Men and women think differently.
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 12-14-2005 - 7:19am |
There's an ad on TV that I've seen several times recently. It's for a national jewelry store chain. It starts with a woman sitting alone in her home on Christmas Eve. She was phoned by her man to inform her that a major snow storm might prevent him from getting home tonight. She hears the sound of a vehicle, and it turns out to be a snowplow that stops in front of her house. She looks out the window, and the man descends from the plow, having obviously moved heaven and earth to get home to her. They embrace, she looks at him with loving eyes, he gives her a gift of jewelry, and they hug again.
I'll bet most women think: "How romantic." As a guy, I was thinking: "He's going to get laid tonight!" Am I right, or do some of you think differently from what I expect for your gender?

Pages
Edited 12/23/2005 2:16 pm ET by katmandoo2001
How so? In the sense that since I don't expect them to want to have sex then they don't, or since I don't expect them to initiate or make the first move then they don't? It's not like I didn’t WANT them to want to have sex with me, and would have been upset if they had explicitly shown interest. On the contrary, I would have been overjoyed. One of my (many) unfulfilled fantasies was to, at least once, be the object of a woman's desire, and to be aware of that desire. Was that really an unrealistic fantasy? In retrospect, it seems like it was.
Admittedly, I only had sex with five women, but in every case I pursued them and made all the moves, not just the first one. Still, with most of them, the first time came as a complete surprise to me. Despite the fact that they all said that they enjoyed it, and all but one (my first) said that they had orgasms, every time we had sex I always had the feeling that if I hadn't worked to get her in the mood and taken all the initiative, then it wouldn't have happened, and that wouldn't have upset her at all. Although a lot of my skepticism about women's interest in sex came from the things I heard from my friends before I finally got lucky myself, a lot of it was earned.
"Simply because a woman isn't thinking about sex constantly(she prioritizes other things), means she's less sexual?"
Of course! By definition!
"Rice, you still don't think that perhaps your expectations and general attitude regarding female libido just MIGHT have something to do with your bad luck with women? You don't see any correlation whatsoever?"
No, because if Rice is a mature adult, he's speaking from the experiences of dozens of male friends as well.
I don't know where everyone is from, but it's quite possible Rice comes from a time and place where women are a bit more conservative. I'd say the women posting here, with sex drives greater than their husbands, and who are interested enough in the subject to rack up hundreds of posts on a sex board, do not represent the median! That's not an insult. Why should it be taken as one?
So while I've met plenty of extremely sexual (young) women of the kind Rice has never met, I can understand his points and think he's being unfairly bashed.
<<>>
I admit that I have been cynical, sarcastic, facetious, and, on occasion, condescending, but I don’t believe that I have ever been judgmental.
Pretentious? Moi?
I disagree. Even all MEN don't think about sex constantly. That is a myth that men seem to perpetuate. And since there are too many factors that can affect a person's libido, men AND women's libido, jumping to the conclusion that women just don't like sex, is silly.
But I don't recognize your name on this board, so unless you're a regular lurker, you obviously don't know Rice's history of making generalized statements about women.
We are all are aware of his history with women and his feelings that women should behave like men when it comes to sex. (I've never understood why he doesn't think that perhaps, men should behave more like women.)
He continues to make very blanket generalizations of women BECAUSE he knows it is controversial, even though he has numerous women AND men on this board telling him that he shouldn't and why.
So, no, sorry, no one is bashing him. No one is being mean to him, he's always entitled to his own opinion. However, he brings it on himself when he makes declaration such as " I know that some women SAY that they enjoy sex, but I don't believe it." Or words to that effect.
"I disagree. Even all MEN don't think about sex constantly. That is a myth that men seem to perpetuate."
You disagree with what? I don't believe that many people think about sex "constantly". But most definitely, those who do are more sexual than those who are a bit more balanced. There's no controversy there. Someone who is obsessed with chess is more into chess than someone who enjoys it in moderation. How can that be disagreed with?
I don't know why men would perpetuate a myth that degrades them, reinforcing the nasty stereotype of being driven by their hormones and thinking with the little head. Sounds like a myth more perpetuated by disgruntled women, really.
Nevertheless, offers of casual sex will be accepted by men more readily then women. That's why finding casual sex is skilled labor for men, whereas for women the opportunities are so legion she must turn it away. Anyone who disagrees with this must be coming in from another society and is completely unacquainted with English speaking nations of the late 20th century and five years since.
And finally, it's true that I don't know Rice's history and he may well be an infamous troll. But it seems he (and a good plenty of other fellows) merely wishes (more) women had the same attitude towards casual (or loosely committed) sex as (many? most?) men do -- again, not very controversial.
What would we think if the ad featured a woman coming in on the snow plow and bringing jewelry for her husband? It might look comic, so contrary to the typical roles. I think we would wonder what was wrong, what sort of extraordinary circumstance drove her to such an striking gesture. I think she would seem desperate. But that sort of desperation is built in to our stereotyped model of masculinity. He's supposed to climb the highest mountains, swim the deepest seas, and slay dragons in a glorified quest for a piece of booty. Inspiring the opposite sex to feats of heroism, even on the small scale of watching your partner go after a mouse in the kitchen: nice work if you can get it!
I can well understand any weariness expressed by men tired of the pressures of the active role, and who wish for more women to step up to more responsibility. But according to Maureen Dowd's new book, we've seen all the forwardness we're going to see out of women, and they are now beating a hasty retreat to the old-school position of not asking fellows out, not paying for their dates, and not opening their own doors. Sure must be nice.
Pages