you've been married. Now she is exhausted, and can only do boring sex, and can't act enthusiastic enough (because EXHAUSTION!) so it has obligatory vibe. Let me guess, you guys just got a new baby, amirite?

Dan only gives the "you can cheat without being a cheating POS" permission card to people who have been in a sexless marriage for a LONG time - that means ZERO sex, and not self inflicted - and they've tried everything to change this situation in caring, loving ways and failed. He doesn't give it to jerkdude who refused sex with his wife - probably while piling on the guilt trip on top of making her feel unwanted and undesirable - because it's not as hot as before they had children and he's BORED!

You have two choices here, LW1. If you love your wife and children, then accept that you're parents now, many things will NOT be as it was for a long while. Take responsibility and gladly do your part as a husband and father. If your wife isn't always exhausted and feeling like she's drowning in a sea of demands 24/7, her libido will come back. If you aren't able to step up fully without resentment and assholery, get a divorce, and PAY ADEQUATE, TIMELY CHILD SUPPORT to take care of the children you jointly made with your wife. 'Cause she doesn't need FOUR children to take care of all by herself.

Rejecting sex with your wife when she's probably going to bed exhausted and gets up even more exhausted after disturbed sleep - because she's doing most or all of the childcaring and rearing yet is STILL having sex with you, however vanilla - makes you the BIGGEST ASSHOLE this side of the Pecos, and will damage your marriage anyway, even if you don't cheat.

Just in case you don't know, CPS tend to frown on foursome sex with toys, porn and other kinks in homes with children; even if they're sex positive and non-judgy, the fact is these kinds of fun and games take hours, and everyone will be tired afterwards. As most mothers of infants and toddlers can't even have 5 minutes to take a bloody shower, social workers will wonder WHOM will be taking care of your three kids while each of you have hot non vanilla sex with three other people; they'll worried the time investment and the logistics needed for this type of sex life would lead to child endangerment and neglect. You could lose your children.

When my sister only had two kids, one week per year she and her husband went hiking and riding, and we took turns taking care of our nephews. When her 3rd child came, the hiking week went away, because none of us could take care of two active toddlers and a baby for long without getting sick from exhaustion afterwards! We could only babysit one or two days at a time. Fortunately there are many of us, so at least they got regular breaks, but I can assure you, the multi-hour-sex-fest wasn't something they could even ever consider, even with our help.

People, kids WILL change your lives. DON'T have kids if you don't want to make changes and sacrifices to take care of them and each other.

Ms Cute - Are we in disagreement? I'm entirely prepared to defer to you on the deleterious effect on young women of being hit on left and right. It appears that we might even agree on how the All Men Are Potential Rapists line belongs to and in Shirley Valentine.

Now, as a complete tourist, I could suggest solutions that I suspect nobody OS would like. I just hope that, whatever happens in the great OS War, the collateral damage is absolutely minimal (with as little SS-only as possible). Can't go deeper now; I have a column to write in 47 minutes.

@iseult. Thank you.

🐸

@121: "Meanwhile, conservative women are expected to let the men handle the thinking, and progressive men are expected to just shut up and support their women."

Do you seriously believe this is the definition of feminism, are you trying to mansplain, or are you trolling again, sean?

For a smart guy your arguments have been really lazy lately.

This whole thread bums me out.

Sean @81: One difference is that boys have spent their entire lives being prepared for an adulthood in which they are expected to be the pursuers, while girls have been taught that they will be pursued. So you get two queer men together, two people who both expect to pursue the object of their attractions. No wonder men hook up far more easily and readily than queer women, neither of whom has been adequately prepared for a future where she is expected to make the advances. And this is one huge reason why most bi women are with men. We can either sit back and let them approach, or take the bull by the horns and approach men, which is well received 90% of the time because the man is relieved to not have to do the approaching. Not so much with other women, who, we know from our own experience, are sick of being objectified -- so it feels disrespectful.

Cat @98: "the guy lists all the qualities that women expect from him that combine to wanting a sensitive, caring Real Man who can also kick some ass defending her and has a great job and drives an Audi...and he's helpless to complain because he'll be labeled a slacker/MRA/scrub." Does this happen? Or does whoever he's complaining to point out that HE has similar high demands of women, namely, slim but big-breasted, young, sexy but not too sexual...? That he as a man is allowed to hold such preferences but how dare women have standards?

DarkHorse @120: Happy anniversary!
Don't forget the other huge reason why even high-libido women are "slower to bed": slut shaming. Men with big sexual appetites are celebrated, told they are "real men." Women with big sexual appetites are sluts; their desires are unnatural, sinful, shameful. Often, a woman may want nothing more than to go home with this dude she just met but she says no, because she doesn't want to be judged for it. Often, that judging comes from the very same man she just had the mutually enthusiastic sex with, and who doesn't see himself as a slut at all, oh no.

A friend posted this on Facebook, which does have an obvious bias, but makes a nice counterpoint to all the gender essentialism that's been going on in this thread: http://fusion.net/story/280614/the-myth-…

Oh Lava, always "stirring the pot" with your emojis. hee hee.
RE: Mars and Venus
Another conundrum I have noted is that whereas men are quite easily aroused (I have read of an pro-Domme who always blindfolds her subbies to take away their visual input) Women are much more complicated. The ld saw: "MEN FALL IN LOVE THROUGH THEIR EYES;.. WOMEN THROUGH THEIR EARS" comes to mind .
My miss N. said one time that she doesn't desire intimacy unless she feels "close" to me. Hmmm.
I, on the other hand do not feel particularly close to her when we are living together and sleeping in the same bed but doing so more-or-less as brother and sister. In fact, living this way I feel very alienated from her, as well as lonely, and borderline resentful. Now past 60 I must cope as best I can. These essays and opinions from both Mars and Venus are illuminating.

#133 Bi - Does this really happen?
Yes, Bi, like unintentional anal, this does happen. Back to my point about both sexes punching above their weight, women as much as men. And we're not talking about 'having standards,' we're talking about people having unrealistic standards and then complaining when they're not met. And more so than men (I submit) because women are more pursued than pursuing, at least before age 30 or so, women see the drop-off in attention that frequently comes with time, as a sudden insult.
You're in another country, but you seem to be well plugged-in to our politics, as any faithful reader of the Stranger will be. You may have noticed during Obama's presidency an increasing chorus of older white men complaining that they're 'losing their country,' when what they mean is, they're losing the privilege they once had and started to take for granted. This attitude is not exclusive to old white men.
The second essay NoCute linked to was one long combo humblebrag/moan about Teh Mens having all these things they want in an ideal women, and dammit, I'm not going to try to mold myself that way anymore, as though wanting a set of unrealistic/out-of-ur-league qualifications is something the Y-chromosome just invented.
Slut-shaming...as many have pointed out before me, this is done at least as much by other women as by men. As with all things that might garner social disapproval, ultimately it is up to us individuals to decide what we want, and if we want it enough to have a certain segment of society disapprove of our actions. Any guy who thinks you're a slut for giving in to his blandishments, you never should have fucked in the first place (in restrospect.) You've got the pussy, you've got the power.

So...the one thing I've gotten from reading everyone's feedback to LW1 is that having kids is the worst idea ever.

You don't sleep, you lose your freedom, it tanks your sex drive, etc.,etc., etc.

Cue the deluge of parents saying, "But it's worth it" but can't really give specific reasons to counter the scores of posts talking about how awful the experience of raising a child is.

I'm middle-aged (which is really not true. I'm 53; I'm only "middle-aged" if I live to be 106. It's possible, but not likely). I don't use tindr. But I'm dating or trying to and I'm on OkCupid which has become some sort of wasteland. Considering the length of my average comment posted here, you can imagine the length of my profile. I took time to craft something that tells you about who I am. It's honest, it's funny, it's revelatory. It was written to pique interest. And there are photos on it--all recent and in focus. In other words, I put effort in, because I am seriously interested in finding someone to be in a relationship with. And 99% of the men that approach me do so like this: "Hey;" "Beautiful smile." Or let me copy a charming introductory message verbatim for you--I'll choose a representative one: "Omg! You are beautiful your smile can make an angel with broken wings go extra mile. Am Derek and you are..?​" I live in California and he is from Oklahoma.
Here's another: :"Hi there lovely one ..how is the weather over there and how are you doing? Happy mother's day to you...if you can chat you can give me your cell phone number so
that i can text you or email address

I'm John"

I don't even bother responding to these.

A 21-year-old (oh look: the same age as my daughter!) sent this message: "How have the threesomes been going?" To which I responded: "Awesome! Thanks for asking. Say hi to your mom!"

A 33-year-old wrote, by way of introduction: "ur hot i would love to fuck u"

I haven't bothered to read these guys' profiles, but if they're like the vast majority of the ones I see they say nothing about the man (except where OkCupid asks for your favorite books, movies, music, and food, and then there is a long list of bands and movies). What's written isn't edited and is full of spelling or punctuation errors easily caught by proofreading. There is one old, blurry photo or really unflattering selfie taken from below so I can see up his nose. There is no picture of him, but there are two of his dogs. The man is 58 (and the kind of nothing-special;-no-George-Clooney that Cat Bro talks about), but has set his age limits as low as 23--of course he has--and as high as--wait for it--40.

You read enough of these things and it is easy to think "dick is abundant and of low value."

But I'm not the audience Alana Massey is writing for. And I don't know that The Zoo is, either, if you are older than 35. She is writing for women in their 20s, who have possibly never been treated to any kind of courtship but that of demands for nudes after two exchanges of text, of guys ordering them to come over for sex before ever having met them. I work with lots of women aged 18-25 and I have daughters aged 17 and 21 and a niece aged 20, and have friends with young women as daughters. This Judd Apatow-created world of bros willing to make zero effort, but who expect to get laid and complain when the pussy is not served to them on a silver platter is honestly their world, and I applaud anyone who can help them realize that they don't need to put up with it. That they deserve better treatment, especially from someone who wants to get inside their bodies. The essay isn't even against casual, hookup sex; it just tells the readers that all a man needs to do to score some is to behave decently.

I wish more young men would see it, too, because it offers examples of the truth that you don't need to be moviestar-handsome or have tons of money to get that girl--but what you do need, in a text-based dating introduction, is some manners and a sense of humor and an ability to be thoughtful and respectful of the other person as, you know, a person. Pussies are not pizzas to be ordered with a "yo; here's the address." The essay is not anti-penis; it's anti-dick. As in the pejorative. And it's true: in the dating scene for young women, dicks (in both sense of the word) are abundant and low value. But decent male human beings are able to have as much casual sex as they want, because the "secret" to getting that no-strings-attached pussy is to not be a dick.

But I find it sad and telling and disheartening that men who are reading it here--some of whom have daughters who either are or will likely be using tindr in a few years--can only see this essay as saying "I have no use for penises and judge every man through my worthy-or-not prism."

There is absolutely nothing humble-braggy about the essay about how being "chill" sets a woman up to be scorned fore daring to want a relationship.

Cat @135: "Any guy who thinks you're a slut for giving in to his blandishments, you never should have fucked in the first place (in restrospect.) You've got the pussy, you've got the power."

Of what? There is no such thing as a psychic pussy! How the heck is someone supposed to know ahead of time which men are going to blank you after sex and which are going to appreciate having met a lusty woman?
And again, here is some more of that problematic language: "giving in to his blandishments." Women don't actually have agency; women don't actually want sex because it's something they enjoy. A woman who has sex has been conquered. It's a game and the man has won, making the woman the loser.

And to this equating of pussy with power: Why are women expected to have more "power" to overcome their sexual urges than men are? Saying no makes a woman "powerful"; having sex, again, makes her weak, a loser.

Hate, hate, hate this attitude. Ughhh.

HUH - Is this just life as a 48-year-old married father of three? Am I being selfish for wanting more in my sex life than my wife is willing to offer?
I'd expect life as a 48 year old married father of three to be back-breakingly busy, speckled with the small joys of connecting to your kids and mate. Hopefully you are getting some joy from spending time with your kids. It doesn't seem like you are getting much joy from your mate anymore, though, and that kind of thing can lead to divorce. You're being reasonable with your desire for a mate with some mutual attraction. I'm not sure you're being reasonable about caring for your children, though. Do you plan to divorce and ask for full custody, or at least equal time spent caring for your children? Or are you considering cheating, modeling a dysfunctional romantic relationship for your children? Or trying to stick your wife with the child rearing duties while you pursue your romantic happiness, hoping that child support will pick up the slack of a negligent father?

Shutting down sex is not going to make you more attractive to her. It sounds like you have already given up on your mate without a fight. Pitching in until your exhaustion levels match is a good start. So is exploring your wife's sexuality.. was she pulling a bait and switch, indulging you without getting what she wanted for years, only to demand this dull sex she needs now? Have you asked her about your suspicions (without accusation)? Maybe she wants a kind of kinky sex that you're not into.. pegging or fisting or tying you up and gagging you so that she can do what she wants with your body... in which case you can trade kinks if hers are not particularly revolting to you.. people do indulge their partner's tastes while letting theirs go unacknowledged sometimes, when they are very attracted and happy with their partner.. and this can last years before the imbalance starts to chafe.. and it always starts to chafe when your sex needs are not being met in monogamy, I think.

But who knows, maybe she's cheating and sabotaging the sex on her end already, or some new dynamic has killed her attraction to you, and there is nothing that you can change without divorcing. Talk a lot about possible solutions to make you BOTH happy before pulling the divorce card, and try not to be the jealous cheating scum kind of stereotype; if you decide to cheat, be understanding that she's going to be attracted elsewhere too and may also act on it. If not.. she probably needs a counselor, not a fake marriage.

UPITT - Panthers better kick some Penn State ass this year. Anyway.
Why do you think that women show zero understanding of male bisexuality? I don't think it's so hard to comprehend why men are attracted to each other. They can be hot in bed.

I'm guessing that you are thinking something more like "women show zero understanding of my sexuality". Often, when someone feels very misunderstood, it's because they don't understand the people that they are trying to communicate with. For two people to get what they want, they have to be able to communicate what they want (presumably you have no problem here as you wrote pretty specifically about what you want) and able to listen to what the other person wants (you don't mention much about female needs except not-a-player and straight-acting, whatever those terms mean), and be creative enough to suggest plans where BOTH people get what they want (do your suggestions to women include the things they say they want?). For example.. this group sex that you'd like in your ideal stable relationship... who is choosing the other people involved? Are you thinking about egalitarian groups, or that you are the center of attention, or are you offering group sex that's all about her?

Also, if you want a bi woman instead of a straight woman, online matching may be your best bet. I can see the attraction; she'd be naturally more interested in queer issues, as you probably are.. but just as you are a special snowflake bi guy, bi women are also a minority requiring a more targeted search and, usually, extra effort to bang.

Is this therapy worthy?
Anything that's really bothering you and you don't know how to solve is therapy worthy imo.

WASSUP - You know a great way to get guys to stop doing stupid painful/repulsive shit during sex? Stop having sex with them. Too bad not every woman has that sort of self control. And as long as we accept their excuses and keep having sex with them, they won't change. Takes 2 to tango, it's not all on them.

GhostDog @ 136
First, acknowledging Jim Jarmusch and another great movie. Ricardo, are you reading this?

As for children- no doubt there are lots of challenges and yet the over all is indeed rewarding, at least in my case.
In a way it's good that we keep hashing those issues here: some people may be slightly more prepared ahead of time, or at the very least realize they were not so crazy as they thought they were during those child-rearing years.
There are too many unspoken issues and hardly any acceptable alternatives. And I’m not talking branching out to others for sex. Masturbation would be my first, but it is still such a taboo.

She-Who-Cannot-Be-Cutely-Named -
[47] In the heat of the moment, when that red sex-fog has descended, I often find myself first going along with, and then turned on by, something I would never do if we had had a discussion and had calmly decided on it beforehand. I once had unprotected ATM and only later realized that oh, gee, I had done that. I probably wouldn't have done that had I been thinking clearly.
seems to directly contradict
[95] The way women are controlled by their sexual urges is in a such a diluted way compared against men. I may think with my clit a little bit, but I don't ever sacrifice the thinking I do with my brain in the same way.
You put your family through a divorce for sex. How exactly do you think men make greater sacrifices for sex, or show that they hold it in greater value, than you do yourself?

#139 – The 'in retrospect' was there for a reason. No, you can't be sure what a guy will do or say about you after you have sex. In related news, like much of this thread, a woman may post-coitally slag me down for any number of reasons, from my height to the beat-ass car I drive. To paraphrase that 90's comedian who's otherwise a libertarian so I don't want to give him any clicks, You say that you're not absolutely sure about people you date, even after you fuck them? Welcome to our group, it's called Everybody.
What I said was nothing more than, if he disrespects you for actually sleeping with him, which is something he wanted, then you got a wrong 'un. Unfortunately, they (of either sex) don't wear signs around their necks, so we all have to take our lumps. Presumably anyone who thinks 'she had sex with me, so she's a sluuuuut,' is not going to keep after you, and anyone who buys that line of thinking won't be either. Win-win.
'Giving in to his blandishments' was a turn of phrase, if you take that to mean that I don't think women ever want sex, as a personal belief, I refer you to much of what I've posted these many years. 'It's a game, and the man has won. And the woman's a loser.' Come. On.
The pussy power to which I referred means that the woman is ultimately the arbiter of whether the man has sex. Period, full stop. This is why men, at least younger ones, do all that pursuing. The woman has the power to say, at any time, you know what, I'm not feeling this, so I'm going home. Sure, the man can say this too, but as previously noted, before 30 this is often like the relationship between a dealer and an addict.
You seem awfully determined to shoehorn this 'women=losers' viewpoint into what I said, which is not at all the case. +

@133: BDF, that was an interesting essay. As the person who's had the higher libido in almost every relationship I've been in, it resonated with me. It is also an example of what I was referring to when I said, @104 that feminism benefits everyone.
Even though feminism focuses on women's rights or women's attainment of equal rights, many feminists argue for the abolishment of traditional gender roles, seeing them as just as constraining and harmful to men as they are to women.

I don't know what seandr is up to @121. He's usually snarky, but this time he sounds serious. And it's a shame that he is so bitter, especially because there is room in feminism, which he would see if he moved beyond the "no room for men in feminism or it wouldn't be called 'feminism,' it would be called 'humanism'" platitude.

Everyone is hurt by constricted gender roles, which tend to pit men and women against each other as adversaries. It's disheartening to me that when a woman stands up for her right to want to be treated with respect and tells other women that they deserve to be treated with consideration she is reviled or mocked and that when she tells women that there is nothing wrong with having feelings and passions that are your own and that you are allowed to legitimately want to have a relationship rather than just to be "hanging out" with the guy you like, she is accused, by men and women alike, of humble bragging.
I showed that second essay to several young women yesterday and asked what they thought of it and their responses were far different--and not anti-male at all.
They said: Yeah! What's so awful about wanting to be boyfriend and girlfriend with the person you're having sex with? I'm mad that I can't dare to ask for that without being made to feel wrong?"

Seandr [121] - Feminism, which by definition focuses exclusively on female perspectives (otherwise it would call itself "humanism")
Feminism is actually defined as an interest in gender equality. (Haven't I referenced the dictionary here before once or ten thousand times?) Part of humanism is about gender equality, and part is about race equality, and part is about income equality, etc. "Humanism" doesn't mean gender equality.. it's almost like you are trying to eliminate all emphasis on gender equality. Since we only got the privileges and responsibilities of engaging in combat (like men) a few years ago, and we still suffer employment inequality in hiring and in pay, I don't think "desegregation of gender" is over.

CatBro [135] - Slut-shaming...as many have pointed out before me, this is done at least as much by other women as by men.
Perhaps women shame other women more often than men shame other men. But women do not slut shame men in the same way that men slut shame women ime. A man is more likely to nag and try to kill a woman's promiscuity by labeling her a trashy slut, if he wants her all to herself. A woman might decide that a promiscuous man is not a good fit for her, but my impression is that men can unfortunately be dogs, but slutty women must be punished and changed (and only sleep with the slut shamer and no one else). Both men and women like to be the one-and-only special lovah... but I think generally only men try to mold women this way with shame.

And both genders will sometimes lash out against the competition, those men and women who are getting all the hot lays, to make themselves feel better. I think "slut" is much more vicious than "pretty boy" though.

#145 -  A man is more likely to nag and try to kill a woman's promiscuity by labeling her a trashy slut, if he wants her all to herself. And in what world does this actually work, in that the woman decides to stay with this man? I don't want to go there, but I think it's a really small territory, like Tonga.
 but my impression is that men can unfortunately be dogs, ... Not to go too deep into the whole pussy-power thing, but if that's the case, then that's a woman/women deciding to sleep with said doggy man. The guy is not Professor Xavier, he can't wrest control of her mind and make her date his slutty self.
Some women do indeed try to mold men with shame, and it can be on the subject of being promiscuous or any number of other things. Really, there is no one of these sins that's specific to just one gender.
And 'pretty boy' is more an indictment of (what are seen as) overly 'feminine' features and/or styles of grooming. I've never in my life heard of 'pretty boy' used as a synonym for 'promiscuous male.'

nocute @ 137
“But I find it sad and telling and disheartening that men who are reading it here--some of whom have daughters who either are or will likely be using tindr in a few years--can only see this essay as saying "I have no use for penises and judge every man through my worthy-or-not prism."

Don’t get too upset just yet. Saying the article, it’s tone and all is not my thing doesn’t mean I justify the men contacting you and others in such a stupid way and have such miscued expectations.
Rest assured, the daughter is fully aware of all aspects of the dating scene, she also found the person she is currently dating online.
We talked about some of our own experiences. When I mentioned the relative abundance that didn’t exist so openly in my days she said, “Yes, more people want to date but not necessarily those you’re looking for.”
I think one can still avoid the idiots without becoming one in the process. Not you- maybe the article writer.

@142: Philophile, I don't see those two statements as the contradictions you see them as. The red sex-fog takes place when I'm already having sex, when I'm pretty close to orgasm. At that point, all kinds of things sound good to me which I don't really want when I'm not at that level of arousal. If someone dirty-talks to me about bringing a woman into the mix at the moment when I'm about to come, it sounds sexy to me. At all other times, not so.

The "clit thinking" v. "dick thinking" refers to a state of being long before the sex starts. It refers to the idea that men will say anything or do anything to get laid or be attracted to women or men they don't actually like because hotness trumps all, or view the vagina or the penis as the electrified rabbit in a horse race (I don't know if this is true, but it's the stereotype and has been reinforced by a number of male commetors here, notably Cat Bro this time around). Whereas I don't think that's generally the case with women, or at least me and my friends. In order to find someone truly sexually attractive, I have to be attracted to his personality as well as his face/body. I think this is true enough in general to have led to the misguided idea that men's looks don't matter at all to women--a comforting notion that breeds bitterness in men who count on that when they try to (as Cat Bro would put it) punch above their weight and get rejected. It's true that for some women, hotness triumphs over everything else, and yes, for all of us, there is a personal threshold for beauty below which we simply won't be attracted, but on the whole, I can't/won't want to have sex with a man I don't like or I think is stupid or can't talk to or is a republican. I might admire his physical presence, but it doesn't mean I would fuck him, given the chance. When men talk about thinking with their dicks or their "little heads," I believe this is exactly what they're talking about.

Lastly, as to breaking up my marriage so I could try to find a more sexually satisfying relationship, that was a decision I came to after years of thinking--agonizing, really--and following endless discussions and marriage therapy sessions. It cost me hours and hours and hours of thinking through the implications of that decision before I was willing to make it. It was a last-ditch effort to find a way to live an authentic life. It was not "thinking with my clit," which I would consider to be a spur-of-the-moment giving-in to a sexual urge. I wasn't making a decision to pursue a particular hot guy because my hormones were surging; I was trying to decide what I wanted the rest of my life to look like.

Cat @143: "What I said was nothing more than, if he disrespects you for actually sleeping with him, which is something he wanted, then you got a wrong 'un."
Yes. And what I'm saying is nothing more than the prospect of getting a wrong 'un serves as a disincentive to many women who would otherwise enthusiastically be engaging in casual sex.

The rest of my rant, though inspired by your problematic "turn of phrase", was a reaction towards that pervasive "sex is a game that men win by getting it, and women lose by 'giving it up'" trope rather than to your attitude specifically. The lack of respect sexually liberated women get in society shows that large segments of the population think of women as "losers" if they "allow" themselves to be seduced by men.

Anecdata: Many years ago I participated in a group sex situation, which could be labelled a "gang bang." I'd slept with one of the guys before, and two others were super hot, so hey, why not? We all had fun. Afterwards, one of the guys went around slagging me off for having participated, saying "she wasn't even drunk." WTF, really? They were perfectly okay with the idea of raping a drunk woman, but couldn't respect a woman for enthusiastically consenting to mutually enjoyable group sex? Bass. Ackwards.

So, in order.

@137 I totally believe what you are saying and respect your thoughts. With that said, that blows my mind and is really hard for me to believe. Maybe it's an experience/generational/social circle thing as I used to have to work way, way harder at dating when I was in that age bracket(I'll be turning 40 next month). Guys really expect to get sex without working brutally hard for it? Wow.

@141 Yeah, Ghost Dog is one of my favorite movies. Hip hop samurai + an AMAZING soundtrack= awesome.

And re; the kid thing.

I think that's one of the most honest answers I've heard in awhile, and I do think that there are a lot of issues that come up that aren't talked about when having kids. I think it is because if people were 100% honest about what having kids is like, fewer people would have them in the first place. I know for me my limited experience with children and reading about other people's horror stories(like this letter) make me pretty dead set against spawning on a personal level.

Oh, seandr:
hu·man·ism
ˈ(h)yo͞oməˌnizəm

noun
an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.
a Renaissance cultural movement that turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.

noun: Humanisn
(among some contemporary writers) a system of thought criticized as being centered on the notion of the rational, autonomous self and ignoring the unintegrated and conditioned nature of the individual.

fem·i·nism
ˈfeməˌnizəm

noun
the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
synonyms: the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female emancipation, women's rights;
informal: women's lib

"Equality" means women count as much as men; it does not mean men don't count as much as women do.

Equality doesn't privilege one group at the expense of the other.

nocute again- I hope mine @ 147 doesn't come across as harsh. Not my intention, I enjoy the conversation and challenges.

@GhostDog (I love that movie, too, btw): There is no good reason to have kids. Kids sap your time, your energy, your money. They prevent you from doing what you want when you want in ways you can't even begin to imagine. If you don't think you want kids, I think you should respect that.

Yet my life is infinitely the better and the richer for having had my kids.

It's a "take it on faith" kind of thing, which I, being an atheist, had a hard time with. And once they're here, there's no going back. If you decide that having them was the wrong decision, it's impossible to just quit or get a do-over (unless you just plan to abandon your children, which some people do). The finality of it terrified me. It was a hard decision to make. And sure, there are some days--and were a lot more when the kids were quite young--when I said, "if I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have had them." But you know what? Overall, for me it was the right decision.

No one should ever try to talk anyone into having children.

@GhostDog: What I got from having children was this:

When they're very young, you get to see the world through their enthusiastic, un-jaded eyes. Everything is exciting; everything is new and fresh. They love learning about the world: about space, and animals, and music, and the joy of what their bodies can do, and spiders spinning webs, and fire engines making noise. It's fun to be around and to help spark that much enthusiasm. It great to watch someone learn and take so much delight in learning.

Especially when they're very young, they're damn cute. And they love you: you become Superman and Harry Potter and the smartest person, the most necessary person in the world. You become that to someone who is adorable--that's a powerful feeling.

Then they get older, and they turn into such interesting people. They become people you want to hang out with. They're smart, they're funny. They're youth; they're energy; they're life.

Does that make up for the things you lost because of them? Who can say. The sleep I lost 21 years ago is long gone and its effects have not been felt lately. I can certainly sleep through the night now--or if I can't it's because I'm plagued by financial worries or work stress or the thought that someday everyone I know, even my kids, will die. The sex drive comes back. In my case it didn't come back for my now ex-husband, but I had lost it for him years earlier, I'm sorry to say, so I don't think our having kids is to blame in that specific case. Many couples resume a healthy sex life with each other. The money spent? Well, yes, I have sunk a metric fuck-ton of money into those kids. Do I sit around wondering if every purchase I made over my life was "worth it?" I don't. I don't even think that there's a single objective measure for determining what is "worth it."

I'm not trying to advise you to have kids, by the way. Just telling you what I got out of it.

Ghost Dog- Yes, people should be much more careful when it comes to reproduction. Some ways to achieve it is to have informative, joyful sex and relationships resources from an early age.
Sex should not be a taboo you don’t talk about, yet get your “education” from pornography. It is also likely to improve the dating scene for the youngsters.

I look back at all those birth preparation classes; it’s only the birth they talk about. No one tells you about the sleepless nights that follow, the brewing resentments, the sexless weeks/months/years ahead.

But lets concentrate on the issues that really matter, like Ghost Dog’s praised soundtrack: When the movie came out I heard JJ consulted with some rappers as to what THEY actually listen to, then built the sound track accordingly.
My favorite scene was towards the end when he’s about to shoot the bad guy through the bathroom sink’s drain pipe and the old Mafioso, in his Heffner style silk robe (I’d go with a much nicer one) rapping some stuff as he brushes his teeth or something.
The dreamy follow of the pigeons in the beginning, and I as I recall in other parts of the movie as well, set the tone so nicely.

Ultimately, having children meant creating more love: more people for me to love, more people who love me, more people for my family and friends to love and more people to love my family and friends.
Sometimes we get irritated with or angry at the people we love. But unless something goes really sour, we still love them. We still like to be around them, we still enjoy being with them.

We like loving people. We like the way it feels.

Kids, cont. Also, having kids forces you to be less selfish. Sometimes that's felt as a loss; certainly when you can't still have the kinky foursomes you used to have, you miss being able to be selfish and think only of what you want (or you and your hopefully likewise-inclined partner) and make it happen. But sometimes, for me, that's a gain: I find it's nice to care about someone else, to hope they get what they want, to celebrate their victories, to try to console them when things don't go the way they wanted. I like the chance to be less self-absorbed and to put energy into others.

Lastly, GhostDog #@150 in response to my comment @137, wherein I described the online dating scene as young women I know and care about experience it, you said "Guys really expect to get sex without working brutally hard for it? Wow."
I understand what you're saying, but if guys think that treating a woman with basic decency and courtesy and respect as a person rather than as a vagina with some annoying qualities attached to it is "working brutally hard" to get laid, then that's a sad state of affairs, and I wonder if you and all the men here would like to see the women in their lives that they love (sisters, daughters, cousins, even mothers, if their mothers are dating or single) be treated like that.

Doesn't seem like asking too much or forcing men to work so "brutally hard" to me.

@157

I think that the title character could make folding laundry look amazing, sleek, and urban. There, I said it.

@nocutename and CMDwannabe

I think I am beginning to see the difference. See, I have some real messed up genetics. The only reason I turned out anything close to ok is an almost fanatical amount of discipline. Any child I bring into the world will have at least a 50/50 shot at a genetic predisposition for alcoholism, drug abuse, asthma, a very specific form of birth defect, and a host of mental disorders(I did a genealogy going back until around the 1600s. It..isn't pretty). And that's assuming the woman I have kids with doesn't have those predispositions herself.

Also, I don't see the world we live in as a place that I would want to subject another human being to. If you don't walk an extremely precise course(top marks in school from kindergarten up until you graduate college, lots of volunteer activities throughout, studying a very small set of majors that could lead to a good job, etc.,etc) in your life you will have an awful time of it. Like..malnutrition bad.

For you, having kids is an expression of love and adding more love into the world. For me and from my point of view, it would add more misery. Honestly, I hope you are both closer to the truth than I am. But I don't think so.

@160

I think I should define what "work brutally hard" means. It means

1. Working out AT LEAST 3x a week
2. If not wearing the latest and greatest, then having a well developed sense of style and be able to argue why you don't like the latest and greatest.
3. Being, at least, bilingual
4. Being fully versed in active listening
5. Have, at a minimum, a strong understanding of art history, culture, politics, science, etc.
6. Have any psychiatric issues WELL under control.
7. Have, at a minimum, have been to at least three countries and be able to speak in an interesting manner to your experiences there.

TL;DR: Basically, the Dos Equis "Most Interesting Man in the World". That's what I'm used to as the bare minimum of getting dates if you were a weirdo(meaning, you liked RPGs, were in the SCA, weren't a football fan, weren't Christian, etc.).

What you are talking about isn't that. It's treating people with basic humanity. In my dating experience, treating people with basic humanity was rewarded with not being shunned. I'm not saying "woe is the guys" at all. I'm saying "holy shit are you serious?!?!"

CatBro - And in what world does this actually work, in that the woman decides to stay with this man?
The same world where abusive relationships are rampant. I don't think I've ever heard of a woman staying with an abusive man when they were celibate ... unless she's cheating or entertaining the idea.. and although the stereotype is that men are usually the abusive half, I think that women who choose to stay in abusive relationships will not be generous, patient, competent, reasonable models of non-abusiveness either... instead either doormats and/or abusive themselves.

Doormats tend to believe any old thing they hear, like "it's wrong for women to sleep around". Because they value fitting in, social acceptance of some sort, over fighting to preserve their own interests. And I think all men and women have at least a little bit of doormat, some need to fit in, as well as a little bit of controlling assholery, or need to physically force or manipulate others to accommodate your interests.

The guy is not Professor Xavier, he can't wrest control of her mind and make her date his slutty self.
It's not direct mind control... it's manipulation when you shame others until they comply. Otherwise known as nagging, or bullying... or verbal abuse or punishment in the sense of hurting another to enforce fear of an undesirable action.

It has been nearly a month since I've heard how a woman is a slut for sleeping with (other) men, or how it's wrong for women to sleep around but normal for men. Maybe the trend is changing!

Some women do indeed try to mold men with shame, and it can be on the subject of being promiscuous or any number of other things.
I agree. But we don't try to kill a guy's promiscuity by implying that he's trading sexual favors to women in exchange for a boosted ego or financial favors or otherwise being hoodwinked for sex. I've never heard a woman call a man a "rent boy" because he was sleeping with other women. I've heard "ho" tossed around a great deal. Sex is assumed to be in a man's interest, and all too often assumed to be a favor women are doing for a man... and it's almost always men who are making this assumption ime.

Finally, pretty boy is a term for an attractive man, often implying that he's vain in a disparaging way. Look it up. I think the effeminate overtones come from a cultural unwillingness to admit that men can be gorgeous... I have more often heard it applied to muscly guys who play sports, although perhaps almost as much to guys who are so into their appearance they wouldn't risk the scars from sports.

NoCute - I don't see those two statements as the contradictions you see them as. The red sex-fog takes place when I'm

already having sex, when I'm pretty close to orgasm.

The "clit thinking" v. "dick thinking" refers to a state of being long before the sex starts.

It was not "thinking with my clit," which I would consider to be a spur-of-the-moment giving-in to a sexual urge.
So which one is it? Spur-of-the-moment urges during sex, or long before sex starts? I don't think that these are two distinct types of horniness, more the difference between arousal and plateau. I think that "thinking with your junk" is generally why people go on dates, why they have sex, and why they do painful shit they wouldn't agree to without the possibility of sex, whether that's waxing or lots of gym time or buying bank-breaking clothes or scents or indulging their partner's sex interests. And I don't see men doing as much stupid shit as women do, I think you'd probably have to pay a man a lot more to see them lick poop than you'd need to pay a woman in a typical het relationship. Same with inviting a third into bed; women are more likely to give in to their man's interest than to demand the third is their ideal... Same with giving up a career.. women will do it for steady sex more often than men will. I think that women seem more eager than men to a) sacrifice their own interests and b) comply with their partner's interests, when good steady sex is involved. The gender disparity between subs and doms might be an illustration too. (Maybe not.. I assume both partner's interests are equally catered to in good D/s relationships, although I've also heard lots of stories where the Dom's interests are prioritized more.) So I've always assumed that women feel a greater need for sex than men, because they tend to sacrifice more for sex. I think we generally experience harsher disrespect&violence than het men, yet mostly stay straight and horny enough to willingly have sex with them.

If women were paid more than men as a whole, and if sex was culturally expected to be all about clit, maybe involving the dick a little.. I don't think people would be having sex so much, I don't think het men could engage romantically in those conditions, like het women manage to.

@GhostDog: re #16:1 If you feel that way I think you should honor your feelings and not have children. I would hope that no one tries to "sell" you on it. It bugs me when people's life choices aren't respected.

Re #162: First of all, I understood what you meant back @150. I realized it was (just a bit) tongue-in-cheek (or I hope it was), that "those guys get all the luck." Except that, as Massey points out, treating women like takeout food isn't actually working for a lot men and then they grumble and complain about how tindr doesn't work.
But to your laundry list, which I again hope was meant to be satiric or at least a reference to the Miss Bingley/Mr. Darcy/Elizabeth Bennet discussion of how many accomplished women are to be found in the world (and Mr. Ven will be happy, because that's one of his favorite references), if you are serious in even some part of it, then I have to wonder who the fuck you've been hanging around or trying to pick up!

The list of accomplishments is so long and some of the accomplishments so arbitrary and useless and specific or of interest to such a necessarily tiny proportion of the population of straight women in your neck of the woods, even those who aren't Christian, and aren't football fans, that you can't have meant it seriously. But I think you sort of do.

So for god's sake, man,
1) move someplace else. Most women aren't that demanding.
2) you're way overreacting and overthinking. Most women aren't that demanding.

re having children: for about 5 or 6 years (24-30), I felt like my body was running the show, telling me to bear children and not adopt, as I'd been planning.

It felt like a drive, like a hunger, and I was lucky to be able to control it enough to settle down with someone who was an excellent parent and a good match for me.

Remembering that drive helps me have compassion for men feeling their own sex drive as an almost overwhelming urge.

I used the term 'humble bragging' to describe the second essay about 'chill'. I did not mean any woman who eschews a 'chill' or casual relationship in order to find something serious or permanent is humble bragging or doing anything else negative. Every woman (and man) should try to find what they want. But this particular writer came across to me as humble bragging, due to her excessive amount of men she was dating. Most women are trying to find one or two decent guys to go out with, whereas as she has six men who needed pink slips. Again, I say if she put that much effort into dating half a dozen guys, she was pretty invested in appearing or trying to feel chill, and blaming a Webster's definition leaves her own responsibility out of the equation.

As for slut shaming, men certainly do their horribly unfair share to contribute to it. But women are in there with large shovels themselves, in many cases. For many women and girls, It's a go-to insult and way to freeze out other women that is used, often with little or no 'evidence' to support it. Women get labeled a slut or a ho based on their clothing, their willingness to flirt, their track record for dates and/or sex, rumors or no reason at all, and it's NOT just by reckless men. I would argue the propensity for slut shaming is about 50/50 between the genders.

@164: Ah, Philophile, and here I thought I had done a good job of explaining myself to you. And I also not only understood, but mostly agreed with you @163 . . .

I don't know why, but you and I just seem to be incapable of understanding each other. The harder I try, the more frustrating it is when you don't get it. I imagine the situation is the same for you. Maybe we should stop trying, because I feel like while the words belong to both our respective languages, you and I are speaking wildly different ones and all our words are apparently false cognates. I wish you well, without understanding you at all.

@167: The Zoo, she was "dating" as in casually fucking and not feeling allowed to want a real relationship with those 6 men at the beginning of the essay. The whole point of the essay is that she shouldn't feel she has to hide or not even feel the desire to have a real boyfriend, a serious intimate relationship, to able to call what she and the guy are doing "dating," even, and not merely "hanging out."

She's not bragging about how many guys she can "get;" she hasn't "gotten" one--unless you count the getting of that which she doesn't want--no strings sex. That is what she's finding easy to get. I don't know that it's bragging, if she is a 20-something blonde, cute, slender woman; it's just reality. I realize that you will say that that's why it's a humble brag, but I don't think that the point of the entire essay is to brag in a roundabout way that she can catch all the random and inconsiderate dick she can handle. This is how she begins an essay in which she bemoans a state young women find themselves in. I'm getting tons of confirmation from the young women I know that this is their experience, too. They weren't humble bragging. They don't want casual, non-committal dick.

GhostDog @161 "If you don't walk an extremely precise course... you will have an awful time of it. Like..malnutrition bad."

I think people at all income levels experience both suffering and joy, GhostDog. If you look at recent data: "every income group rates itself as happier than average (> 5). You have to extrapolate the curve all the way down to $700/year of household income in order to arrive at a hypothetical demographic group that would consider itself less happy than average."

(So, maybe people earning $10,000 aren't as happy as people earning $75,000 a year, but they believe they are happier than an average person.)

Taken from: https://gravityandlevity.wordpress.com/2…

See also this chart: http://icanhasscience.com/wp-content/upl…, taken from http://icanhasscience.com/psychology-stu…. According to the chart, 70% of people with salaries at $10,000 experienced "happiness, enjoyment, smiling, laughter" on a particular day (the day preceding the survey).

All I know about marriage is you get out what you put in and the things you think will make a difference and try to shoulder might not be as important as simply asking what needs to be done and should be done to delight the other person. Nothing is too outlandish to bring up.

@167: "As for slut shaming, men certainly do their horribly unfair share to contribute to it. But women are in there with large shovels themselves, in many cases."

So what? Everybody needs feminism, women can certainly buy into the regressive trashiness. We're you trying to offer some insight?

Men and women are different creatures;
Have you tried Fetlife nocute. It's not a dating site, it'll tell you though where meetings are happening. You say you like kink, submissive in bed, threesomes;
Some interesting groupings go on there. What an eye opener.
So. Men and women are different, yet similar. All humans.
Fan, I'm not sure I agree with your position re gay men. Male sex seeking out male sex is about more than social
conditioning. Men on the whole don't seem to have a problem asking if you know, you wanna have sex. The erotic spark seems to be enough.
I've often wished I could experience being a gay man.
And yes, sexes guilt each other.
And GhostDog, having kids is about years of sustained commitment to the growth of other human beings. You up for that job, go for it. The rewards are unfathomable, and I believe it's like having psychotherapy day in and day out. One's unconscious is activated, and all one's damage is shown to oneself. This opportunity to rear another and at the same time re rear oneself, is invaluable. It's work. And it delivers one moments of love very different from the love felt in any other relationships.

Fan@133. Should clarify my above comment; not saying being gay is social conditioning, I was responding to you saying men are trained to pursue.
And GhostDog, what I meant by activating the unconscious, is that rearing a child brings up how the parent was reared. Impulses come up to behave a certain way, that when looked at by the mind are not the best response. The intensity of the work creates a sort of pressure cooker, so much thought and reflection needs to go into the job. It's a mugs game, yet it is worthwhile. Go figure.

So, what you all arguing about?
Must be time we compile a list of what we have all learnt re ' how to negotiate the hilly terrains'
Perhaps there's a book deal waiting. We could do a small chapter each.
I've learnt that men and women
are different. The difference is the attraction. It also causes confusion. How does one navigate that confusion?
All I can say at this point is good luck.

Ms Fan - [Sean @81: One difference is that boys have spent their entire lives being prepared for an adulthood in which they are expected to be the pursuers, while girls have been taught that they will be pursued. So you get two queer men together, two people who both expect to pursue the object of their attractions.]

You mean - being pushed relentlessly towards pursuit of WOMEN. (No wonder we have such high suicide rates.) This leads a great many of us to have an extremely tortured relationship with the concept of pursuing. *If* your statement is true of more gay men than not, my first guess would be that it would apply to a portion somewhere between Mr Obama's percentage of the popular vote and his percentage of the electoral vote.

@148 nocutename - I haven't read past this post yet but had to chime in to say that I can reach extreme levels of sexual frustration (and by this I mean privately weeping, screaming, shouting expletives in the shower, masturbating constantly) without being willing to change my selectivity around specific sex partners. I can be at maximum-frustration-head-about-to-explode stress level and still turn down willing potential partners who aren't necessarily unattractive but just don't do it for me for whatever reason. The person has to do it for me somehow or I just won't want it from them, no matter how desperate I feel. I think some people would perceive this as me just not really wanting sex as desperately as someone who is willing to stick their dick in a glory hole or visit a random sex worker, and I would disagree with that because I know how desperate I am in those moments. OTOH, I'm willing to believe there are different types of drives that are satisfied in different ways.

Child rearing under capitalism, yes, one does get amazed how many people have kids under such dumb social structures.

@137 NoCuteName:
"[the essay] just tells the readers that all a man needs to do to score some is to behave decently."
"But decent male human beings are able to have as much casual sex as they want"

I only skimmed over the essay, so I don't know whether this is an accurate description of it. But, as far as your quotes go as a description of reality, they're completely untrue. Completely and spectacularly untrue.

Ms Cute - You didn't just say "feminism benefits everyone," you said [This is why feminists say that feminism benefits everyone,] - possibly a significant difference.

If we are going to start resorting to dictionaries, I'd study Mrs Woolf, who does this quite neatly in Three Guineas, almost immediately after she bestows the third guinea upon the gentleman hoping to prevent war ("would that it were a million!"). (In the Harcourt paperback I have, Part 3 begins on Page 85 and she finishes bestowing the third guinea at the very top of Page 101.) I am much more sympathetically inclined towards an ideology when it wills the obsolescence of its label if that advances the cause than when it wants to steal the accomplishments of other ideologies to increase its label's significance.

But I don't want to quarrel with you (at least not just yet) and have had an idea. Three Guineas, as you doubtless recall, speaks much of the situation of the daughters of educated men. As you haven't had any sons, you might be just the person to write a modern version speaking much of the situation of the daughters of educated women. I'm sure you could make the end product quite thought-provoking, whether or not it equaled the merits of the original.

@nocute: I've only heard "humanism" used as an gender-inclusive superset of feminism, as in this and many other discussions, some of which I'm pretty sure have taken place here. The feminism I've read seems in agreement that these are two different things, and because women have been historically marginalized, identifying as a feminist rather than a humanist is justified.

Alas, it seems my point missed its mark, but you've gone above and beyond the call of duty hearing me out.

@seandr: Humanism had its start in the renaissance and is distinguishes between a god-oriented worldview and a human-centric one.

When people describe themselves as "secular humanists" it is more a political/areligious morality that they're referring to. For example, I am an atheist jew who is also a secular humanist. I'm also a feminist, as these things can coexist.

I honestly can't remember anyone here using the word "humanist" to mean a gender-inclusive subset of feminism, but I'll give it a whirl.

@181: Okay, Old Crow, that's true and I'm sorry. I was trying, as the essay was, to talk about the benefits of being a decent human being as opposed to an entitled bro, but I overstated. Not everyone who is decent scores.

@182: Thank you for the compliment, Mr. Ven. I can't help but think that a movement about equality benefits everyone, but I am aware that many don't agree.

I just wish that more men didn't see feminism as the enemy or the problem.

NoCute [168] - you and I just seem to be incapable of understanding each other. The harder I try, the more frustrating it is when you don't get it.
I think I get what you mean when you say "The way women are controlled by their sexual urges is in a such a diluted way compared against men." I just don't think it agrees with my experience. And the way you tell of your experiences, doing things which you disliked or caused you great pain, like the divorce, in pursuit of good sex... I don't understand why you think men's horniness, or need for sex or whatever you call that desire to get down and dirty with an attractive person, is stronger than the pull you describe.

Look, if you're bored, we can drop it, no prob. But you're acting like I can't speak or you can't read English. What gives?

Lava [173] - I love the way you speak about raising children, most of the time.

Lava - Even when it makes me sad, it's nice to hear your perspective, though. So change that to all the time.

GhostDog, having children for me was an expression of love for my husband, whose idea it was, and I thought we would be reasonable parents. It turns out having children is tiring but also a total adventure and a blast. There's lots of drudgery, of course, but so much fun.
Yesterday my husband had a terrible day at work and nothing was going his way. He came home in a bad mood and didn't want to come to the kids' swimming classes. He did come, and our son was put up to the next class at the end of his lesson. He was so full of joy it totally made our days and my husband went home happy saying that it had turned out a good day after all. Is that a good example?
Also, having children hasn't tanked our sex drives apart from the short time of breastfeeding and horribly broken nights. It's better than ever after kids and we thought it was great before. After all, it's free entertainment and we are on a budget like many families!

I was prepared to get riled at the absolutist option of WASSUP, that every "that's the wrong hole" complaint was in response to intentional mistargeting by asshole (no pun intended) men.

Then I got to Dan's "anal...require(s) lube, focus, precision, and deep breathing" and remembered that the maybe 8 or so times I've been warned "that's the wrong hole" by a woman partner, I'd been slowly approaching entry, intentionally trying lubricate my tip with vadge wetness. Because I actually give a shit (no pun intended).

All that to say, yeah, nonconsensually anally-penetrating men don't deserve anyone's understanding--yours or the law's.

Oh god, HUH could have been writing about my sex life right now. My wife's going through some issues on top of being exhausted from work and the kids and such.

But you know what HUH? A couple of months ago, we got away on a vacation in Mexico without the kids. And holy fuck. She started her period about two days in, and we've barely ever had sex when that was going on (she's normally either squicked out about it, or the side effects turn her right off), but she was all "Fuck that noise, we're *FUCKING*! Damn the torpedoes, let's ruin some towels!" It's been a while since I saw her so enthusiastic for getting laid. A week with a complete lack of any responsibility whatsoever (and like Dan says, a significant amount of alcohol) was all she needed.

So yeah, that's proof plenty that the passion is still there, it's just been crushed by her overall exhaustion lately.

But I'd also have to admit that every once in a while, we still get away for some group sex action too. I highly recommend letting the kids "go camping" on grandpa's living room floor for a night or two every once in a while.

Re: the essay on being "chill." The fact that she was dating six men didn't come across as a humblebrag to me; it came across as a statement of fact. What came across as superior was the author extrapolating her realisation that she was tired of being "chill" and, in fact, wanted a committed relationship into a call for society in general to reject the idea of being "chill" as a positive attribute and recommit to commitment. If I'm happy dating casually, then who is the author to tell me I'm doing it wrong?

Re: women who slut shame. I find there are three possible interpretations:
1. "I wish I had the courage to reject society's gender rules and have sex with whoever I want, like she's doing. But I don't, so I'll slag her off for it."
2. "I've spent my life being told that men want the 'good girl', but that slutty girl has a boyfriend and I don't, and I feel cheated. So I'll slag her off."
3. "I worry that my boyfriend will leave me for someone with a higher sex drive. So I'll slag off this woman in hopes that he agrees she's low value."

Re: humanism, I've been familiar with the original definition of humanism as, basically, secularism for three decades. Don't know how you missed it, Sean. But I've also seen people who believe in gender equality but disagree with radical feminists' ideas to the point that the word "feminism" seems tainted arguing to adopt the term humanism or equalitism instead.

Re: children. I'm with Ghost Dog. Never saw any possible up sides to breeding. Hunter @176: I'm convinced the female orgasm exists to ensure we survive as a species. Raising children is such a burden we need a major enticement to participate in the act that, if we're unlucky, leads to pregnancy and children!

And as for the whole "what do women want in a man," stop conglomerating "women" into this homogeneous mass. Yes, some women want a buff bod. Some women prefer a skinny or a pudgy bod and some women don't care. Some women like a man who's salaried and suited. Some women prefer a blue-collar bit of rough and some women only care that he has some sort of job instead of playing video games all day. (And some women don't care if he plays video games all day, if he eats pussy like a champion.) Most women want him to be a decent human being who treats her with respect, but some women, yes, are drawn to abusive pricks. The question to ask is, would YOU date you? If the answer is no, identify why not and work on those problems to make yourself more dateable. And the other question to ask is, indeed, are you aiming way out of your league. If you've an average Joe with a dad bod, Charlize Theron is probably not going to be interested. If you screen out people at or below your own attractiveness level, you can't fault the attractive people for doing the same.

Nice posts, Fan. I agree, what I find attractive in a man has always been all over the place. As I've mentioned before, the love of my life was a balding man, with a rotund, cuddly body. His mind and energy just swept me away.
This notion of seeing people in categories; above us, below us. I mean your example, Charlize, she got with Sean Penn. he ain't no Channing Tatum.
Slut shaming. I'm glad to look back and see I never indulged in it. The girls at school, rich Eastern Surburbs of Sydney girls, the ones who went out with older men.. I looked on them with awe.
Slut is such an ugly word. Society encourages the control of female desire, from both males and females.
Look about this kid having, you got to see I did overdo the offspring a bit. At one point, four under eight. Ah, those were the days. I know for me, having kids rooted me to the earth. I could have floated off otherwise.

Ms Cute - Dr Sean's use of the "humanist" label as what some people call "equalist" rather than as a throwback to Erasmus is something People Are Doing. Recently, I have even seen the term Women's Rights Activist (or Advocate; another new thing is for people to go into detailed hair-splitting about the difference between the two As and whether the hair-splitter should present as an Activist or an Advocate) pop up; a number of people who decline the Feminist label say they are MRAs and also WRAs. Sorry to YouTubesplain, but, given how many people here had no clue whatsoever about the difference between the labels MRA and MGTOW, it may prove helpful.

A movement about equality or the movement about equality? I shouldn't expect you to stand for it if an SS publication called, say, the Equal Pay Act an Inspiring SS Moment ("because now lesbians will be paid as much as straight men for doing the exact same work") instead of An Inspiring Feminist Moment That Many Same-Sexers Supported. There's a big difference between saying, "Your cause Q fits well with our stated goals, and our cause R seems to fit with yours; let's work together," and, "Fixing women's problems fixes everybody's problems and therefore only looking to fix women's problems will be deemed an acceptable approach." You seem to be in a camp that welcomes many voices and accepts a good deal of dissent (others are road hogs who insist everyone ride their bus or get pushed into the ditch). Given how equality so often (if not usually?) turns out to be selective, that would seem to make many voices a necessity.

I could go on about The Cause v The Label, but doubt sufficient general interest. Given how from both sides lately I seem to be seeing an increasing number of generalities to which numerous exceptions instantly spring to mind, I'm beginning to incline to guess that a great many people are in either good or bad circles, and think what they see is a larger proportion of the whole than is strictly accurate.

Lava - Look about this kid having, you got to see I did overdo the offspring a bit. At one point, four under eight.
A good friend's family was much worse. His mom simply would not quit having kids until menopause. No cash for college, his dad couldn't retire forever... I think he ended up with 11 brothers and sisters!?! In my own family, my uncle is working on his.. second? third? pension for a family of 6. And my aunt runs the "farm".. and at one point all 4 were under 9, one of whom had health problems. But that's exactly what he searched for (minus the health problems of course, but shit happens). Some people need a big family. My own parents were pretty average wrt number of children, but I greatly appreciated the large extended family while growing up.

Re slut shaming: I think women do it because they are jealous of the chick who is having all the sex. Trying to manipulate a dude into disliking high libido women.. I haven't heard it in that context but it makes sense as an asshole move. I've heard men do it for 2 reasons. The chick they want to have sex with is noncommittal, they are pissed that she's not a shy virgin or strongly monogamous or whatever, so they call her a slut. And maybe as common is when men are pissed that any women sleep around, in fear that their woman might get these "wrongheaded" ideas. (and then there are gay guys who are jealous of all the dong their girl friends get and can launch a more lighthearted "you slut!", but that's more like women's jealousy.)

Yes, sex is risky.. arguably riskier for women than men.. a reasonable answer to an enticing risky move is to mitigate the risks when possible so you can pursue your desires anyway.. or else you'll end up afraid to cross the street or touch a public sink..

Mr. Ven: Thank you for the tutorial; I really keep as far from the people who control the labels as possible, and they always remind me a bit of this.

@199: I'm not being snarky only; I do see your point, and it's a quite valid one. I just get frustrated when, in 2016, an educated man with a wife who has a career still makes anti-feminist statements. It's so much like those angry, entitled white men so convinced that the tiny little gains people of color have made, make them (angry, entitled white men, or AEWM) a group who's being discriminated against. It bothers me that apparently many men still see a movement about equality being a movement that's anti-men. I know there have always been misandrists in feminism, but it seems misguided to cling only to that one aspect or those people's voices. And I do recognize the fact that the feminist movement has not been cognizant of or made a priority of issues pertaining to women of color or, to a lesser extent, lesbians. But if you work with the baseline, common denominator of equality--equal rights and equal access--I get steamed when men say that there's no place for them in feminism.

BiDanFan @193, my orgasms rarely happen during any act that could lead to pregnancy, lol. But maybe that's why I got extra pro-breeding drive (see @166)

Erica @203: But if you didn't have orgasms, you wouldn't let a dude near you in the first place, is my point!

@BiDanFan: I'm not trying to speak for all women, and I know that there is no one universal attribute. I wasn't trying to speak for all women.

One medieval common thought was that in order for conception to occur, both men and women needed to orgasm. Women's orgasms were also thought to be necessary to keep the womb calm.

I didn't orgasm until I was 38, and I let a lot of dudes near me before that. I also couldn't orgasm without a vibrator--so no man or any other person was necessary--until I was about 50. And yet I still wanted to let dudes be near me.

I didn't experience it as intensely or for as long a period as EricaP, but for a while when I was 24-25, I had a very strong desire to have a baby. My husband didn't share it, and after about 6 months it completely abated. Then, when I was about 29, I began to think about it in a "should we or shouldn't we?" kind of way, and was completely ambivalent. I was still pretty ambivalent when we decided to stop using birth control and let nature take its course when I was 31. I was ambivalent all throughout my first pregnancy.

Hun [196] - In the 1st half of the 20c, there was plenty of female anorgasmia in western society, but population climbed nonetheless.
You mean, when they stopped giving the groom directions to have pleasurable sex?
http://www.idacraddock.com/wedding.html
And right before women rebelled en masse?
Sure, no problems with that approach...

Really, the wedding night pamphlet is very very old fashioned. Religious, anti-masturbation, pro-female circumcision and probably male too, anti-drugs, etc...

But it has more useful, accurate info about how to have pleasurable het sex than most current sex-ed classes. Even talks about the clitoris, hymens and size mismatches or "matrimonial misfit".

Please some of the women here, explain some womens decision to have sex with strangers: some women will have sex in the bathroom of a bar with a guy they just met. No foreplay, just pure lust. Granted these are usually younger women, maybe college age or a little older.

Regarding having children:

It's somewhat like a hard graduate program - med school, law school, PhD studies. When you are in the thick of it, it is exhausting, tedious, draining, occasionally rewarding. When you look back on it, the sense of pride and accomplishment is indescribable.

In other words, the days are long, but the years are short.

But, absolutely, the world would be a better place if breeding was left to those who made a conscious, informed decision on breeding.

@NoCuteName:

Thank you for your apology earlier. Now I'm going to criticize your @202. Hopefully respectfully.

You say that you get "steamed" when men say "there's no place for us in feminism". First, it's not my job to perceive Feminism as a movement that has a place for me. If Feminism wants me to perceive it as an movement that has a place for me, it's Feminism's responsibility to make itself an attractive place for people like me. To put this in perspective, if many "women of colour" didn't feel that Feminism had a place for them, you wouldn't be angry at the "women of colour", you'd start thinking about what Feminism was doing wrong. The fact that if I replace [women of colour] with [white men] in that sentence, you blame the men, is a reflection on you, not on men who don't think Feminism has a place for us.

The fact is that Feminism does not owe people like me anything, and, conversely, I don't think we have a meaningful place in it. And those things are both OK. But if you're going to get angry because I don't feel I have a place in a movement whose members regularly use me as a synonym for "Evil" because of my genitals, skin colour, and sexual orientation, you're going to spend a lot of time being angry.

I disagree that Feminism is about equality because my experience of Feminism strongly contradicts that. I'm aware of the definition you have for yourselves. But MRA's also define themselves as being pro-equality, and you (collectively) don't take that at face value: rather most feminists I know seem to view MRA's as similar to Orcs, except with less moral ambiguity. (I had no idea that the acronym "MRA" could be hissed before I heard a feminist pronounce it!) If you're allowed to not accept MRAs' self-definition, why do we have to accept your self-definition when it contradicts our lived experience?

And no, the situation of middle class white women is not remotely analogous to that of "people of colour". There's (lots of!) objective evidence that black people in the US are worse off than white people in the US. Black people have lower incomes than white people, they have lower life expectancies than white people, they have worse educational outcomes than white people, Black men are, per capita, more likely to be imprisoned or shot by police than white men, etc. etc. etc. There may be a demographic variable where US blacks are better off than US whites, but I don't know of it. Whereas with women vs. men the stats are a mixed bag. Better off on some stats, worse off on others.

Incidentally, Ally Fogg, a columnist for the Guardian who has a considerably more sympathetic view of feminism than I do, has a thoughtful essay on why he doesn't identify as a feminist:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013/…

Yes Philo. Having lots of kids was intense for a long time. Now, I've got these five lovely, mostly, young adults to have good strong intimacies and friendships with.
Hi Tim.
@208 Amos. What timing for your question. Why do you not ask why the men are fucking strangers in the toilets.
Answer to both questions; because they both want to.
Feminism takes many forms. Really Venn, these days my left toe has a special category. I see others taking it, Feminism not my left toe, to places I don't agree with. Doesn't change my feelings about self identifying as a Feminist.
Yes it's about wanting equality for all, which includes men women and children. It's also a word that connects us back to women who demanded the vote, who sat in the White person section of the bus. Strong, clear women who fought for others and themselves to be seen, acknowledged and respected.

Amos; to specifically answer your question. I think it's because some women contact their erotic self and go with it. I was always more taken with the idea of zippless fuck on a train. Much more hygienic.
I hope they are doing it in the female toilet. Unless they are into piss play and the smell of two million men turns their dial up further.