[Sopater]

Your views?

I tend to agree with the article, and the more I think about it, the more complicated I believe that it is.

As for men, I believe that they have always tried to have as many exploits as possible, however they were only interested in marrying the right "kind" of woman. Loose women had a hard time finding a good man to marry them. Once a man found a woman he was interested in marrying, he would also have to win over her parents. This usually required an established position with good prospects for growth.

As for women, it was usually very difficult to live a comfortable life without either marrying a man with a good income or staying home with daddy. In order to ensure this, they had to carefully guard their reputation. Now women have been "liberated" and can respectably earn a comfortable income just as easily as men. The strong insentive for chastity has been effectively removed.

[Mrs. Don-o]

What you're saying here makes sense to me.

I also think women have (more prominently than men) a fairly strong inbuilt desire to bond emotionally and build a secure relationship with a man with whom they have shared their sexual embrace. This is not, of course, to say that there are not promiscuous, emotionally shut-down women; but these women have done violence to their inward "connective" nature.

This inward damage to women really troubles me. At some point I think most women will realize that transitory sexual alliances will maim them spiritually.

There are many Marilyn Monroes out there; but Marilyn Monroe was not a happy woman.