From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Please explain this quote
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:56:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.232006.23839@ils.nwu.edu> lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.045411.19018@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.213837.13554@ils.nwu.edu> lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:
>>>In article <1992Nov1.174836.12192@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>>In article <1992Oct26.224830.20044@midway.uchicago.edu> mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>>>payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>>>>carol@ee.uts.edu.au (Carol Gibson) writes:
>>>>>  
>>>>>>>Really - I think you'll find it was *far* more often the wife
>>>>>>>accomodating the husband than the other way around. To get some peace
>>>>>>>many women would just lie there and allow her body to be used by
>>>>>>>her husband, even though she wasn't in the mood at all. Allowing
>>>>>>>this use is made easier to her by a life of brainwashing from
>>>>>>>society about the role of wives. But how often would a tired husband,
>>>>>>>not at all interested in sex right now, consent to go down on his
>>>>>>>horny wife just to "see <her> reasonably well-satisfied sexually"?
>>>>> 
>>>>>>Proof by stereotype, how compelling. 
>>>>>
>>>>>It is hard to representative data for historical situations.  
>>>>              | (find)?
>>>>
>>>>Does not the "I think you will find it was *far* more often the wife
>>>>accomodating the husband" seem like a clear representative claim? But
>>>>I have had it claimed that a) women have the same sex drive as men,
>>>>and b) men more often want sex. The above seems more in line with (b).
>>>
>>>Not necessarily.  It could easily be that women and men wanted sex equally
>>>often; but that women were expected to perform when he wanted and she didn't,
>>>but not vice versa.
>>>There is not even a correlation between the two, much less cause and effect.
>>
>>What?? There is no correlation between the occurances of men having sex
>>and the occurances of women having sex? Are you hypothesizing 100%
>>homesexual sex? I really do not understand this at all. 
>>
>>As for cause and effect, is there not a common cause?
>
>No.  In my 1st paragraph I had two sentences.  The first was "Not Necessarily".
>This indicates that I am about to disagree with you.  The second contains two
>clauses separated by a semi-colon (;).  The first clause can be reduced to "sex
>drive". The second can be reduced to "expectation of performance under duress".
>These are the two that do not have to have a correlation:
>
>Specifically, it is entirely possible that women, in general, have a higher sex
>drive but would not, in general, expect a man to perform when he didn't feel
>like it.

In other posts it has been mentioned that a man is not really necessary.
I mean, she can satisy herself, can she not. This would 1) still count
as sex, and 2) be an expression of her sex drive.

The word 'drive' has strong implications. 
 
>I am sorry to have confused you.

There is more than enough confusion to go around. Look, it seems that
you might have gotten some on yourself. 

>Disclaimer:  I have already said that I think men and women have equal sex
>drive, so please read carefully all the embedded disclaimers.

Why, you still miss the original point, which is simple. 

>"TANSTAAFL"     lynch@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu


Rich

payner@netcom.com


Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women,soc.men,soc.singles