Wow! This is very funny, and yet very sad at the same time.

Can any of you worldly-wise women explain something to this dumb guy? Why do feminists want to "have sex like men"? What is the benefit of this behavior that millenia of biological evolution overlooked?

It's easy enough to answer thru a Christian lens: Satan is attacking the family, and stealing the purity of our daughters.

But how to explain this from a secular materialist view? Wouldn't it make more sense for feminists to go all Lysistrata on us, withholding sex until they can get an favorable exchange in power and favors?

Why does Andrea Burns think that we should encourage her to be promiscuous AND respect her for doing so?

I just don't get it.
Del | 11.18.07 - 9:49 am | #

"Dawn lamented her sexual rebellion of the 60s" !?!?!? Wasn't Dawn about 2 years old when the 70s arrived?
Steve Harvey | 11.18.07 - 12:13 pm | #

Actually, I was barely 15 months, Steve -- thanks for the catch!

Dawn Eden | Homepage | 11.18.07 - 12:20 pm | #

Wouldn't it make more sense for feminists to go all Lysistrata on us, withholding sex until they can get an favorable exchange in power and favors?

Why should we have to withhold sex as a means of power? It's just punishing ourselves in the process! :)

Seriously, I want to try to answer the question, "Why do feminists want to 'have sex like men'?" I do consider myself a feminist, although a number of other feminists have renounced me and some of my choices over the years.

"Feminism" is not a unified belief system like Catholicism. But I don't think it's the goal of ANY feminist movement to come up with a one-size-fits-all sexual ideal of behavior.

So I don't think it's true to state that feminists want to "have sex like men." What I want (and what my like-minded feminist friends want) is for an individual to be able to freely choose the right expression of sexuality for himself or herself. And chastity is certainly the right path for some people.
L. | Homepage | 11.18.07 - 1:15 pm | #

But how to explain this from a secular materialist view? Wouldn't it make more sense for feminists to go all Lysistrata on us, withholding sex until they can get an favorable exchange in power and favors?

This sounds more like the woman who's angling for a rich husband and holds out on sex until she's "hooked" him. As L. says, there is no such thing as a unified feminist belief system, but you wouldn't find too many feminists advocating this sort of behaviour.
Terezia | 11.18.07 - 2:56 pm | #

Yay for the quote from Love & Responsibility. I'm about halfway through it (mostly read in front of the Bl. Sacrament during adoration) and I'm getting so much out of it.
Kate P | 11.18.07 - 6:29 pm | #

Thanks, L. & Terezia...

Okay. I really don't care about the labels... I take back the reference to "feminists." Let me re-write my question:

Why do women like Ms. Burns want to "have sex like men"? What is the benefit of this behavior that millenia of biological evolution overlooked? Can anyone explain this from a secular materialist view?

I read a biology book some years ago (entitled "The Red Queen"). It explained well the evolutionary urges of men and women (assuming that humans are merely material animals):

Human Men want to "spread their seed," and simultaneously they want to guard the purity of their wives and daughters.

Human Women have a biological urge to secure a husband who will provide well for her children, and also a lover who will help her produce strong, attractive kids -- ideally, the same man does both roles.

I am a scientist (chemist), and I respect evolutionary forces. From a purely materialist viewpoint, I don't understand why so many women want to "have sex like men." It appears to be an unnatural urge, like homosexuality. I don't see the evolutionary advantage. (If it WERE advantageous, wouldn't prostitutes would rule the world by now?)
Del | 11.18.07 - 7:15 pm | #

That 60s comment is actually pretty telling. The critic would likely prefer to think that you're an aging boomer lamenting on a misspent youth, rather than a young woman who knows what she's talking about, and sees the problems all around here.

It's a lot easier to criticize a former rebellions youth, now middle aged, who has "enjoyed" the fruits of her rebellion, than it is to acknowledge that the person you are criticizing is actually the rebellious youth seeking reform of a corrupt culture.

Putting down somebody as past their era is somewhat amusing. Trying to defend corruption against the up and coming is not.
Yeoman | 11.18.07 - 7:49 pm | #

An interesting thought... every time I hear "have sex like a man" or other feminist (or whatever label describes this particular subset) notions that say the path to women's lib is in being like a man, I wonder when it became such a bad thing to be a woman.

These notions are little more than self-hate. I must be "the other" to be "ok" and must suppress my uniqueness to do it.

The response to the legitimate complaints of gender equality by seeking to self-destroy one gender is baffling.
John Bambenek | Homepage | 11.18.07 - 9:02 pm | #

Jown Bambenek, "have sex like a man" is certainly not a battle cry taken up by feminist women who believe less in "being like a man" than they do in, say, the first Merriam-Webster definition of feminism: "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes." That's certainly not equivalent to "being like a man."

If you're interested in learning more about what feminism is actually about, here's a basic link to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wom...i/Women% 27s_lib. Feminism has come a long way since the 1970s era when it was commonly called "women's lib."
Terezia | 11.18.07 - 10:18 pm | #

Chris, I'm not impressed by Ms. Burns's viewpoint, so I've got nothing there. But I suspect, for many women, what it means when they say "have sex like men," they are referring to society's double standards in regard to how sexually active men are often viewed differently from their female counterparts: admirable vs. slutty. I believe Ms. Burns is correct in claiming that women do this to each other, although I think she has the wrong handle on the chastity movement.

Plus, she gives off the "I'll say it's all the women's fault so men will like me" vibe I get when I read Ann Coulter. All-around offensive!

I genuinely understand the frustration of being pigeon-holed into traditionally female roles I'd prefer not to inhabit, but there is an awful lot of muddled thinking out there. On both sides.
Terezia | 11.18.07 - 10:52 pm | #

The asterisk is rather redundant, don't you think? Can't everyone quote the entire script of the Holy Grail by heart?
Bender | Homepage | 11.18.07 - 11:55 pm | #

Bender, I am coming to realize that there is a whole younger generation out there that does not know the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow.
Dawn Eden | Homepage | 11.19.07 - 12:00 am | #

African or European?
Ledasmom | 11.19.07 - 7:23 am | #

Oh no! This thread has been hijacked by "Holy Grail" quotes.

Run Away! Run Away!
Del | 11.19.07 - 9:17 am | #

"As for the madonna-whore complex, I would believe such an animal existed were it not that it is usually propounded by women whose sympathies lie entirely with the whore."

How Chestertonian of you.
IA | 11.19.07 - 1:59 pm | #

High praise, IA, thanks! The funny thing is, I was thinking of Chesterton as I wrote it. I wonder why it struck both of us as Chestertonian -- maybe it echoes the spirit of something he said.
Dawn Eden | Homepage | 11.19.07 - 2:17 pm | #

I, too, thought that sentence was a great little Chestertonian aphorism ("As for the madonna-whore complex..."). I see Mark Shea has picked it up, too. It may be around for a while.
mh | Homepage | 11.19.07 - 3:58 pm | #

Andrea Burns' response is a thing of hilarious beauty. Accuses you of making sex both mystical and dirty at the same time.
Eileen R | 11.19.07 - 8:45 pm | #

So, are you going to respond to the response, Dawn? ;-)
Matthew | Homepage | 11.19.07 - 10:53 pm | #

When Burns goes on to blame women, what she is trying to do is avoid another shredding from myself and most of the other men who regular comment on her blog. It's not going to work!

Please allow me to introduce myself; my name is Alastair and I am what is referred to as an MRA (or men’s rights activist). There are several things on here that interest me, starting with the topic at hand I have noted with some dismay that both the concepts of “chaste” and “whore” have become labels unto themselves. This has stripped them of there meaning and original context with regards to the expectations, actions and beliefs of the other gender. Combine this with the fact that the only real time the labels are discussed in depth is when they are being used to deride the party they are being applied to and you end up with the only explanation of either term being negative. Thus to be chaste or to be whore is an insult or a position that requires a defense and people who are defensive only think about how to protect themselves and what application of the label can best be used to negate the negative attack. What ends up missing from the melee is how either stance can be used to interact with members of the opposite sex for the benefit of the individual and I find that somewhat sad.

Next the term “have sex like a man” gets thrown around, and well, I gotta tell you umm… I’m a man and that not how I have sex. Has anyone stopped to realize that what is being described here as men’s sexuality is sitcom style stereotyping? I hate to break it to you but sex in the city was not reality TV, nor did it actually portray real sexual archetypes, those characters were the fantasies of a couple of gay men. Real male sexuality does not what to “spread the seed” no matter how much people who cheat try to use that as their excuse. Male sexuality is about securing paternity, I get that it makes sense theoretically therefore that what that would mean is that a man tries to have many mates, but in actuality that’s not what happens. In truth what happens is a guy has one mate which he tries to keep all others away from. The reason for this is that in the wild a new male will often kill the unguarded offspring of the old male to assure room for his own. Thus it is no use having many unguarded offspring because they would never make it to maturity, the time lag between childhood and independence in humans is just too great.

It is actually women who have a vested interest in “spreading it around” because once inside the womb sperm compete. Thus the resulting baby would likely be produced by the best sperm, the issue of someone to help raise the baby doesn’t arise until after pregnancy. A woman does not want to mate with the best provider she simply wants his provisions, this has caused a lot of confusion as most people assume it is the best provider that gets to mate, well women have other ideas. The women who want to “have sex like men” find that saying serves two purposes, first it allows them to follow their instincts and seek the best sperm without being stuck with the first mate they find and second it absolves them of responsibility in a society that does not view promiscuity in a very good light. The idea that ‘well men do it too’ is just a deflection to avoid accountability. Men who cheat on their wives are viewed with distain in today’s society and it is only a few drunken frat boys who give any credence to the idea that “men with lots of partners are legends, sorry but that’s not how it works in the adult world. That so called double standard is just a right off used to shut down debate.

I for one do not intend to take a side in this until such time as the labeling stops being about aggression and start to once again reflect gender expectation. In all of this the only part that has involved men so far is that they should be quiet because their sexual expectations are irrelevant. Well again sorry to disappoint you but you can not call men’s sexual expectations of women irrelevant to a debate then expect us to react positively when you present the results. From my point of view both labels are completely off base with regards to positive gender interaction so it doesn’t matter who wins the argument the end result will be the same. Wider gender gap!
Alastair | 11.20.07 - 1:46 am | #

Here's my reply to Andrea on her site. We'll have to see if the moderator let's it through.
------

Do you eat from unclean dishes?
What do you think of people who do?

Sex isn't only about [i]your[/i] enjoyment. That's selfish, immature thinking. Defining manhood as you do works against your "potential man", for clearly you are neither a virgin or a mother. I'm not calling you unclean, you're saying that of yourself.

Did you know that a man is defined by his wife? It's true. A woman who holds herself for her husband, and gives him the joy of becoming a father with absolutely no doubts or diseases isn't a Madonna, but simply a mature woman. One with which they can intimately and deeply enjoy sex. A lot. A whole lot.

So what are you saying about your man, your future husband? That he goes to restaurants and eats from dirty dishes?

I don't think you meant that.

Every man wants to sit down at a clean sumptuous feast; to eat, and drink, to fully enjoy and be spectacularly satified. And every woman wants and deserves the same thing.

Many don't want to admit they live by sampling from other's people's dishes; by scraping the leftovers from another's plate.

Every man wants to be treated as a king, instead of a beggar.

Which do you prefer for a husband?
BTW - Maybe you want to stop and clean up your plate.
Chris Arsenault | 11.20.07 - 8:24 am | #

Response? That wasn't a response. It wasn't even coherent.

No, it was more in the nature of the classic schoolyard weenie reply. "If you won't let me win. . .I'll take my ball and go home."

Ms. Burns has conceded your points, only noting that she continues to disagree, but implicitly noting that her disagreement is without foundation, so it's merely an irrational reaction. All the more pathetic.
Yeoman | 11.20.07 - 8:55 am | #

That item above should have included the headline item of "Andrea Burns responds"
Yeoman | 11.20.07 - 8:56 am | #

Ms. Burns simply doesn't get it at all and doesn't want to get it. It's like she ducked to make sure your points sailed completely over her head.
Susan B. | Homepage | 11.20.07 - 9:13 am | #

Haven't people ever stopped to at least speculate that sex might not be about finding fulfillment?
Paul Catalanotto | Homepage | 11.20.07 - 9:18 am | #

Chris A.,
You wrote:"Every man wants to sit down at a clean sumptuous feast; to eat, and drink, to fully enjoy and be spectacularly sati[s]fied. And every woman wants and deserves the same thing.
Many don't want to admit they live by sampling from other's people's dishes; by scraping the leftovers from another's plate."

A gentle word in your shell-like!

I understand your point.

However, you do yourself no favors at all by using metaphors about dishes - dirty, clean, piled high, empty, or recently containing horrid leftovers when you talk about ideal notions of love and sex between men and women!

You are likely to get a dinner plate winging past your head - metaphorically speaking!

Even if it is unintentional, Chris, you raise the specter of scrubbers, greasy Joan, women as stuff consumed, chains and kitchen sinks and all the rest.
Jody Tresidder | 11.20.07 - 9:47 am | #

Excellent point.

Most people know that it isn't about finding fulfillment, but people sure haven't told the female oriented press that. In spite of a 40 year running experiment proving that it doesn't generate fulfillment, perusing the magazine rack, of female oriented magazines, shows they're still pushing the opposite.
Yeoman | 11.20.07 - 10:16 am | #

Having messed up the quotes again, I'd note that my comment above was to Paul C's observation.
Yeoman | 11.20.07 - 10:26 am | #

Did you know that a man is defined by his wife? It's true. A woman who holds herself for her husband, and gives him the joy of becoming a father with absolutely no doubts or diseases isn't a Madonna, but simply a mature woman. One with which they can intimately and deeply enjoy sex. A lot. A whole lot.>>>

I don't think I am 'defined' by my wife, nor she is defined by me. We are each separate people who have decided to share a life together.
Neil C | 11.20.07 - 12:11 pm | #

Jody said However, you do yourself no favors at all by using metaphors about dishes...

My wife loved it; thought it completely appropriate as well as very clever, considering Thanksgiving and all. So there! ;-b (heh) (It's also inspiring to me to write a children's storybook!)

I'm noticing that pride/shame thing is quite the trigger to reveal the truth about where people's minds & hearts are at. If you're talking dishes winging past my head, then I'm spot on, so to speak.

BTW - my response was inspired by a stack of dishes I had washed before responding. That's one of those foreplay secrets young husbands need to learn. ;-)
Chris Arsenault | 11.20.07 - 12:37 pm | #

Well, it does get a bit annoying to have men calling you a pre-madonna all the time. :)
Ipsitilla | Homepage | 11.20.07 - 2:07 pm | #

That "response" was pretty disappointing she didn't even try. How sad.

I think Alastair made some very good points.
I hate the term " have sex like a man."
Women will have "sex like a man" when they grow a penis & testicles.

I don't look at male promiscuity as a achievement. I think such men are rather immature & a turn off.
& what is so bad about being a woman. I like being a woman. I don't want to be a man -if i did I'd get a sex change.
lar | 11.20.07 - 9:19 pm | #

This whole, "have sex like a man" thing confuses me. In my experience and I thought studies back this up, women start having sex younger than men and truth be told probably have as many or more partners. It has been that way for a long time. Outside a relatively small subculture of men, sexual conquest is not anything that is valued. Most of us just want partners we can count on.
Michael | 11.22.07 - 7:43 am | #

Maybe I'm misunderstaing Andrea's viewpoint, but it seems to me that she's saying that men don't want to marry women who are slutty, so to encourage them to marry us, we'll act sluttier.

This doesn't make sense to me.
Tony | Homepage | 11.22.07 - 12:55 pm | #