From: muffy%remarque.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.berkeley.EDU (Muffy Barkocy)
Subject: who "benefits" from sex roles? (Re: men's issues vs. women's issues)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
Date: 16 Aug 92 14:30:22 GMT
	<24JUL199207433737@erich.triumf.ca>
	<1992Jul29.191026.7735@ucc.su.OZ.AU> <2A786B6B.17268@ics.uci.edu>
	<robert.713050512@labyrinth>

In article <robert.713050512@labyrinth> uunet!infmx!robert@ncar.ucar.EDU (Robert Coleman) writes:
>tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore) writes:
[Men are expected to be rapacious w.r.t. sex, women are supposed to be
 conservative.]
>Why *are* men expected to be rapacious?

To prove to other men that they *can*.  This seems to me to be something
that is encouraged by men for men.

>Why *are* women expected to be sexually conservative?

Two reasons.  The societal training/pressure is still for women to be
"good," meaning to not want sex.  The idea here seems to be that if a
man "gets" a woman who is a virgin, he has done something much more
difficult than getting a woman who is not, so he has won some sort of
prize.  This, like sleeping with lots of women, gives him something to
be proud of.  Naturally, if she then *stays* with him, that gives him
even more to be proud of, since she is showing that she only wants him.

The more practical reason is that women often can't afford to have sex
because of the risk of pregnancy.  Even now, there is not adequate
access to birth control or information about it, nor is it 100%
effective.  If she *does* get pregnant, the man can just leave, so it's
not all that risky for him.

>Who, in the family, usually
>instructs the girl not to have sex until she's married or that men
>only want one thing?

Her parents.  My mother didn't tell me this at all, but she's rather
unusual.  It's my understanding that mothers in general, however, do
tell their daughters this, but then, so do fathers.  My father
(stepfather, actually) was extremely suspicious if I was ever in my room
with a man, and he often would come by and watch us to make sure we
weren't doing anything.  Not so long ago, I understand that fathers were
even more initimidating to any man that their daughters were around
(interviewing them, asking about their intentions, etc.)  Meanwhile,
these same fathers are encouraging their *sons* to go out and have sex.
Indeed, one of my friends' fathers took him to a brothel in Nevada to
"get him started."  I'm sure that he did *not* do anything of the sort
with my friend's sister.

>Since we know that women enjoy sex too,

In fact, it is not clear that women, in general, enjoy sex nearly as
much as men.  It's only lately that men have even been that concerned
about women having orgasms, and there are many women who have had sex
many times and never had one, which is *very* rare with men.  In fact,
look at what constitues "sex," to most people.  It starts with a man
getting excited, proceeds to intercourse (most other forms of sex are
not really thought of when you say "sex"), which has, as it's goal, the
man having an orgasm.  Once he does, "sex" is over, regardless of what
has happened to the woman.  There is very little concern for her getting
excited, for any form of sex other than intercourse, which is generally
the most difficult for women to enjoy (vs. oral or digital sex), or for
further effort once the man has had an orgasm.  I saw a man on a mailing
list I'm on say, quite recently, that it was "criminal" for a woman to
stop sex "in the middle."  What did "in the middle" mean?  Before the
man had an orgasm.  He did not seem to think that it was "criminal" for
a man to cut a woman off "in the middle," though.  Given all this, why
*SHOULD* women enjoy sex?  All they're there for is to satisfy the man.
Bleah.

>how do
>we explain why women desire sex only within a relationship, whereas
>men enjoy sex regardless of a relationship?

Well, look at the above.  How does a relationship change this?  Well, if
a man actually *cares* about the woman he is having sex with, he might
be more considerate about whether she is actually enjoying it or not.
Therefore, her chances of enjoying it go up quite a bit.  In addition,
if you're looking at traditional roles and such, women are basically
told that they should *not* enjoy sex, but just submit to it for the
purpose of having children and getting a man to support them.  So, there
is no reason, if they *don't* enjoy sex (or have been told that they
won't or shouldn't), for them to *want* to have sex outside a
relationship.

Men, on the other hand, generally have very little trouble enjoying sex,
PLUS they are told that it is a source of pride in themselves and
respect from other people for them to have sex with many different
women.

>If this is a man-thing,
>how do men, who want multiple partners at least until marriage,
>benefit from women being conservative?  That's not completely obvious;

Well, actually, it's pretty obvious.  They benefit because they are
possessive and territorial.  If "their woman" sleeps with someone else,
they lose the respect of the people around them, they are considered
"less of a man," etc.  Therefore, men want to find a woman who will have
sex only with them, which makes them important and worthy of respect. In
addition, even with multiple partners, the harder it is to get each one,
the more respect he deserves for his many conquests.  If it were easy,
then no one would respect him for doing it.

>but it is obvious how women benefit from withholding sex until a
>relationship is established.

Well, it may be obvious to you, but it is not to me.  The only
difference I really see is that the woman will get more respect from the
people around her if she does not have sex right away.  However, this
"benefit" is only gained by the loss of sexual freedom.  She can't have
sex EVEN IF SHE WANTS TO, or she will lose this.  Some people (me, for
example) would consider this lack of freedom to choose as much worse
than the loss of "reputation" among narrow-minded people.

>That's the real question: who would most benefit, and least
>benefit, from an open sexual atmosphere in the dating realm, and why?
>Answer that, and you'll know who most benefits from the current
>situation.

Well, unfortunately, I do not think that there is a good answer for
this, nor do I think that you are correct that the answer to one
question will answer the other.  The situation is very complex, with
many pressures on both sides.  I'm sure you know the pressures and
expectations on men, I have outlined some of the problems women have.  I
think that *everyone* would benefit from an open atmosphere, as far as
sex goes.  However, you would be destroying much of the underpinings of
the current marriage structure, which is based on exculsivity.  Now,
since women are still being held in roles where there is an advantage to
them in being married, they would be negatively effected by this change
in the concept of marriage.  However, that is already happening, with
women having to work anyway, divorce being so much easier and more
common, etc., so  I think that the loss would not be as significant as
the gains.  PLUS, if this open atmosphere was really implemented, maybe
men would stop thinking of women primarily with regard to sex and
children and they might take them more seriously in business and such.
Right now, it seems like a lot of men just can't help thinking about sex
when they see women, which makes it rather difficut for women to work
with them, etc.  So, there *could* be an additional benefit for women
there.

>>What do people call a woman who goes after men or readily agrees to
>>sexual favors?
>Which people?  Women call them sluts; men call them fun.

Actually, men call them "sluts," but they like knowing them because they
(the men) are so focused on sex as the be-all and end-all of existance.
(Note gross generalizations here, as in the paragraph I'm responding
to...*grin*.)  Men don't respect them any more than women do, they just
use them.

>Who's feels threatened and why?

I understand that a lot of men are threatened by women who enjoy sex.
Probably because that means that their "performance" will be compared to
others, and might be found lacking.  More than that, the woman might
actually *expect* something from them, when it comes ot sex.  Actually,
this is another reason for men to want women to be conservative.  I have
not had a single male lover (long-term) who has not, at some point,
essentially asked "am I better than all the rest?"  If I had never had
sex with anyone else, they wouldn't have to fear this comparison, would
they?  Naturally, if I'd only had sex with one man, he would, by
default, be "the best."

>>What do they call a man who is sexually conservative
>Ummm...I dunno.  Actually, I'm unaware of a name for a man who
>won't have sex outside of a relationship.  Do you know one?

Well, I don't know that there's exactly a word for this.  However, my SO
and a friend of mine once both expressed the view on here that they did
not find the urge for sex so uncontrollable that they could not stop if
a woman asked them to, once they had gotten excited.  They got many
letters from men telling them that they "had the sex drives of
children," "weren't real men," etc.  (By the way, I don't know many
people with stronger sex drives than these guys, so I can only imagine
that there are men out there in serious physical pain all the time, if
these two have "inadequate sex drives"...*grin*.)  There may not be a
specific word, but there is a specific reaction - loss of respect,
insults, etc.

>>And since it is women who are the overwhelming targets of rape, I'd
>>question your assessment of where the "power" is...
>Yes, well, there's the power of the minority criminal class
>and the power of the majority law-abiding class.

Well, the point isn't that all men are going around raping women
whenever they feel like it, the point is that they *can* and many *do*,
and that makes women feel quite powerless.  For example, if I go out
with someone, he *might* be one of the "majority," but the "minority" is
sufficiently large (yes, I'm including date rape here, of course,
especially since it is particularly relevant in this discussion of sex
and relationships...it *is* rape), that I would not be unreasonable if I
felt a little concerned.  Speaking of date rape, I then might well feel
some pressure to agree to sex, since I know quite well that it might
happen anyway.  I know several women who have agreed to sex because they
felt trapped and felt that it was the only way to get away.  People
don't mention this much in the discussions of "'no' means keep trying,"
but such persistance is very threatening and it seems to be fairly
frequent that women say "yes" not because "they really wanted to" but
because they feel they can't get away any other way.  Consider the
animal in a trap gnawing off a leg.  Did it really *want* to gnaw off
the leg?  Was it just playing with the trap?

I agree with you that the majority of men are not rapists.  The majority
of people with guns are not murderers, either, but that doesn't mean
there isn't a threat there, and therefore a power imbalance.

>>[As for demanding an exclusive relationship, the appalling number of
>>husbands, boyfriends, ex-husbands, and ex-boyfriends who kill "their"
>>women, or stalk them, or otherwise make life a miserable hell because
>>they left them, I'd say that the demand "you be faithful to me" is
>>made on both sides...]
>True, once within a relationship.

Well, isn't that pretty much how our society *defines* a relationship,
though?  Some sort of agreement of faithfulness?

>Worth thinking about.  We know that sex is enjoyed by both
>genders; given that, why should limited sex be the norm when other
>things that people enjoy, like, say, skiing or parachuting or roller
>coasters or drama or music etc. are usually enjoyed in a fashion that
>could best be described as glutinous, even when such activities carry
>risks?

Well, the risks are equal on both sides in these other activities you
mention.  The rewards are also pretty equal.  Most other activities do
not require a partner, which makes a *big* difference.  Basically, there
isn't much that is really parallel to sex (heterosexual sex with a
partner, that is), so it's hard to make comparisons like this.

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy | muffy@mica.berkeley.edu | wi.4636@wizvax.methuen.ma.us
~Little round planet/in a big universe/sometimes it looks blessed/
 sometimes it looks cursed/Depends on what you look at, obviously/
 But even more it depends on the way that you see~ - Bruce Cockburn

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.