Do Men Have More Sex Than Women?

[CLRV]

Really? How many women have come in here to identify themselves as sluts, while the men cheerfully identify themselves as pigs? If a woman called herself a slut, wouldn't you think she had a problem? Yet here we have men saying "Look at me! I'm a pig!" and no problem. Is this a good thing?

The rise of feminism in the past few decades has produced some very worthwhile changes, particularly in the attitudes men hold towards women. For example, most men no longer think a woman's place is in the home or that no really means yes. Yes, you will still find a few anachronistic holdouts on these things. Yes, there is still a ways to go, but there can be no denying some positive changes in male attitudes towards women.

Where are the corresponding changes in the way women regard men? Men are still the pigs, even as more and more women cheat. Men are still the polymorphous polygamous perverts, while women are still virtuously monogamous; the pillar of the family, even as the numbers show a different story. In short, as women have gained more and more of the freedoms men have enjoyed, they have begun to do all the crappy things men have been doing. The only difference is, they give themselves a lot more slack for it. When a woman sleeps around, she's not cheating. She's exploring her sexuality. She's emancipating herself from phallocentric domination. When cornered, the final exuse is invariably that men have been doing it so now it's the girls' turn, as if two wrongs made a right.

This, I think, is the next major stage in feminist thought. That's the next bulwark to be breached. Note your initial reaction to this whole idea. Why should it be women's responsibility to change? Because with freedom comes responsibility. Because if true equality is to be reached, it means changes for all in how we see ourselves and each other.

Edited August 18, 2007 by CLRV

[Guest American Woman]

If men are cheering on the "men are pigs" attitude, how are women supposed to change that stereotype? That's why I thought you meant earlier that women should see themselves as pigs, too. I will say this-- women can be very hard on "promiscuous women (ie: sluts)." Is there such a thing between men? Do men look at other men who sleep around as anything other than normal and/or to be commended? Because I think Black Dog makes a good point about that. I'm referring to before marriage, btw. But it's not a whole lot different when women cheat. Again, women can be very hard on other women. I know women who've cheated and they are thought of as "sluts." I haven't seen any other women patting them on the back. Most of the time those women are cheating with someone else's man, and as I said, women can be vicious to other women when that happens-- while their man is usually forgiven. After all, it's the "sluts" fault for going after him.

But for the record, I don't think the "men are pigs" thing is all about cheating. I think it's the rude/crude comments too many men make. And how many women look at a man's crotch as he's talking, more interested in what's there than in what he's saying?

But here's the thing. Not all women think all men are pigs by any means. In fact, no one in my life does. Like I said, some are. Maybe too many are, but I know from my own experience (my family, my guy) that there are a lot of good, respectful, caring men out there too.

[Drea]

Thing is there is no equivelant male word for "slut". It is exclusively used to degrade women. When I was young we'd call a guy a "male slut" but it was more like a title of honour than a derogatory slur.

A woman (even in this enlightened day and age) who sleeps with many different men is considered a slut by both men and women. A man who sleeps with many different women is not.

I tried on a helluva lot of men before I found the one I love. Yup I slept with them all. I cannot imagine entering into a marriage without trying out the sex first. I have been with some men who I dumped simply because of sexual incompatibility. Imagine how many divorces I would have had to have if I married them all before sleeping with them! Ack.

One does not buy a $25 pair of shoes without putting them on your feet first... yet we are encouraged to marry without knowing if we are sexually compatible or not. Craaaazzzy IMO.

[Guest American Woman]

Men aren't shoes. For one thing, you can communicate with men, as in "I like it when you do this," or "I'm really not so into that," or just "Hmmm ... that feels nice" when something does feel really good. That'll go a long way towards making the sex compatible. I'm guessing the love wasn't there, because when there is enough love to contemplate marriage, seems as if there should be good communication too.

[Higgly]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread because it kind of went so far south that I was starting to get uv burn but my take is that women now enjoy sex as much as men do, and ain't it a bloody treat. Kick back. Open a beer. Lean on your shovels. This is the promised land.

[cybercoma]

Congratulations on finding the right man Drea. American Woman does have a point though, communication goes a long way towards creating compatibility. I had a gf where there was terrible incompatibility, but communication made it spectacular. Unfortunately, there may come a time in a relationship when one partner may end up incapable of having sex... or the relationship may change in a way that the sex is no longer the primary focus, I can't imagine what life would be like if that was the only thing that was compatible.

[August1991]

If we're going to talk about double standards, I'd say that the slut/stud one is far more pervasive and damaging.

I think this famous double standard was the main point of the OP.

Going back to the linked article, a mathematician pointed out that the average number of partners reported by men should give a total equal to the average number of partners reported by women. But it's not. The total number of partners men report is greater than the total reported by women.

Men having sex abroad and gay men may explain some of this confusion but not all of the discrepancy.

I find the discrepancy intriguing and suggested an additional wrinkle: a few women have sex with alot of men. This would explain why the median of partners reported by women is lower than the median of partners reported by men. It does not explain the discrepancy of averages except if the few women who sleep with many men are bad at math and under-report the numbers.

To make this clear, imagine a small town with 10 women and 10 men. Of the women, nine are nuns and one is a prostitute. A survey is conducted of sexual activity and the 10 men have one partner. The prostitute has 10 partners. The averages are equal and the medians explain the discrepancy.

Now then, why would the prostitute under-report? If she's bad at math, she's just as likely to over-report. Indeed, this might improve business since it would suggest that she's good at her job.

IOW, we're back at BD's famous double standard that women (even sluts) prefer to appear chaste whereas men (even those who go to prostitutes) prefer to appear like studs. Why?

This double standard is in addition to the other intriguing question: why are there more prostitutes than gigolos (or why do female models earn more than male models)? I suggested an answer to this question: a woman has only a few chances to pass on her genes to the future - a man has many more chances. This difference is at the heart of life on our planet.

I tried on a helluva lot of men before I found the one I love. Yup I slept with them all. I cannot imagine entering into a marriage without trying out the sex first. I have been with some men who I dumped simply because of sexual incompatibility. Imagine how many divorces I would have had to have if I married them all before sleeping with them! Ack.

Several years ago, a friend explained to me that if it doesn't work in bed, it'll never work. But if it works in bed but doesn't work in life, that's a recipe for disaster. The best is if it works both in bed and in life.

-----

Perhaps because I have been in the US and English Canada in the past few weeks, I am surprised how puritan English North America is. I reckon that Luther was appalled by Popes having mistresses or something.

Edited August 19, 2007 by August1991

[Drea]

Cyber, of course good sex isn't the ONLY reason to marry someone. But sexual incompatibility is an important part of a healthy marriage.

American Woman, no a man is not a pair of shoes. The shoes I expect to have with me only a couple of years... my relationship with my hubby is supposed to last a lifetime, hence I wanted to know before making the commitment that we would be compatible in ALL ways.

I've been with some guys where the sex is great but they are losers and didn't make the cut either . A healthy mix of friendship and good sex make a marrige work.

[CLRV]

If men are cheering on the "men are pigs" attitude, how are women supposed to change that stereotype?

The "pig" thing is just shorthand for the hump-anything, always ready, totally preoccupied sexual stereotype of men. Some men can feel pressure to try to live up to that. But perhaps that's a topic for another thread about how men are seeing themselves these days. As for how women see themselves...

I will say this-- women can be very hard on "promiscuous women (ie: sluts)." Is there such a thing between men? Do men look at other men who sleep around as anything other than normal and/or to be commended? Because I think Black Dog makes a good point about that. I'm referring to before marriage, btw. But it's not a whole lot different when women cheat. Again, women can be very hard on other women. I know women who've cheated and they are thought of as "sluts." I haven't seen any other women patting them on the back. Most of the time those women are cheating with someone else's man, and as I said, women can be vicious to other women when that happens-- while their man is usually forgiven. After all, it's the "sluts" fault for going after him.

Women are tough on each other in a lot of ways. Chris Rock observed that when a man brings his new girlfriend around his buddies, they think "I gotta get a girl like that" but when a woman brings her new man around her friends they think "I gotta get HIM and I'll cut that bitch's throat to do it." There are plenty of ways that male interaction differs from female, so yeah I'd say there aren't a lot of men these days encouraging their friends to cheat or helping them with useful alibi. I'm sorry to say I have witnessed women doing this.

That's why cheating is relevant here. I'm very glad that women are feeling the freedom to enjoy their sex lives. Honestly I am. But the real test is what people do with their freedom. The current stats indicate that more women than men are cheating now. Worse, they are giving each other a pass for it. Look at the tone of that article, the apologia being offered by the female "experts" to explain it. Women just aren't getting it from their marriage. They feel entitled. So that's all right then.

I think you might have a harder time finding an article in a current men's mag saying that about cheating men. I know all I would have to do to find such an article is leaf through one of the Cosmo-type women's mags in my girlfriend's bathroom (it's either that or Archie comix -- long story).

And how many women look at a man's crotch as he's talking, more interested in what's there than in what he's saying?

Well now, you'd have to ask the girls that one, but I think you'd find the answer surprising; especially if you were asking younger women who have been raised to be less repressed about their sexuality -- the ones who are also admitting to more cheating and more sex partners.

But here's the thing. Not all women think all men are pigs by any means. In fact, no one in my life does. Like I said, some are. Maybe too many are, but I know from my own experience (my family, my guy) that there are a lot of good, respectful, caring men out there too.

Yep. And they're not getting half the credit they deserve. Men have been cleaning up their act for decades while the women complain the glass is still half-empty. Meanwhile, women are going around emulating all the worst behavior of men, then absolving themselves.

As I said, these are the next steps I see as necessary in the ongoing struggle for gender equality. Sorry if they're too far "south" for some people, but it's how I see it.

[Black Dog]

Really? How many women have come in here to identify themselves as sluts, while the men cheerfully identify themselves as pigs? If a woman called herself a slut, wouldn't you think she had a problem? Yet here we have men saying "Look at me! I'm a pig!" and no problem. Is this a good thing?

I'm not sure what your geting at: is it bad that men identify as pigs yet women still shun the slut label? Or should all labels be rejected?

The rise of feminism in the past few decades has produced some very worthwhile changes, particularly in the attitudes men hold towards women. For example, most men no longer think a woman's place is in the home or that no really means yes. Yes, you will still find a few anachronistic holdouts on these things. Yes, there is still a ways to go, but there can be no denying some positive changes in male attitudes towards women.

Where are the corresponding changes in the way women regard men? Men are still the pigs, even as more and more women cheat. Men are still the polymorphous polygamous perverts, while women are still virtuously monogamous; the pillar of the family, even as the numbers show a different story. In short, as women have gained more and more of the freedoms men have enjoyed, they have begun to do all the crappy things men have been doing. The only difference is, they give themselves a lot more slack for it. When a woman sleeps around, she's not cheating. She's exploring her sexuality. She's emancipating herself from phallocentric domination. When cornered, the final exuse is invariably that men have been doing it so now it's the girls' turn, as if two wrongs made a right.

First I think your assessment of where things stand vis women's sexuality is way off base. Yes, women is some circles will celebrate their liberated sexuality, but from a broad social standpoint, the double standard still overwhelmingly favours men.

To your point, though, I'm still not clear if you think women who sleep around like men (stereotypically) do should be more ashamed or that men should get more slack for their"bad" behaviour.

[CLRV]

I've clearly said it's a good thing women are more sexually liberated. I've clearly said I think labels are unhelpful and put negative pressure on individuals of both sexes. I've said very clearly that women give each other too much slack for bad behaviour and don't give men enough credit for good behaviour.

I find it hard to believe that I've been so unclear in my posting that you have somehow gleaned the exact opposite meaning from everything I've said. I can only conclude that you are skimming over or deliberately misinterpreting it so we can have a conversation about what I didn't say instead of what I actually said -- a very common phenomenon in online discussion. Small wonder that you think I'm "off base".

[Black Dog]

I find it hard to believe that I've been so unclear in my posting that you have somehow gleaned the exact opposite meaning from everything I've said. I can only conclude that you are skimming over or deliberately misinterpreting it so we can have a conversation about what I didn't say instead of what I actually said -- a very common phenomenon in online discussion. Small wonder that you think I'm "off base".

Calm down. I was simply asking for clarification.

I've clearly said it's a good thing women are more sexually liberated. I've clearly said I think labels are unhelpful and put negative pressure on individuals of both sexes. I've said very clearly that women give each other too much slack for bad behaviour and don't give men enough credit for good behaviour.

Here’s my issue: despite your rejection of labels, your suggestion that women should call each other out for bad behaviour while cutting men slack necessitates some kind of labeling. And, as has been discussed here, the most common way of categorizing a woman who’s sexual proclivities run contrary to accepted social norms (or are at least precieved that way) is to label her a slut. Now, I don’t think restoring slut to its rightful place is your intention here, but I think it’s an inevitable consequence.

[CLRV]

Calm down. I was simply asking for clarification.

Oh dear. Did I get dangerously close to showing feeling or sensitivity there? Sorry. I know men aren't allowed to do that. It's just another of those "advantages" we lord over women.

But in this instance I assure you I was calm. I'm just not going to discuss things I didn't say when I do put some effort into saying what I do say.

Here’s my issue: despite your rejection of labels, your suggestion that women should call each other out for bad behaviour while cutting men slack necessitates some kind of labeling. And, as has been discussed here, the most common way of categorizing a woman who’s sexual proclivities run contrary to accepted social norms (or are at least precieved that way) is to label her a slut. Now, I don’t think restoring slut to its rightful place is your intention here, but I think it’s an inevitable consequence.

So that's it, is it? Take some responsibility for your liberty and it's back to barefoot in the kitchen; nearly 100 years of progress in women's rights gone at a stroke? I doubt that.

[Black Dog]

So that's it, is it? Take some responsibility for your liberty and it's back to barefoot in the kitchen; nearly 100 years of progress in women's rights gone at a stroke? I doubt that.

Who said that? Was that in one of the issues of Cosmo upon which you're basing your whole premise? Honestly: how are women to hold each other accountable in your books? What is the mechanism?

[CLRV]

Who said that? Was that in one of the issues of Cosmo upon which you're basing your whole premise?

Nope. It was in your post under "inevitable consequence".

Honestly: how are women to hold each other accountable in your books? What is the mechanism?

It's called dialogue. With each other and with the men around you. Free from revolutionary cant. Free from self-deception.

[CLRV]

I'm also hoping you'll do it without Cosmo.

I shudder to think if any of you are actually trying those "19 sexual secrets that will make him crazy".

[Black Dog]

Nope. It was in your post under "inevitable consequence".

Funny that's not what my post says:

the most common way of categorizing a woman who’s sexual proclivities run contrary to accepted social norms (or are at least precieved that way) is to label her a slut. Now, I don’t think restoring slut to its rightful place is your intention here, but I think it’s an inevitable consequence.

Nothing there about "barefoot in the kitchen" or rolling back 100 years of progress on women's rights.

It's called dialogue. With each other and with the men around you. Free from revolutionary cant. Free from self-deception.

That's great, but why are an individual's personal sexual choices subject to the scrutiny and judgement of the group in the first place?

[CLRV]

I don't know, I'm sure. Why have a discussion like this at all? Why did they conduct the study that started it in the first place?

[M.Dancer]

I don't know, I'm sure. Why have a discussion like this at all? Why did they conduct the study that started it in the first place?

Inventory....supply and demand, that sort of thing.....

[Rue]

Please. There's an enormous double standard.

When men do it, they're thinking with the wrong head. When women do it, the sisters are doin' it for themselves.

Double standard? Get real. You are projecting onto women your own subjective values. Take ownership of them and stop

projecting. Instead of making sweeping generalizations about what you think other people think, speak simply for yourself.

[Rue]

That's great, but why are an individual's personal sexual choices subject to the scrutiny and judgement of the group in the first place?

Probably because that group is npt getting it in the first place and need to stick their face in other people's business. Voyeurism I believe is the word for it.

I do not thinkl anyone's personal sexual choices or behaviour is anybody else's business unless it is criminal, i.e., being forced on someone without their consent or on a child.

Where and what you do with your wazoo is none of my f..cking business.

[geoffrey]

Where and what you do with your wazoo is none of my f..cking business.

I agree, though with the caveat that I don't want to hear or see anything about it either.