Wayne Holland: Irrational Universe

 

Paying For Sex

fantasy egregious ... October 13, 2010

 

At some time or other we have all been regaled with the solemn assurance that - no matter what - we always end up - somehow - paying for sex.

But there is an aspect of this truism that I have yet to consider. As a matter of fact, now that I think on it, I cannot recall that anyone has ever mused on it. As far as I know, what I am about to suggest is original with me.

Please note that I say as far as I know. I strongly suspect that someone before me has surely dealt with this subject, and I am just not aware of it.

What I refer to is the virtual guarantee (especially from women who are not prostitutes) that you are not a real man (talk about a fantasy) if you have to pay for it, said guarantee even going so far as to suggest that there is something wrong (i.e., inadequate) about you if have to use money to acquire sexual favors.

I take issue with this. In fact, I am increasingly inclined to suspect that it is just the opposite.

In a very substantial way you are being less of a man if you do not pay for it.

Historically, women have expected to be courted, or wooed, as if they viewed it as a part of their birthright to be pursued. The very strong implication was that you as a man wanted them more than they wanted you.

Women need a reason to have sex. Men just need a place.
(Billy Crystal)

I will never forget a joke that someone once shared with me about two young children, a boy and a girl, who, as many children so often do, exposed their genitals to each other.

The boy is somewhat taunting to the girl about it, both telling her and showing her that he has something that she doesn't have.

The girl responds by showing him her vagina, and saying, "That's nothing. My daddy told me I can get all those I want with this."

If a state of equality existed between the sexes, this joke would not work. And it sure as hell wouldn't work if you reversed it, having the little boy offer the girl's line.

If a man pursues a woman in the traditional manner, in the way that Society expects him to, he is thereby deferring to the woman's will, virtually humiliating himself as a man just to get in her pants.

Yes, it can indeed be viewed as dishonorable for men to kowtow to the social demands of women for the purpose of gaining sexual access.

I much prefer the idea of putting the cards on the table, just coming out with it, offering to engage in the forthright honesty of a business deal.

Yes, honesty. Are we not literally preached to about it? Is it not dishonorable to be dishonest? Do we, or do we not, teach our children that a real man is an honest man? That liars are cowards?

Why then do we approve of the dishonest component that seems built in to the courting behavior of men and women?

I firmly believe that a man could very well have more respect for himself if he were legally permitted the opportunity to conduct his sexual exploits in a more honest (businesslike) manner.

The face (the heavily made up face, remember) that women typically present to men is the face of what I call pussy power.

They are flaunting their sexual power (I would go so far as to say that they are lording it) over men. How can we not feel humiliated when we give in to it? And we do give in to it when we condescend to play their dishonest game.

Yes, their game, not ours.

Our game is honest. It's simple. It uses money, and only asks, "How much do you want?"

Their game is complicated, time consuming and downright humiliating for the man.

Nature has given women so much power that the law has very wisely given them little.
(Samuel Johnson)

Isn't it bad enough that we want them more than they want us? Why does it have to be made even worse by groveling?

Home | Books

wayneholland.org