If women became men for a month...
 

...Would they become more sympathetic with the male sex drive?

Too many women are either terrified of men, or annoyed at their lustful attentions. Too few actually CELEBRATE it, openly and joyously, except in bed.

Say the post-room boy walked around the typing pool with a hardon poking out from under his Chino's. Pretty quickly, he'd get the bums rush, and probably his P45 too (or american equivalent), amid screams of "Pervert!" and "Asshole!". Yet if Tingling Tess walked through the Accounts Department in a tight satin shirt, nipples visibly tingling along with the rest of her, the number-crunchers wouldn't run for the nearest Fire Exit, but simply stare appreciatively. I'm sure a few would like to drop their spreadsheets and spread her over their sheets...

(dodges rotten fruit!)

But, I honestly think that if all women had to live as men for just a month, pretty soon the typing pool would show reactions ranging from, "Oh poor thing, he hasn't been laid in ages!" to outright APPLAUSE. I can see some of the girls actually kissing our postal hero, and maybe one of them even grabbing his hand and saying, "Show me where you sort the mail at the back, and I'll help you sort your male thang on your front!"

Yeah, I know...another cheesy line!

But I think it would open womankinds eyes immensely, doing both them and MenKind too a big service. Both genders would be far more relaxed with each other, if they knew how URGENT our drives are.

Ps...I know some girls work in the mail sorting/accounts areas, and a very, very few guys are typists. Just using examples here to make points.


Jaybee.

It sounds like you need to get out more jaybee. ;) LOL


I think that after you take matters in hand, (so to speak) and have a read around Pixies a bit more, you will see that there are a LOT of ladies that share and appreciate your feelings and thoughts. I believe our people are as healthy and typical as folks everywhere. Maybe only a bit more comfortable and open about it. It IS a personal matter, so perhaps you want to think about building personal relationships and not looking for societal expectations. :)

Ummmm...yes, I was aware that the ladies here at Pixies are refreshing exceptions to the above. I was talking TO them, not ABOUT them, and merely reminding them, and you, that the thinking patterns of most of their sisters, sadly, still suffer from societal constraints of Victorian severity.

And you're right, I need to get out a lot more. As do we all...

:)


JB

Unfortunately PF, I disagree with your statement that,
Pixies women are generally here because they have a sex drive and seek to explore it, not bury it. I do not believe this is the norm for the majority of women based on women I have talked to, friends' experiences, and magazine articles/radio programs I have seen/heard.

Further, I think Jaybee's hypothetical situation with the aroused male stated above is subject to qualifiers. If the post-room boy is well groomed, at least somewhat attractive or muscular, it's no big deal. He might even be secretly appreciated or discussed privately in the bathroom. If he is considered to be unattractive... too geeky, sloppy, or basically undesirable, he will be secretly (or not so much) ridiculed and perhaps even reported. Please understand ladies, I am generalizing here... but in general this is true.

I don't think women need to experience life as a man for a month to open up to their sexuality... I think they need to experience Pixies' for a month. :D

The qualifiers are certainly a necessary addition, although I'm not sure why you feel the need to apologise, ever, for stating a fact... If the guy is the 'Diet Coke Break' type, no problemo. If unattractive, the chances of an email winging its way to his bosses (and HR's) Inbox go up by a factor of a thousand. Reversing the roles, if a fat, sweaty lady walks through Accounts to drop off some paperwork, her visibly erect nipples will elicit ZILCH in the way of consternation.

Consternation...that's the point. Most women, to varying degrees, fear the male sex drive, or rather its possible consequences. Not a healthy state of affairs in the modern day. Most men find unwanted female sexual attention, at worst, a very mild irritant that is very quickly forgotten. I did a training course recently, and one of the delegates was an enormously obese woman who took a hankering to my big brown eyes and my nice, BBC accent. "Oooh Jay, I just luv your voice, they don't talk like you round my way!!"

She'd take every opportunity to brush past me when it was glaringly obvious she could and should have taken quicker routes. She'd ask me intimate questions that were quite 'inappropriate' for a relative stranger. She'd fall forwards onto me in the lift, breasts touching chest, 'accidentally'...the list goes on.

Now, swap 'he' for 'she' and 'man' for 'woman' in the above two paragraphs, and read them again.

Now, I wasn't OFFENDED, I simply pitied her. Nobody should have to go without, regardless of size/shape etc. I understood that her needs weren't being met, and acted accordingly.

But, imagine if the roles were reversed...


Jaybee.

I think I am gonna come back to this.

Boy I must be in the wrong place. No women fear me. Now Jay that British stiff upper lip is showing. I would run through fire and crawl over catus and even eat grits to have a woman fall on me in the lift or rub past me. How did you react to this? Further, I may not be reading what you posted right but it sounds like you are not comfortable around well rounded women? Jut to add. I am a nurse and have been one male to twenty females in the workforce and I can tell you that they can and do talk the same way as a group of males in a office or pub would talk. They are humans too. Plus they can be fired just as much as a male would if they acted in a way that would cause offence.

If I were a man for a month I would celebrate the hell out of not having cramps for once in my life!!! LOL

....and of course play and play and play and ...... lol

I never have a problem with a man flirting -- or even asking if I want to have sex with him -- as long as he does it nicely. In fact, I find it flattering. Now, if this same guy starts *stalking* me, then I have a different opinion.

Now, I have a whole list of men who I work with whom I would *not* toss out of bed, given the chance. I also have a list of Pixies I feel the same way about, in case you're wondering. :D Everyone else's attentions are, at best, flattering....

I am not the most ideal woman in the world. My curves have curves, and I have a very...polarizing...personality. I have absolutely no doubt that some of the men on my list would find me unattractive. That's OK...It's life.

If the opportunity ever arose with a man on the list, I might make a move. If he said no, I would move on and understand. I expect men to act the same way.

Lil~

Are you sure you're not Catholic? I learned that ^^ trick in grade school from the Sisters. :D

Must come naturally to some of us;)


LOL Sharni...hence my deletion. Sometimes even I have to just shut up and walk away.

I like prunes.

I don't think I've ever terrified women. Well, maybe one...but she should've knocked first! :D

You touch upon a very interesting idea in your first sentence. "Would they become more sympathetic with the male sex drive?" In my opinion...yes. And no. And maybe a little. It depends on the woman...and the male they spend a month as.

Speaking generally...I think we would all benefit from spending time as the opposite gender. In sexual ways and otherwise. Good Grief! It'd be nice to have even the smallest clue how each other's minds work, don't you think? :D

But the bottom line is, shouldn't we all already be trying to consider other people's feelings when we interact with them?

I think it transcends gender...it's about mutual respect, or lack there of, for me.

I agree with Lilith. If men and women spent more time thinking about what the other wanted and needed and set out to fulfill that need regardless of their own (within reason) then everyone would be happier.

Thats what I did in my last relationship, then she realized that I would give her the best head no matter what she stopped everything and just sat back and got head for a year withought giving me anything...

Did someone call for a satyr?

I hear you there. Most of my friends have always been women, but almost none of them have ever shown any interest in me (and yes, I asked serveral of them out. Got shot down many times. And I'm still friends with most of them).
Still, I think Lilith is right, it is all about respect. As long as everyone is being respectful, there usually aren't too many problems.

First of all.....I think it might do you good to spend time as a woman Jaybee, so that you could appreciate that a woman gets erect nipples, not because she's sexually aroused but because it's bloody cold in the office (usually, because the men have control of how much air con is on, and men always seem to be warmer than women!).

Secondly, your man walking through the office with a hard-on, is not behaving in a manner which is appropriate to the office envirnment, just as a woman walking along, complaining that her tampon is uncomfortable, or that she's got thrush is not appropriate behaviour for the office. Incidentally, by the way, I don't wear sleeveless vest type tops in the office in the summer no matter how hot it is (although many of my other female colleagues do) because I have particularly large breasts, and I don't feel it's appropriate to show too much of them at work, while my colleagues are more subtly proportioned and do not look indecent in the same type of garment. The reason I do this? Because I realise that not everyone wants to go about their daily business looking at a vast expanse of my flesh. Likewise, no matter how good looking the bloke in question is, I don't want to see his cock making a tent in his trousers at work! It's what they call 'too much information' about someone!!!

As for appreciating the male sexuality, I think that most women, in the UK at least, do have an appreciation for it, and would argue that men still have little regard for OUR sexuality. The double standard of polygamous women being 'sluts' while their male counterparts are 'just being men' is still rife, female masturbation is still a tabboo subject and on a more personal level, how many men in the uk, continue giving their partner sexual pleasure after they themselves are sated. I know from my point of view that the one thing I like after a great session of sex, is a bit more sex a few minutes later, but how many men even bother to try to get an erection when their women are still craving more? We're capable of orgasm after orgasm, but because men aren't, we are often denied. Not much of an appreciation for OUR sexuality, in my opinion!

Likewise, did you know that when a woman is sexually aroused but not brought to orgasm, it takes 12 hours for that sexual arousal to subside completely, whereas with men, once their erection has gone, their sexual arousal has finished? When you think of all of the thousands of women who have faked it at one time or other while their partner has rolled over and gone to sleep, it puts it into perspective don't you think?

And if women do tut at a man openly displaying his sexuality, do you wonder why? Might it be a touch of jealousy that for centuries women's own sexuality has been kept securely under lock and key, and to an extent still is? How would you feel if women started to bleed freely when they were menstruating, rather than risking using a tampon and getting TSS? Surely that's us expressing a perfectly natural part of our sexuality? Hell, a lot of the time women find themselves breast feeding their babies in public lavatories, because people tut at them if they try to do it elsewhere, despite laws in the UK stating that they are allowed to do it anywhere they like.

I'm sorry, but while I can sympathise that there are constraints put on your sexuality, I'd like to remind you that there are constraints put on all of us, and as others have said here, they are for the sake of showing respect and courtesy to the other people with whom share the planet. Not unreasonable, in my opinion.

End of rant.

Lou,

Early start tomorrow, but I appreciate the comprehensive reply. Will catch you tomorrow with an equally detailed synopsis.

Meantime, I'm one of the few guys who needs the heating turned UP in October...


JB

Does that mean more men would expect and get sympathy fucks? ;)

Ok,

When I said appreciation for male sexuality, I was speaking here of expression between non-Pixies. Many women, sadly, fear the sexual urges of strange males, and that CANNOT be healthy. Yes, I know the imbalance stems from the fact that we're a lot stronger than you, but regardless, I'm making the point that any imbalance isn't good for either gender. Men were made stronger than women to aid procreation, but ironically, this imbalance has the opposite effect in modern society, and actually means we get less - both men AND women.

Point about the women who express being misperceived as 'slut's well taken, of course. I've seen it for myself. Not sure I agree with we men just 'rolling over' after sex. Nobody knows what the heck goes on in all bedrooms up and down the land, but after talking with a lot of my pals, I'm guessing there's a sea-change in progress. I spent weekends with my last girlfriend doing very little but eating, drinking, and lovemaking. I'm still an oral virgin, but then, I'd have no qualms about going down on my future girlfriend after the event, for as long as she wants me there. Heck, if she wants me to start eating her out at 8am on Saturday morning with a hangover, I won't quit until sunset. I'm a loyal trooper...

:)

Didn't know about the 12 hour period of slowly decreasing arousal in women (thanks for letting me know), but looking back, it makes sense. We blokes do also have a degree of afterglow as well, albeit to a much lesser one; if I found the sex utterly mindblowing, there have been times when she's simply given me a slow kiss a few minutes later, and that is that - the pleasure of the sex was so intense, and the memory of it still vivid, and the kiss such a warming reminder of it that I'm ready again, at full power.

But you know, while I think the breast-feeding laws are spot on correct, a lot of women apply the same discretion with them that you do when you dress for work. You're (fortunately) a big, healthy lass, but perhaps you'd rather not send out those signals at work. Why not? Because you may wish to maintain a businesslike impression, or you are tired of fending off constant advances, or you're a considerate lady. Perhaps all three, and maybe more. But certainly because you'd be misperceived, I'd hazard. Same with us guys. And ironically, although a woman in a bar MAY be thought of as a slut if she sidles up to some hunk and says, "My place. Sex?", if you reverse the roles, you'd find the chances of him throwing his beer in her face is almost zero.

What grates me is that, all my life, I've only ONCE heard an unfamiliar woman express understanding for a mans natural yearnings (at least, not on sex site!) , and then it was only in a song! Whereas I've heard lots of guys - believe it or not - express appreciation for the female libido. My point is that, although we men have always been less fearful of your sexuality than you were of ours, as time moves forward we are now (and consequently and increasingly) more accepting of yours than you are of ours. It's fear - logical, but nonetheless unhealthy fear - of men that constrains you, and also means we don't get as much... :)

Jaybee.

Ok - I do feel that the fear of the sexual urges of *strange* males should be perfectly healthy for women to a certain extent. You forget that woman often victims of sexual predation by men. A woman might not think, "nice cock there", but more like, "will this man hurt me?".
Also I don't think that if women became men for a month would do much to change the situation. The idea of a female nude to this day still embodies a passive role more or less. It is something to be looked at by the active (usually male) spectator. So a strange female nude would be considered less intimating by most. I don't think that is the case at all with the male nude which might explain some discrepancies.

Also, I was curious as what you meant about men being stronger than women to aid in procreation.

Dang, boy. That's interesting. Have you done this experiment? Been a woman, I mean. Cause you seem damned sure of what our responses, motivations and problems are. If one of my colleagues unabashedly pops a woody while we're talking shop, my first thought is that he is more interested in my tits than my opinions...and yes, that's both insulting and demeaning. I wouldn't get him fired for it, but I sure as hell wouldn't be impressed. And I'd worry, if he had influence over the course of my career. Any time people with influence over us aren't taking us seriously as professionals, it's a time to worry.

If he gets an errection, and he IS abashed by it, then maybe I'll be flattered. I'm lucky to be that confident of my professional abilities. I wouldn't judge my sister-friend down the hall if she were threatened by it, though. Not because men hold some sort of physical power over us (that girl benches more than I weigh, she's not afraid of much physically), but because they hold disporportionate professional power. Women are still bizarrely vulnerable to sexual stereotyping in the workplace. Get known as a slut, or a cock tease, or a frigid bitch...hell, develop ANY sort of sexual identity in the workplace, and you're not taken seriously any more. A guy getting a hard on in my presence tells me I'm in danger of getting one of those titles.

It has nothing to do with sex. That's the problem. It's not whether the guy is good looking or not (sorry, Aqua...but I seriously disagree with you there). It's not whether he's higher up the ladder than me. It's got nothing to do with whether I would find a comfy closet with him should the same situation arise (pardon the pun) at a social gathering. It's an insecurity that runs bone deep, even if we're doing better than our mothers did. It's not that we don't understand the poor guy who just can't help it...it's that we fear that as soon as sees us as sexual, that's all we are.

Maybe your guy gets fired. A woman who flaunts her sexuality loses her power just as surely. Lou's entirely right, a woman's nipples showing may just mean she's cold. But let's run with your example, because it's a misinterpretation most men are going to make. Some girl spills her drink and then sits in front of a fan. Her nipples pop, and so do the guy's eyes. Does she get fired? Probably not. But now her tits are a topic of conversation over the urinal. Hey did you see so and so's nips. Man, she was REALLY turned on. I wonder who for. I wonder if it was X, he was missing after lunch, what'cha want to bet they were christening the new supply closet. I didn't know they were going out. They're not. Man, she slept with him just like that? I dunno who she slept with, but she's obviously got the hots for someone. Sitting at her desk getting all wet over someone here, damn she's nasty.

And the next time our heroine turns up at their section to tell them she's got a new idea for the marketing campaign or defense arguments or treatment protocol, they're all staring at her tits and wondering if they're the object of her affection. She doesn't hit on them, so they assume it's someone else, possibly her boss (after all, she's only in it for the power right? That's why it's not them). Within a week, the word around the building is that she's sleeping with her boss and THAT'S why she got her last promotion. The folks who decide on her NEXT promotion get wind of the rumor, and now she's not as likely to get it. Why? Because they don't trust her work, she's obviously just sleeping her way to the top.

Go ahead, tell me it'll never happen. Tell you what, I'll race you. It'll never happen. At least, not exactly like that. But variations on the theme DO happen. I've got a friend who's brilliant, but she's also beautiful. She wouldn't sleep with a guy who was hitting on her at work, so now the word in the department is that she's frigid (her RAF bf makes it hard to call her a lesbian any more, but that one was going around for a while). Does it matter? It shoudln't, even if it were true. But all the time spent talking about her frigidity is time NOT spent talking about her stellar work. People take a dislike to her without ever meeting her, because the hear the rumors first. And the administration consider her a trouble maker, because all those rumors must come from somewhere.

The real poison comes in when I admit that it's both men and women who are hassling women with sexual identities at work. Still, it doesn't change the fact that it just isn't your libido's we're worried about. Truthfully. It's our reputations, however frustrating irrational we find it. We're very protective of our professional identities, and shamelessly sexualizing us in the work place takes that away from us. Me? I wear sensible shoes and conservative clothing. I don't wear low cut shirts, and I don't vamp my hair. I don't flirt at work. I made that mistake once with a guy who I knew wouldn't take it seriously. He didn't, it was someone at the NEXT TABLE that started the rumors. So now I leave a whole chunk of my personality behind. Yeah, I've given up something, so I don't feel all that sorry for guys who have to behave professionally around me.

And if you'd spent a month as a woman, you'd have known that already. Course, you could've spared yourself the month...and just asked us instead of assuming we were threatened by your need for sex.

G

It isn't healthy for anyone to fear anyone, or anything. Fear is a necessary evil, but an evil nonetheless. Actually, a poster further up jokingly hinted that women would give out more 'pity' fucks if they HAD lived as men for a month. Interestingly, this is part of my assertion; women would be much more willing to give 'it' up if only they knew - no, felt - how badly we men wanted sex.

To answer your final point, I meant caveman overpowering cavewoman. If both sexes had equivalent bodypower, humanity would probably be about 1/10th of it's current population - but expanding twice as fast than at present.

Evolution argues otherwise. Freedom from fear, and freedom from a need to fear are two different things. You may be arguing for the second, but it doesn't take away from Cassie's point.




Oh the poor men, jacking off to relieve the pressure just isn't the same is it. I'm starting to understand what Sharni referred to as frogshit. I've got a wonderful big brother who once told me that guys would try that line on me..."but Baby, I NEED it, I'm in PAIN, you're so CRUEL. If you won't give it up, I'll HAVE to find someone who will." He said that it was a wonderful way to identify the guys I should dump ASAP. It's bullshit. I'll tell my daughters so, and if they don't believe me...I'll send 'em to their uncle. It's exactly what he's going to tell his...and I pity the boy who tries the line on them.

Maybe if men lived as women for a month, they'd understand how for some of us sex isn't trivial...and just giving it up to save you getting repetitive stress injury is a bit insulting.

You've missed my points and wildly overindulged in your own.

Firstly, I wasn't referring to evolution, but to civilisation. Back in Cro-Magnon times, there was a very definite and daily need to fear - or die. If you didn't break out in a sweat from running from a predatory male every few days, you'd quickly be raped, then killed. Or killed, then raped. There SHOULD be no need to fear men in a modern, developed, society. 'SHOULD', however, was never a definitive description of reality. The consequence of the fact that there clearly IS a need for women to be on guard against unsavoury characters, in modern times no less, is indeed a tax that all men, even the noblest, must pay. Therein lies the point you're either missing, or more likely ignoring for the sake of bandying wordage.

Incidentally, your relatives were indeed correct that a guy who uses complaints of lack of sex to elicit sex is indeed a piece of lowest-decile trash who should be avoided. I must, however, wonder why he would think to warn you in of such a crass, transparent and low-class approach - that most women with half a brain would see through - with such strong emphasis.

As for your 'sister-friend' (interesting phrase...) lifting your bodyweight above her, all good and great. Shake her hand for me when next you meet. Really. But when she can press MY weight, then I'll be impressed. 60Kg is a warmup for some of the Neanderthal gals at my gym.

Finally, no, sex isn't trivial. Houston...we have found a point of accord.

Chill. I was suggesting this is what you meant. I was pointing out it probably was what Cassie meant as well.



Ah....then you weren't suggesting that women's behaviour should change to accomidate men's "needs." Merely that it _would_ change. I misunderstood you, and I appologise.




Yeah, well...it's around. We girls sometimes circle the wagons when we're feeling attacked. Something in your first post made me feel like she, and those like her who may well have wanted the mail-boy fired, needed defending.



Glad we have that much in common. I'm sorry I didn't get that impression from your previous post.

G

Woops, missed one. My brother used the phrases he did because young women can be exceedingly stupid, and have been known to fall for the line. Wether that means they have half a brain or not, I'm not entirely sure. But he wanted to make sure his point was made.

G

No apologies need, G. I've been misunderstood and misinterpreted all my life, I don't expect the world - male or female - to suddenly change to fit little Jaybee's need for concision, precision and relevance and logic.

On that note, if I'm being utterly honest, this is not the first time I've been taken out of context for my views by and about women. There, I've confessed. But I'm intrigued...what was it about my first post that made you feel like the women who wanted that guy fired were in need of defence?

By the way, you were right to circle the wagons...I'm actually an Indian...

:) :) :) :)


J

*laughing* Must be the good Wisconsin farm stock in me....either that or the 1/4 Glaswegian scrapper.



Hmmm....totally fair question. I think I felt there was an implication that any problem women had with men expressing their sexuality at work was "in our heads" so to speak. The idea that girls are just making a fuss about nothing. I do think there is a real reason why they might object, and that any objections raised wouldn't necessarily be for the reasons you described. All too often real cases of sexual harrassment (NOT what you were setting out, but it's around the same trigger) are dismissed as women who can't take a joke. I wanted to try to explain that they may HAVE a point, just not the one you were suggesting. And I think I felt the way you presented it was dismissive of ANY objections.

Does that make more sense?

G

Doesn't sex mean more if people have it when they both want it? Are you saying that women want more sex than they have, but are afraid to go out and get it because they don't understand how much men want it? :confused: Mrs. WI knows damn well how much I want it...that doesn't seem to help. :D

If cavemen and cavewomen had equivalent bodypower, perhaps starting off on a level playing field would've made us a lot more respectful of each other.

OK...not that anyone wants to see my name on this thread any more...but I just saw the title and had a random thought that made me giggle.

If all women became men for a month....anti-sodomy laws would be repealed within a week.

Going now....no need to throw things ;).

G

It does indeed. My hypothetical scenario too closely resembled that of a sexual harrassment case for comfort, and it came across as though I were actually encouraging the hypothetical post-boys unashamedness. A few of the other ladies also mistook it as such, so perhaps I should have been more emphatic.

But now the example is clarified, let's go back to it; If western society developed, in a few decades, to the stage where rape, or derision for expressing/acting on sexual desire, was never a possibility - as unrealistically utopian as that first appears - would the women who lived in a society and worked in that office NOT joyously/sympathetically applaud that postboys display of enthusiasm?

What I'm saying here is that one of the most grievous shortcomings of our so-called 'advanced' society is that the sexes are at an impasse which seems to be deadlocked. Women can't put out as much as they themselves would like for fear of being labelled 'sluts' or worse, for fear of being raped by a would-be date. Men, for their part, tread on eggshells trying to appear as unthreatening, cultivated and as decent as possible. Noble aims in and of themselves, but we shouldn't NEED to do it to reassure. But we men do need to reassure, however. Because of the strength differential. Women don't rape men, as a rule. Sorry if I seem to be hitting you all over the head with the same blunt points, but I want to make sure they're sinking in. Sex may no longer be a taboo subject of conversation, but it is still a heavily restricted, constrained activity.

So, we have two genders who both want more sex. One would LOVE to give more, the other would love to be given more. The people here at Pixies are very much proof of that. This is why, in a generation or so with monitoring technology recording every ray of light and every sound made by ants farting, and biotech having eradicated VD/Aids etc, my (future) son ought to feel perfectly entitled to stroll up to an unfamiliar girl at a barbecue whose smile he finds irrestistible, casually but politely ask, "Would you like to have sex?", feeling no more sheepish than if he were asking her for a light, and not get a slap/white wine on his face. And she should feel perfectly free to accept his request and do it right there and then, with no more shame than if she were sluttishly and disgracefully whipping out her Zippo and publicly lighting his Marlboro in front of all those strangers!!

But neither side can break this deadlock. We men and women are stuck dancing this ridiculous dance with each other. Ironic that, as a species, we are the only one that uses contraception, so we should be screwing like crazy, yet our females STILL fear involuntary insemination. I look forward to a day when NOBODY is going without, for any reason. I look forward to the day when one of the gals in that office pulls that poor boy into broom cupboard with no more hesitance than if she were buying him a beer in O'Malleys.

Anyway...as the popular phrase round here goes, "Rant over". I've talked enough.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get off. I suggest you all do the same...

:sex:


J.

and there would be a new way to do/get the information provided by a pap smear and a mammogram :D

Jaybee - fear is a human universal...of course its healthy to fear certain things and people. Some people call that self preservation!

I agree with you it sucks that male sexuality is often forced into repression. But as many other pixies have mentioned, female sexuality is equally, and in some cases more repressed in our Western society. Trust me, men would learn a lot about the needs and constraints of female sexuality if they became women for a month. Or hell, even a week or a day!

Also - caveman does not have to overpower cavewoman for the sake of population expansion. I think its engrained in the both the male and the female mind to procreate. I'm sure most fathers did not have to use brute force to tackle the mother into procreating! Well, unless they were really kinky. ;) And don't forget that, in MANY other species, the female is usually larger than the male!

jaybee -

I have found something on which we agree! Yes, I DO want more sex......definitely! LOADS of it! I want sex at least three times a day!

But I only want it with my chosen partner. And if I wasn't with him, despite still being desperate for sex three times a day, I STILL wouldn't be taking the opportunity to shag the enthusiastic post boy, or even be appreciative of his erection. Why? Because I'm not in the slightest bit attracted to him. Why? Because he's a stranger. I don't fancy people until I've got to know them. I'm not interested in a random sex act with a stranger, I have no desire to get physically close to a man I don't know.

And I'm not scared of accidental insemination......that's why there are contraceptives. And I'm not frigid (I've been masturbating to orgasm since the age of 8, for Christ's sake). And I'm not scared of being raped (I can honestly say that weeks, maybe months go by at a time, when the thought doesn't even cross my mind) I'm just not turned on by the sight of someone I'm not attracted to having an erection. In general it's just not the way that women are wired.....and I'm afraid that's all there is to it.

I wonder if I am alone in this respect, or whether women would agree with me here. My main reason for not having sex with random people (the way you think it should happen for your future son - by the way, have you read 'Brave New World'?) is because I have never found myself in a situation where I've wanted to. To confirm, I've only ever had one one night stand and that was with a friend I'd had for 2 years, the shortest amount of time I've ever spent getting to know someone before so much as kissing them is about 3 weeks. I guess I'm just not that easy to arouse - if anything because it takes my body some convincing that the pleasure it might gain from a sexual encounter with a particular man, is going to be better than the pleasure I can give myself. And my instincts have usually been right! LOL

I'm in agreement Lou....

I'm not interested cause you've done nothing to interest me. Where as there are men on this board, I'd shag in a heartbeat, sight unseen because they have stimulated me in ways that count.