Mark Regnerus, whom I mentioned in part one, also provides the topic of this Echidne post. Regnerus’ running theme is that classic argument, men won’t buy the cow if they can get the milk, and that women can only get commitment if they hold out for marriage.
As evidence, Regnerus cites one of those studies in which men and women were asked if they’d like to go off and have sex; lots of men say yes but very few women, so there, that proves men won’t offer commitment if they can’t get laid (or something like that).
As Echidne points out, this ignores trivial facts like women have to face the risk of rape if they go off and have sex with a stranger, and men don’t. Natalie Angier (in her book Woman), makes a similar point: What about the fact that a guy who goes off in this situation may boost his reputation while a woman’s reputation ends up tarnished.
And as Echidne notes, other studies indicate that given a safe situation and an equally attractive partner, the figures are pretty comparable for who says yes.
And, of course, any argument based on men being inherently sex-obsessed should consider that we have a society where sexy female images vastly outnumber (and outsex) the equivalent male images. You can find sexy women in Burger King commercials, Internet ads for anything from T-shirts to bank loans. Why the heck wouldn’t we think about it more?
And as an argument for why women should marry early (or at least withhold sex) it’s pretty weak. Is a man who thinks “well, I can’t get laid if I don’t get married?” that good a basis for marriage? Why shouldn’t women hold out for someone who wants to marry them for love, regardless of sex?
I presume Regnerus’ point is that this ain’t gonna happen: We guys are just such horndogs, the only way we’ll be led into marriage and sacrifice our sexual freedom is if women use their charms as bait. It’s a familiar theme, but the fact we’re still getting married in this day and age leaves me thinking it’s bullshit.
The fact Regnerus (in other material Echidne links to) also thinks that financial success is bad for their love lives (as they no longer need a man to support them, they have sex without marriage and thereby fail to trap the man in their web) makes me think he has other issues than women’s wellbeing on his mind.
Undead Sexist Cliches, Part Two: Guys only want one thing …
Filed under Politics, Undead sexist cliches
Pingback: Undead sexist clichés part three: Feminists castrated our television! « Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliches: I thought I was done « Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: People are alike all over, so everyone must think just like me « Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Links that make me want to bitch-slap someone « Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead sexist cliches: It’s a thin line between virgin and whore « Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Following up a couple of points from yesterday | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead sexist cliche: There is no Republican war on women | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliche: Once again, a right-winger tells us how feminism makes women suffer | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: More Undead Sexist Cliches than you can shake a stick at! | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliche: Women who give away the milk are DOOMED!!!!!! | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Rape, maternity care, prayer breakfasts and other political links | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliches: Slutty Girls Are Destroying Civilization (Again) | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexual Harassment: No means yes | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliches: why I wrote it | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Undead Sexist Cliches: Sex is just a form of retail shopping | Fraser Sherman's Blog
Pingback: Scott Adams says women are no different from the mentally handicapped | Fraser Sherman's Blog