Posted on 09/29/2017 6:21:22 PM PDT by EdnaMode
Edited on 09/29/2017 8:07:58 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
In what some (the author) likely consider a groundbreaking assertion, University of Texas sociology professor Mark Regnerus is warning women that no one buys the cow when it gives the milk away for free.
In an extraordinarily trollish essay for the Wall Street Journal, excerpted from his book on the same subject, Regnerus makes a lot of sweeping generalizations about how the decline of marriage is a result of women boinking with impunity. He starts out with this quote from a 24-year-old guy named Kevin, a man of age who knows all there is to know about romantic and sexual relationships:
“Girls are easier to mislead than guys just by lying or just not really caring. If you know what girls want, then you know you should not give that to them until the proper time. If you do that strategically, then you can really have anything you want…whether it’s a relationship, sex, or whatever. You have the control.”
Nasty, Regnerus admits, but it works. And if it works, why would any guy ever stop lying to every woman he meets or treat them as people with any actual value? You can only get a guy to hang with you long enough to respect your humanity if you hold sex just out of reach for as long as possible, like a little bonbon in reward for eye contact.
To make his point about what dumb bimbos ladies are, Regnerus asks a girl named Kristin if men should make “sacrifices” for sex. She gives him a confusing answer (because wtf does that even mean) and he draws a damning conclusion:
Kristin rightly wants the men whom she dates to treat her well and to respect her interests, but the choices that she and other women have made unwittingly teach the men in their lives that such behavior is noble and nice but not required in order to sleep with them. They are hoping to find good men without supporting the sexual norms that would actually make men better.
My vagina is for teaching a lesson. If you’re not learning, I’m doing something wrong—to all of society!!
This cheap sex isn’t happening just because women are stupid and give the fuck without demanding a candlelit dinner first. It’s the result of technology, apparently. The two “technologies” Regnerus names are birth control—which he admits has been around for 60 years, so it’s unclear why family planning is a modern culprit—and pornography:
Online porn has made sexual experience more widely and easily available too. A laptop never says no, and for many men, virtual women are now genuine competition for real partners.
>There may be something to it, but it is wrong to lay this all at the feet of women.
>Good men (and women) have to be raised from children with good moral character. Good parenting, good examples (in life and in the media), and real religious education are probably more important.
It’s not effective. There’s a reason that most civilized societies don’t let their young women out of their relative’s sight until they’re married. Virgin wives have been prised since the dawn of time because it’s really the only effective way to form happy families and the only way to produce virgin wives is through prevention and control, not education.
stingy with kisses?!
When I worked on college campuses, most young women considered fellatio sort of an introductory handshake.
No boundaries, never taught boundaries.
Poor things were emotionally devastated by their sex lives, but couldn’t come up with one good reason not to put out.
They were no longer virgins and felt that they were spoil sports to withhold their private parts if someone wanted them.
LOL Not quite. 1958.
Ever notice when a woman has sexual encounters with several guys she's a slut. But if a guy does the same thing he's a stud?
Ditto in reverse. And your point?
Didn’t take it personally. I don’t care one way or other what he wrote about women. It’s okay when guys write about women (of course them not being one) it’s science, but when a woman writes pretty much the same thing about guys they’re called just about ever disparaging word they can think of.
I agree with his family norm.
These days that's exactly correct. I'm 54 and back on the dating scene after a divorce and that's exactly what I keep running into. Frankly, not interested in women like that. I'm just not. If I were I'd not have any issues having multiple dates a week and "having fun."
The thing is, any man with a good job (or career as I have..) with zero debt and considered a good earner is a high value target. Add being emotionally stable/available and an empty nester and you're literally in every single woman who's between the ages of 39 - 60 bullseye.
I'm not bragging here, the way the numbers work is that there's more single women at my age than there are men. Especially men with good jobs, good paychecks, zero debt, own their own homes, etc..
Honestly all I want is a woman with good Christian and moral values, has respect for herself, a sense of dignity and isn't hard on the eyes. Not looking for perfection, just someone I can share the rest of my life with and all the blessings I've been given without being "chased" like a paycheck and a piece of meat.
Is that too much to ask these days?
We hear so much about the evil Feminazis. But men benefited from feminism more than women did. With feminism, women became more sexually loose, and if they got pregnant, they had abortions. No longer were men expected to marry the girls they knocked up, or at least pay child support for 18 years. Once upon a time, if a man wanted a wife, home, children, and respectability, he found a nice girl, one who didn’t sleep around, so he knew she’d be faithful, and he married her. People felt sorry for the pathetic “bad girls” who were “kept women” or found themselves alone.
When “nice girls” became promiscuous, women threw away all their leverage.
The key here is, a man wants to be a woman's first (and only), particularly if he wants commitment.
A women is often secretly pleased if a man has a past: it proves he's not a loser and that feeds her ego that she "beat out the other women" for him. ("He may have slept with them, but he's with *me* now.")
If a guy has an affair, say, what happens when the woman finds out?
She screams, "Roger, how *COULD* you?"
(A woman in fact is FAR more threatened by her man becoming emotionally close to another woman, than by a one-night-stand, though the one-night-stand is actual explicit sin.)
But if a woman has an affair, the man doesn't ask for an explanation. He *knows* it's over.
Yes, unless you go to girls who have never left their small town, or to the Philippines, or perhaps parts of Eastern Europe. I have heard that Orthodox communities have preserved gender roles more than others.
So the article’s point is for women to be glad they had sex with a manipulative guy, because they could have ended up marrying him if they withheld sex.
Do you know how many marriages break up because of sexual incompatibility?
No, people of both genders shouldn’t have constant sex with strangers. It isn’t healthy. But premarital sex, done carefully, is probably here to stay, even among the religious. People shouldn’t eat two big pieces of chocolate cake either, but it happens.
And being married to someone who only kisses your butt when he’s horny is definitely not a love relationship. Nor is it good for the man to plan to spend 30-40 years with someone who is so good at refusing sex with him.
Seriously?
There's the sexually transmitted disease issue. Objective fact.
Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
Hebrews 13:4, New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Far more than most people think I'd suspect. That's a major reason mine did (well, in addition to the issues she refused to deal with as a result of her being sexually molested by her own father when she was a teenager. That's a whole 'nother can of worms I didn't know about her when we married.)
No, people of both genders shouldn’t have constant sex with strangers. It isn’t healthy. But premarital sex, done carefully, is probably here to stay, even among the religious. People shouldn’t eat two big pieces of chocolate cake either, but it happens.
As a single male in his mid 50's, this is something I've been struggling with as a person of faith. Do those of you who are married and in your 50's have any idea how hard it is to find a quality partner who doesn't want to "kick the tires" on or after the third date before they even get to know much about you? I now understand why so many of my (unfortunately) divorced and Christian friends tell me that I'd have to be prepared to "compromise" my values and faith if I really wanted to find someone to have a long term relationship with. How exactly does one "balance" their desire to find a new mate with their faith in this day and age? I struggle with this, I really do. I don't want to have to have sex with someone to determine sexual compatibility before they allow me to get to know them better as a person. This just seems to me to be so backwards from when I was dating my ex so many years ago. Then again, perhaps I should've kicked her tires way back when prior to committing to a 30 year marriage that failed because among other things, she was frigid as hell?
And being married to someone who only kisses your butt when he’s horny is definitely not a love relationship. Nor is it good for the man to plan to spend 30-40 years with someone who is so good at refusing sex with him.
Allow me to correct you on something: Being married to someone who only wants sex for procreation or in the extremely rare event they're horny isn't a love relationship, nor is it good for a man to spend 30+ years with someone who's so good at refusing sex unless they want it themselves once or twice a year.
Yep, that's how it was.
Tell that to the young sluts.
That describes a big chunk of free Republic
I think most freepers are sexually inactive
For whatever reason
There’s a lot to be said for a patriarchal society. It’s worked for thousands of years.
Not muslim but like the cadence, “I love working for Uncle Sam, let’s me know just who I am.’
Or maybe you prefer what we have now: whatever you do, white man, it’s wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.