Tag Archives: masculine

2374. Advisory for Men #08


71. Even though you don’t appreciate unearned gifts, women do. Actually they expect them frequently as reminders of their importance to you. Timeliness is next to Godliness when it comes to pleasing a woman. When she’s down, she needs some sort of recognition of her importance THEN. And nothing works better than you reinforcing her importance to YOU.

72. You always do or try to do your best and don’t deserve blame except on the matter of breaking marriage vows. You’re a very admirable character reflective of a good man. Be grateful for whoever taught you that valuable trait.

73. The prettier she makes herself, the more she likes herself, which frees her to focus on your interests more than her own.

74. Remind yourself frequently that a woman needs opportunity and it seems to be an endless time to groom and primp. Every female is born knowing that she’s pretty. It’s the foundation of her personality, and must be preserved at all costs. She does it for herself but you benefit.

75. Women desire mindful lovemaking when her man uses his big head to outweigh his little head. It brings out more deliberate care for her than just plain old ordinary little head sex. It consists of gentle holding, caressing, venturesome touching of erogenous zones, no impatience, lengthy foreplay, and intimate after-play. Intercourse is far more important to you than her except with intent to create a baby. All that is her conviction; everyone knows you have a more urgent need echoing from little-head love-making.

76. Gentlemen, I worked indirectly under Ross Perot’s leadership and his motto was “Up front, blunt, and candid.” So I close this series on that vein.

Men are not the lovers they presume. Sticking Willie where he ought to go isn’t love-making in the female world. Love-making to women is gentleness more than poking, purposeful slowness more than quick fumbling, intimacy more than orgasms. So, what is intimacy?

Great love-making depends on one thing. The longer she spends caught up, growing excited, and ‘vibrating’ vulnerably in the emotional uplift between initial physical contact and climax, the greater is the love-making.

The true and intimate value of love-making is her highly charged up process of getting to the end, namely orgasm. The time spent between his stimulation and her climax is her primary expectation for sex, the intimacy she craves. IOW, being deeply aroused, staying, and dragging it out before (each) climax is the ultimate intimacy and her primary incentive for sex in the first place. Not orgasms nearly as much as continuous arousal.

That applies to foreplay and intercourse. After-play is more important than intercourse to her. Intimacy afterward means a different arousal. It’s a confirming spirit that comes from closeness, holding, caressing, snuggling and similar lingering actions that leave her with an aroused sense of how important she has just proven herself to be to her man.

Leaving her without such confirmation reveals masculine inadequacy. It may reveal that her man/lover is more grabber and jerker than considerate, more adolescent-minded than mature, more boy than man, or more talker than lover. He doesn’t truly know the woman he just poked, and he’s not nearly the man or lover he imagines himself to be.

But women are smart; they keep such opinions to themselves. They prefer to have a poor lover than do without a man who is better for many other things that are more important to a woman’s life. Sex to her is just duty—perhaps enjoyable, perhaps not—until someone provides the intimacy she craves.

8 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, feminine, Her glory, marriage, sex differences

2303. Preventive Relationship Maintenance — Guy’s PRiM: 41-50


41. Quit trying to be perfect and quit trying to demand that of others. No one can be perfect but you can be the most ‘good person’ that you can imagine and the kind of woman that husband finds likeable. Perfection ain’t where it’s at. If it makes you more likeable to him, it’s the right thing to do (unless, of course, it goes against your moral principles).

42. Your moral principles and religious beliefs are a major part of your likeability. Disclose them during courtship or you will lose in the end. If you wait till after the altar, disclosure turns you into a different woman, one he did not marry. If you try to get him to buy into your beliefs and convictions, you are trying to change him, and that’s offensive to him.

43. If you learned to do or think something from feminists, drop it, quit it. It will offend him sooner or later. The nature of feminist-think makes you eager to blame him, which opens competition, which makes him vulnerable to lose battles with his woman, which men avoid at all costs, which causes male dominance to explode in her face, or else he may just escape her company. It can’t be good for you in the end.

44. If your man knows your sexual activity before him, he can use it against you. And most men will if they need it to keep from losing battles with their woman in the future. Full disclosure torpedoes the female ship, which then sinks when he decides to pull the plug and let you go your own way.

45. Sharpen your thinking and promise yourself that you will remain the closest you can to the woman he married—physically, mentally, and habitually. His thinking and expectations won’t change from the woman he met at the altar. Why should you if you hope to keep him?

46. You expect him to change to meet your expectations, but he doesn’t change his way of thinking and especially not for a woman. Consequently, he expects you not to change, but you have to in order to stay flexible and capable enough to harmonize your relationship. Only you can figure out how to keep those conflicting expectations harmonized.

47. If he doesn’t want to go to church, you go anyway. Insist that it’s your way of life with or without him. Don’t complain, don’t explain, and fix his breakfast with a smile on your face so he won’t begrudge your absence. You may attend all alone for years, but he will come to love you for it and be much more likely to join you someday. He will come to admire your moral strength and loyal determination, and what he admires is a virtue and men marry virtuous women. That is, your steady church-going (and with the kids) confirms his choice; he did the right thing by marrying you (even if he never attends church).

48. Start this during courtship. Stand up for yourself long before he has a chance to tear you down. Draw some lines in the sand that you diligently protect and over which he shouldn’t step. Example: He knows long before you marry that to hit you is to lose you. Period. That’s it. Once is enough. He can expect the same result will flow as the result of his abusive language, sexual maltreatment, lack of respect for your children, failing to respect your dignity, and whatever else you determine demeans you as person, woman, wife, and mother. He needs to know clearly—and long before you’re married that you will do exactly what you say if he crosses those lines.

49. During courtship you should clear the air about his expectation of your submission vs. your submissive spirit dedicated to supporting him. To submit is to follow his will as he directs it. However, you also have free will. You should reject his concept of submission and offer your alternative of a submissive spirit. To be submissive follows his will but is tempered by his recognizing and accommodating your interest and need.

50. Explain this difference to him and don’t allow him to change the arrangement. You have a submissive spirit that seeks to follow his lead in relationship, family, and home matters. It doesn’t mean automatic submission to his will over yours. You don’t or won’t accept what’s imposed upon you arbitrarily. But you will accept the same thing if it flows out of some form of negotiation or advance notice that invites your input. Certain decisions are his to make because he’s directly responsible for the results. Without including wife as advisor or worthy of advance notice, he can too easily demote her dignity as partner and carry an attitude of expectation that suggests she’s his slave.

Men wear submission as a biblical right, when it’s only a matter of privilege. While they deserve the role, they don’t deserve the honor without involving their wives. I describe the female authority in my book, Where Did All the Good Men Go? Chapter 8 describes both the female right and role, which are far different from masculine claims.

10 Comments

Filed under courtship, dear daugher, feminine, How she wins, sex differences

2259. Compatibility Axioms #831-840


831. How females play the sex game dominates the lifestyle of males. Men keep trying to make frequent and convenient sex more easily available. The less loosely women play the game, aka withhold sex, the more men try harder to earn a woman’s acceptance of his worth to her. [284]

832. Low morality promotes a male-friendly culture at cost to female-friendliness. [284]

833. When morality declines, men operate with less female influence. It helps further downgrade social and domestic values, standards, and expectations toward masculine interests. [284]

834. The weaker that women stand up for feminine values, standards, and expectations, the less enchanting their lives become. It creates both social and domestic power vacuums and energizes men to take advantage. [284]

835. Females giving in to ever-increasing male social pressure forces women to reshape the lifestyle of females and children contrary to the instinct and intuition of mothers. [284]

836. Men giving in to ever-increasing female pressures forces men to reshape the lifestyle of males into greater agreement and friendliness with females and their unique interests. [284]

837. If conveying her wants, needs, and desires outweigh his satisfactions about their sex life, she’s not likely to get far without the tenderest charm and diplomacy. [286]

838. She’s in charge of their relationship. Not because he’s incapable, but because he lacks knowledge of her, and men often go to extremes to hide that lack. Moreover, men lack both interest and skill for relationship management. [286]

839. He sees little need for more than he already provides in love making. So, if she’s not satisfied, coaching him may help. However, nurturing demeans and teaching tends to humiliate him, so unique female indirectness and patience are required to resolve her dilemma. [286]

840. Any discussion of their sexual shortcomings can push him toward consequences, up to and including abandonment. It can come without her being aware of what’s coming. [286]

32 Comments

Filed under courtship, Culture & Politics, sex differences

2257. From Whence Comes Respect


Sir Eric at 2250 triggered this article. He said, “Before there was No-Fault Divorce, the wife’s behavior would have been legal grounds for a divorce, and now their husbands praise the same behavior!”

I quote from Wikipedia, “The earliest precedent in no-fault divorce laws was originally enacted in Russia shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution. …The purpose of the Soviet no-fault divorce laws was ideological, intended to revolutionize [transform?] society at every level. … California was the first U.S. state to adopt what are now called “no-fault” divorces in the United States in 1969.”

I hope to show that the damage to family stability and need of no-fault is caused by lack of mutual respect, in slight decline before no-fault but precipitously so ever since.

Men are driven to compete against Nature when it obstructs progress, compete with other men to enable progress, and shape and control human events. To the male mind, women aren’t part of that competitive world, just supporters, witnesses, or interferers.

The male competitive nature prevents men from respecting other men until they earn it by accomplishments that symbolize their significance in the male world. Significance, for example, in personal associations, professions, workplaces, fathering, sports, home. IOW, by value-added indications of accomplishments and personal significance, men earn the respect of other men; they earn mutual masculine respect by doing.

Women also have to earn masculine respect. Not in terms of individual significance for doing things, however, but by making themselves of significant value to supporting a man’s ambitions. Some mixture of success as female achiever and ambition-aiding significance—in competition with other women—earns the respect of men.

It enables each man to find, evaluate, and mate with the most respectful after evaluating the most respectable in his own judgment. Yes, selecting a mate begins with his respect of her before love ever invades his heart. (Selecting her based on respect also helps husband this way; how well wife is respected by other men adds to both his self-respect and respect of men.)

Thus, a man’s respect of men revolves around accomplishments that kind of generate a pecking order that varies and guides men through each competitive event and day. A man’s respect of a woman depends on her ability to accomplish significant things of lasting interest to him.

A woman’s respect of a man emerges differently. She loves first and learns to respect later. His accomplishments are not the root of her respect. It accumulates from his success helping her confirm her sense of self-importance as person, woman, mother, friend, girlfriend, fiancé, bride, companion, and the other roles she fills in their life together.

Now watch this ladies and tell me if I’m wrong. She respects him as the result of her making him important in her life. To the extent he doesn’t fit well in her plans for shaping their relationship, she doesn’t respect him. IOW, for the most part, if their relationship sours, it’s his fault and he doesn’t deserve for her to respect him.

Therein lays one root of early divorce. He respects and loves her. His habits and faults hit her wrongly, don’t meet her expectations. She tries to change him and he resists. She becomes frustrated, which makes her feel incompetent, which makes her feel unimportant in his life, which stimulates her to not show respect for him, which he sees as reason to depart if she hasn’t already filed for a no-fault.

Consequently, mutual respect depends on wife finding and keeping respect for husband and not letting his behavior diminish her appreciation for their relationship.

Perception is reality in such cases; whatever appears to be, is. Immature women and those who lack patience judge their man too quickly as not respectable enough. They act accordingly, hubby detects it as ingratitude, her likeability begins to fade and his love to weaken. All of which kills mutual respect.

Women expect her and his love and men expect mutual loyalty and likeability to hold their relationship together. The common denominator, however, is respect. And unless it grows into mutual respect, the no-fault is not far behind.

8 Comments

Filed under courtship, Dear daughter, how she win, sex differences

2171. Mid-life Dating — C6: Internal Burnout aka Bowel Distress


Surprise, ladies. I can’t hazard a guess of how many, but some of you may not be healthy enough for uninterrupted dates. So, I hereby stick my neck into an arena for which I’m unqualified by normal standards. I admit the chivalry articles partially inspired this opinion piece.

Disclosures:

  • You’ll think I’m crazy, but stick around for a highly unusual and perhaps controversial or perhaps worthless example of What Women Never Hear.
  • I’m neither a medical doctor nor other medical professional. However, I’ve studied human nature and motivation for 64 years. The following describes my analysis of bad habits of thought and emotion that lead to poor body functioning, specifically that which leads to frequent bowel disturbances.
  • I neither understand nor describe the process that happens. I just identify likely causes of adverse bowel functioning that plague some men and women. I leave the details to medical professionals, while I focus on causes and the behavioral changes that can relieve discomfort.
  • Let me know what you think. Those of you or who know someone with continual bowel distress, see if I am pretty close to identifying your or their causal habits. Everything is relative and nothing is precise.

Our physical condition is a function of what we eat. Our body functions are impacted, sometimes severely, by the result of how we feel and think about emotional matters. The following causes ‘internal burnout’, the result of special kinds of anxiety, to which I attribute bowel disturbances.

I choose self-image as the concept around which to explain causes. Self-image, the picture we each have of ourselves, governs our lives. We assiduously live within that picture of who we are and what we do, can do, and expect to do. We are motivated to pursue our self-interest, and our self-image contains our guiding beliefs and juggles our emotions to match our pursuit. If we fall out of line with it, or in effect contradict our self-image, we correct or rationalize deviations. We see normal functioning in this truism: If you think you can, you can, and you act accordingly. If you think you can’t, you’re right, and so you choose to do something else.

While it can’t be called faulty, some people’s self-image interferes with the proper functioning of their bodies. That’s where this is headed. What might the causes be of the symptoms that adversely disturb bowel functions?

Let’s look at it under four headings.

  1. Internalizing. We should all know about this factor that plagues both introverts and extroverts. Many people focus too much on themselves. Their thoughts turn inward with personal concerns. They focus mostly on negative functions; they worry, agonize, and find faults in relationships, jobs, and their body. Thoughts such as, this ain’t right, that doesn’t work right, that hurts a little, it could be serious, and what am I to do? And worst of all, they focus far too much on things and about people they can do nothing about. Such as, how do I make someone like me? How do I impress them? How do I hide my bad side? How can I help someone, when I have the same fault?

Some people are so vulnerable to internalizing that it consumes their spare time. It causes them to fall prey to stirred-up emotions and hormones, enzymes, and digestive juices in excessive doses that act almost as if foreign to one’s GI tract and connected functions. It’s not what they internalize so much as too much of it. Not good, but then most of us have learned about the repercussions of too much worry, and so nothing new in all that. It’s just my recap of what too much internalizing leads to.

  1. Guilt. Women live continually with guilt. Much of it reminds of their bad side, which stirs certain guilt to plague their spare time. Their focus on it intensifies by internalizing about their relationships.

Men are less prone. Their guilt swings mostly around their actions and independence. Guilt doesn’t make them bad, it stirs them to action. I’m not good enough, or I should do better; I have to try harder. Or, how do I handle that SOB or hide my cheating? A man’s sense of independence disconnects others from his guilt; he’s more a loner to relieve it. He can more easily than women take action that relieves guilt. Women have no such ‘easy release’ because their guilt is tied to someone else; they’re less independent.

  1. Judging. This is new ground for readers. People don’t naturally talk along these lines. Too personal, too descriptive of our personal motivation, which is not usually a discussable subject. You may find yourself uncomfortable.

We judge and it takes place in two ways. Part of the shaping of our self-image is judging ourselves. It’s usually not much of a contribution to internal burnout, because natural pressures push us and sense of independence enables us to do something about it. (Example: I have to lose weight, dress more attractively, smile more, get a better job, give spouse more attention.) We are the only ones involved with fixing whatever we judge to need it. Action displaces disappointed emotions, and so we learn to either fix or accept and live with the rest. Internalizing about it usually does not make us sick.

But some people make themselves sick by ‘comparison shopping’. That is, judging themselves relative to others.

We are always in the process of judging others; it’s required for our own safety. For some, it gets out of hand. It’s an irresistible urge for all of us. But those vulnerable to internal burnout find themselves excessively wanting or lacking. It self-demeans their worth and belittles their picture of themselves.

Such people fuss with themselves. Not to work on recovery, but to stew about comparative shortcomings that can’t be fixed. Stewing takes less courage and steadfastness than to change habits, create different beliefs, develop new behaviors, or just take actions that keep one busy enough to divert attention from internal stewing.

They find themselves unhappy with what they do, want to do, or can do. Their self-image shrinks relative to others, while their self-interest urges them to do better. Confusion exacerbates anxiety, which invites more stewing.

  1. Image Projection. There are two kinds to be covered, do it for yourself or for others.

a) Imagine one’s abilities and qualities to be different for the sole purpose of pleasing oneself. (I suggest the book The Magic of Thinking Big.) You can become a much better, powerful, influential person without inducing illness. The difference is this. You have to do it for no one but yourself.

b) Do it for others and you can too easily induce illness. Some people develop their behaviors and habits in order to generate an image to others that just isn’t what’s in their hearts. They don’t have to be phony or out to fool people so much as to convince themselves of who they are or want to be relative to others. They worry constantly even if they are being successful. They just want to be better instead of somebody definite, so there is no end to their internalizing about it.

Essentially, they are wannabes, such as women to be prettier or more important, guys to be more respected or admirable, alphas to be easily recognized as such, or who they really are as person to be hidden. Their internal problems come from this phenomenon; they set an objective, which is a process without an end, and so they manage progress, which induces internalizing, which impacts their gut.

Too much internalizing of emotional issues, excessive guilt, unproductive judging, and convincing others of one’s qualities cause internal burnout. Deliberately change your actions and you change your feelings. Deliberately change your feelings and you change your thinking and vice versa. Deliberately change your behaviors and you change your habits. Deliberately change them all and you can calm if not end bowel disturbances and malfunctioning. Then, you’re healthier for mid-life dating.

Deliberately changing oneself is very difficult for men. Not so for women, whom I advise this way. Change first to quit thinking in parallel with or emulating man-think and masculine values, standards, and expectations. If you return to specialize in your feminine nature, you can more easily and deliberately change the makeup of your beliefs and emotions in ways that are healthier.

Finally, there’s even a simpler way. When believers sin they can take it to the Lord and be forgiven. When people disappoint others, they seek forgiveness from the disappointed or offended. However, too many people can’t forgive themselves; they don’t think they deserve it. It intensifies their internalizing, which almost automatically stops with true forgiveness of oneself. Whether through the Lord or self, forgiveness generates better health.

 

2 Comments

Filed under courtship, Culture & Politics, feminine, sex differences

2168. Chivalry — Another Casualty from the Dark Side of Feminism


There’s more coming on mid-life dating, but let’s take a break. Guy Jr. and I collaborated on this subject and two part series for weekend reading.

Women are givers, men are takers. Right? However, bet you never thought of these social processes that leave women craving better men made worse by the death of chivalry.

The spirit of Feminism stirs masculine indignation against feminists; which spreads as non-feminists fall for propaganda and adopt feminist values and expectations; which causes masculine disappointment in womanhood; which stimulates loss of unconditional respect for the female gender; which over time morphs into fury and anger at individual women who show men disrespect; which stirs ambitions for revenge; which intensifies as women blame men for social ills and domestic incompatibility; which convinces men that female uniqueness is valuable only for sex; which kills masculine desire to be more giving; which terminates incentives for gentlemanly behavior and energies for chivalry. Even momentarily, men are unwilling to yield their convenience as symbol of higher regard for women than themselves. Self-centeredness, selfishness, and more taking prevail among men.

Domestic incompatibility soars as women face off against men made uninterested and inadequate for helping to fulfill female hopes and dreams.

History records it this way. The suffragettes planted the seeds, Women’s Liberation fertilized it, and feminists reaped the political fruit trying to emasculate men and thereby destroy patriarchy. Due and well earned in legal, political, and economic arenas, women’s advancements at men’s expense spread toxins into social and domestic arenas, which today makes couples incompatible.

Feminists killed the social construct of ladies as cultural opinion leaders, which pushed men to abandon gentlemanly behavior. Feminists rejected unconditional respect for females to symbolize their demand that men accept the political superiority of the female gender. Needing to appear as dominant leaders, feminists rejected chivalry, belittled gentlemanly courtesies, and shamed the unconditional respect of men for the female gender. (I can open doors myself, I don’t need you.)

Women accepted feminist propaganda and watched as ladyhood died of feminist ridicule. Women abandoned femininity as a featured attraction to capture a man for mating. Men lost interest in female hopes and dreams.

In the name of attacking manhood, womanhood was victimized by radical feminists. Chivalry disappeared along with the death of masculine thoughts that women deserved special attention and treatment just for being the weaker sex. Feminists could not admit to being the weaker sex, even though it’s a misnomer based solely on physical differences. As women proclaimed less need for men and greater strength for femaleness, they got what they wished for. Independence from men except for sex, which also nullified any need for chivalry.

I think it purposeful. Feminism killed the unconditional respect of one’s gender for the other sex that our forebears had developed and had become the greatest protector ever devised for women and children—respect solely because they are women and children (and who gets in the life boat first). Mutual respect for the opposite sex was demeaned and lost trying to benefit women at the expense of men.

Loss of mutual respect at gender level magnifies the loss at individual level. Undesirable relationship outcomes for females depletes the benefits of men in their lives. Witness the death of chivalry, fading away of gentlemanly behavior, and disintegration of harmonious family life—all tied together in a neat radical package.

The fallout today? Boys taught to be chivalrous such as in scouting discover they are emasculated in the eyes of girls and women. After a few unsuccessful efforts to demonstrate gentlemanly or chivalrous behavior, they just quit. Without female encouragement, they turn to easier ways. For example, this ultimate insult for women as quoted from the Manosphere, “there is unanimous agreement that you should never buy dinner for a woman as a date before you have had sex with her. This is probably the most unanimous point of agreement across all Game material from all sources.” Can you think of a bigger opposite of chivalry?

Chivalry triggers unconditional giving of oneself by a man, which minimizes masculine selfishness and neutralizes his role as taker, which symbolizes unconditional respect of women, which recognizes a certain superiority of the female gender, and which puts his convenience momentarily at the disposal of a woman. No wonder women appreciate chivalry and wish they had it again.

 

10 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, Dear daughter, Feminism: OOPS!, Sociology 101

2151. Politics of Sex


Her Highness Krysie at 2149 wondered why the interpersonal results from fellatio were different from those from cunnilingus. I tackle the issue from both the political and sex difference viewpoints.

Love and passion are not the only soul mates in the bedroom. As the Marxists used to say, Everything is political except politics, and that’s personal. Ditto for the bed. His dominant gender vs. her superior gender makes it political. Who’s the boss of two equals? Who gets the other to do what he or she wants? Of course, love and passion add flavor and determine some of the outcome, but the underwritten truth is they are in competition regarding sex and memories carry forward. Who gets their way, when one seeks to take their togetherness into a new arena? Who is the most sensitive about where they are expected to go, and who is most likely to have to go against their sensibilities?

We have to look to their natures, how they are born differently both in heart and mind. The bed does not make their natures more alike. Women, guided by their hearts, don’t by nature see sexual relations as men do, although lessons learned in life can change all that. But here I describe their natures as likely to interact in the bedroom.

Before marriage they compete as she justifiably refuses to yield and it’s acceptable to the male nature; it’s not too surprising and usually expected as men seek to marry a virtuous woman. After marriage, she can’t morally refuse sex, because he traded his independence for frequent and convenient access to sex. She’s pushed into the position of having to cooperate in bed. The instant a proposed or required sex act goes against female sensibility, however, they compete because he expects her to do as he wishes. Submission and all that, you know, even if against her will.

He pressures her, nicely or not, or talks her into it. Either way it becomes political; he against her competitively. Oh, not the normal everyday politics as we think of it. But the kind that costs the loser the respect of the winner, and the winner’s expectations for the loser to live according to the winner’s favor. Once obligates her for another event. Their next encounter goes according to the wishes of the previous winner. Conqueror’s right, you know.

Actually, fellatio is another form of conquest. In the absence of you ladies objecting and calling me wrong, I stand by these claims. 1) It goes against the female nature; she questions the rightness of it. 2) She’d rather not. But she’s conflicted because her man wants or expects it. 3) She questions if she can uphold her self-respect if she does it. 4) She fears it will change how her man views regular sex with her. 5) And the proverbial, will he love me in the morning? 6) After she does it, guilt sets in and re-emerges with each request for BJ. 7) It takes many experiences before she feels comfortable enough to initiate it on her own, and even then new doubts and guilt set in for a while. 8) And this question returns, will he love me in the morning? Please feel free to add, subtract, agree, or contradict. Clarity and truth remain my objectives. If I’m wrong here, all else in this article is inadmissible for relationship experts to judge.

He’s the dominant one. If she goes down on him, his dominance increases. If he can get her to do that, he can get her to do anything. How does it serve a woman that she makes herself more vulnerable to his dominant attitude? Where does his sexual adventurism end? Can she go along when he wants to experiment with other ways? Can she accept her inferior position in his mind for having yielded to his tastes, his experiments, his choosing of the unusual if not the abnormal as she may see it? How does she keep from ‘going too far’ for her sensibilities, once she has violated her sense of rightness? And finally and most important, how will it affect their relationship outside the bedroom? Will his affection taper off? Will his love be affected?

In bed she’s not looking for greater dominance but for intimacy with an equal. If he goes down on her, he yields some dominance. She loves to be pleased, and so he pleases her. It adds to her sense of importance and directly displays his love. While she’s not a winner in the purest sense of reducing his dominance, she’s not the loser either. He does love her, and so all else is minor.

The paradox lies here. Cunnilingus displays a man’s love; he pleases himself with action that pleases her. Fellatio does not display a woman’s love; it doesn’t express her dependence on him nor her gratitude and respect for who he is and what he does. She just pleasures him for the sake of pleasure; love is neither required nor displayed. Thus, cunnilingus has meaning for women that fellatio doesn’t have for men.

Of course, men will take issue with all of the above. It’s never in their interest to have anyone interfere with how they regard sexual relations. Their sense of dominance requires them to contest any amplifying of sex with politics, any tampering with the domain over which they rule by instinct. They think sex is their turf, everybody defends his turf, and politics has no role in the bedroom.

In the end, all of the above is part of the endless competition between men and women. Whoever wins the last battle owns their sexual agenda and will likely win their next encounter.

And now comes the fire from masculine ire to which I aspire to make it expire.

 

43 Comments

Filed under Culture & Politics, sex differences