(Authors note: For those interested, Chuck Ross did an excellent piece of writing on this, in The Sexual Peak Myth, He approaches the subject with a good bit more scientific diligence than I am willing to do here. I have already accepted that the subject is mythical and am much more interested in posing some questions about why this is the case.)
–
Some years ago I was at a night club with a group of men and women. Naturally the conversation turned to sex. One woman, in her late forties, said, in a good natured way, “It’s a shame that by the time men really learn what they are doing in bed, their equipment doesn’t work like it used to.”
“I understand how you feel,” I said, in an equally jovial tone, “By the time women start learning what they are doing in bed their looks start fading.”
Needless to say, my response, while as truthful as hers, more or less took her out of the conversation. It was not my intent at all, but you could tell by the look in her eyes that she felt like every line on her face was magnified a thousand times, reading like a giant “use by” date from the last millennium. Fortunately for me, I didn’t have all manner of ego and identity tied up in my penis, or I might have felt the same way.
There was a silver lining, though. It did spark a rather lively round of verbal sparring with the rest of the people at the table. And I am sure that it was a discussion that has been echoed millions of times at millions of night club gatherings.
Why is it that men and women hit their sexual peaks at such radically different ages?
And the answer is, of course, that they don’t. It is just another one of the myriad of lies we enable women to live for the sake of not disturbing their self image- and perhaps for the sake of getting in their pants in leaner times.
Where else but the current gender Zeitgeist can a woman with crows feet, sagging breasts, reduced sexual hormones, a vagina that does not lubricate as it once did, more difficulty conceiving and less ability to attract sexual partners of their preference, stand up and say “I am in my sexual prime,” and have everyone in their presence nod their head in agreement?
Only in a world where we tell women whatever they want to hear, no matter how ridiculous.
And it admittedly fits with part of women’s experience to maintain the lie. An observation I have, one that I cannot back up with any research, is that as women’s biological clocks tick down toward the final moments, there is a tendency, in the words of Dylan Thomas, to rage against the dying of the light.
It’s not sexual primacy, it’s desperate horniness. Their fantasy of being in their sexual prime when they are well past it is only the labored breathing of someone in their last moments, struggling to suck air just a little while longer.
I am not knocking it. When I was 21 I had a 45 year old woman show me what fer, good and proper, for three weeks in a cabin in Oklahoma. It was an educational rite of passage and a very fond memory in my life. Wouldn’t trade it for the world.
But, let’s face it, the only one in that cabin in their sexual prime was me. I was a youngster with a gold mine of a horny older woman desperate for sexual relevance. And when the experience was over, I walked away smiling, and a little better equipped to take care of business with women who were, well, who actually were in their sexual prime.
And she had at least one more round of clinging to her sexual power; to her relevance in the world.
The point is that without sexual viability, the power of most women in this culture is reduced to whatever is afforded by rote chivalry. And while that chivalry affords them a great deal of latitude, it doesn’t provide them with the meaningful significance of a younger woman who still turns heads- and can have babies.
Being in your sexual prime is about being ready to make babies, not about how willing you are to be ridden hard and put up wet.
In the pure biological sense, infertile women, even those that just appear to be, are just so much excess baggage. And since women as a group either cannot or will not draw their self worth from anything but sexual power (NAWALT stipulated), we will forever have them demanding to live lies. And in modern times, they even have the option of paying surgeons to cut, suction and inject that lie until it looks damned near the truth.
Business is booming.
There is a solution to this, though it is doubtful we will ever get there.
Women, feminists in particular, have long lamented the male beauty standard. They claim it drives women to extremes like surgery and eating disorders, and results in damaged self esteem, all because men want women to look a certain way.
But of course, once you peel back the layers of victimized drivel and get to the core of the matter, you find that women drive themselves to do these things, biology leading them by the nose, because that is their quickest route to personal power, and because they don’t rise above it and find relevance in other ways.
Like the ways men do.
When women collectively quit worrying about sexual primacy and start focusing on their own innate human potential, when they learn to value their own accomplishments more than they value what they can sexually manipulate out of men, the plastic surgeons will be out of business and their bad self esteem, rather than their personal significance, will be facing expiration.
What’s that you say, women already are like that? They already do more on their own than they try to get men to do for them through sex and other forms of manipulation?
Well, I would like to address that here, too. But I only take on one lie at a time.
Tags: Mythbusting, Paul Elam, Sex, Women
668 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
Kimski:
theoutside:
crydiego:
externalangst:
Dean Esmay:
Alexander Hunt:
ive actually heard it is a psychological thing, the biological clock is ticking and menopause is just around the corner so they want to be more sexually active on a psychological level because they equate it with a last chance to having kids.
Scientifically speaking. Women hit their peak around 24, while men do so around 17. Compare this to women hitting puberty as young as 13 (and with hormones in our animal products, it is surprisingly younger) and men usually hitting puberty around 15-16. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense, puberty does not necissarily mean a woman is able to bear children immediately. The process for women is much more drawn out due to the drastic physical developments.
Men’s voice and balls drop. Big deal. Women’s hips broaden in order for the birth cavity to allow for birth, breasts not only increase in size but develop more complex tissues in order to provide breast milk. Women’s bodies need to be able to carry a children to term, that kind of change can take years. Just because a period means a woman can become pregnant, does not mean she can deliver a child without complications.
In regards to beauty, women and men are equally to blame for the photoshopped-to-death fashion models on the covers of magazines. Our society as a whole is deluded in regards to beauty and what is regarded as attractive. I assure you, as a fashion illustrator designer AND model, even the most perfect models do not look as they do in advertisements. It is a problem with our capitalist society, selling unattainable dreams so that women will spend money on cosmetics and so that men feel as though they need to have excessive money or other assets in order to bait these non-existent women. Such things destroy a woman’s view of themselves and destroy a man’s image of beauty.
Biologically speaking, health is what matters. Healthy skin, hair and muscle tone is a sign of this but it does not need to be overdone.
In the matter of procreation, the issues a far from infertility in women. We are over-populated as is and our society unnecessarily attaches sexuality to procreation. It may surprise you but the two are hardly as connected as you or society may believe. Especially given modern science, physical sex is hardly necessary in order for procreation. If we were only meant to produce offspring sex and other sexual acts that do not facilitate breeding would not be so goddamn enjoyable.
A sexual peak and a biological procreative peak are different. This is something you have not seemed to grasp understanding of. Nor most of society who shuns homosexuals or transgendered as they are unable to reproduce. Sex is not simply an act of biology it is a social act. And if it were not, why would we attach so much meaning to such a thing. Sexual activity is far more complex than biological imperatives and until our society is understanding of it women will be continued to be seen as sex objects and men will continue to be judged worth by how much money or hair they have.
You cannot expect women to be loving, faithful partners and then treat the acts of love as simply acts of breeding. It is a mater of having your cake and eating it too.
I like how Ophelia uses “scientifically speaking”, yet fails to describe a basis for measurement or reference to a scientific publication.
I’ve never thought much about this issue, but how does one meaningfully measure sexual peak and on what basis?
Paul makes perfect sense, a part of game is knowing that women are excessively insecure and their options become limited with age. For men, not so much. It’s also an excuse for glamorizing cougar culture.
“Sex is not simply an act of biology it is a social act. And if it were not, why would we attach so much meaning to such a thing.”
The strength of the biological drive.
“You cannot expect women to be loving, faithful partners and then treat the acts of love as simply acts of breeding.”
Uh oh, Paul … it’s the “you’re never going to get laid” shaming tactic!
@Denis,
Let me consult my library. I’ll get back to this page when I’ve sorted through my massive pile of books.
It should be noted that this ‘peak’ is a matter of hormones. It is the average age in which are brains and bodies are not developing quite so fast and thus we have the energy and stability to focus on other things. Sex drives vary from age to age and person to person without much pattern.
Where the idea of sexuality peaking at 30 comes from, I haven’t a clue. That is perhaps, admittedly a scam.
It should be noted that men who run such companies and medical practices that make money off of tricking women into thinking they need cosmetics and surgeries are just as much to blame for the phenomenon listed above.
@ Snark,
Do you really think we do not have the power to overcome our own biology? Do you really think we are soley or uncontrollably driven by it? If so, may I ask if you are religious? If so the very idea of religion and biology are counter-productive. Either we are apart from other creatures on this planet because we either have the cognitive reasoning skills to excel or because as many religious folk like to believe; we were made special. Either way, the “we’re just animals” does not hold up to much scrutiny. Especially if you expect your partners to be faithful and for anyone to maintain any semblance of societal structure where one’s self is compromised for the whole of the group.
I am not saying he will not get laid. I am just saying if you treat your partners as objects do not expect them to treat you the same in form. If you quantify a woman via her beauty and age then do not be upset when we woman quantify you by your money and social status. This goes for divorce, if you are married to a woman during the years when she is at her most potent then do not complain when she takes half of your money for those years you have required her to remain exclusive. It then becomes a simple exchange of goods.
If love, affection and family is the currency (so to speak) then one should neither worry about the youth, social status or excessive wealth of one’s partner. Yes money is important and so is the ability to procreate. And with scientific advances, procreation is most certainly related more to money than to love or family.
Ophelia, you have authored a well-written post, and this something I appreciate from people who disagree with these articles.
Your first two paragraphs are good and true statements of fact, but when you get into your analysis I find myself amused that you would, with such certainty of the soundness of your position, admonish us for a lack of understanding.
You say sexuality is unnecessarily attached to procreation. Your argument in support of this idea is that sex acts that could not produce offspring would not be enjoyable.
Life on planet Earth is a haphazard endeavor, with many solutions having a level of elegance no higher than ‘jury-rigged’. The desires and satisfactions of sex are the attempt to get sexually reproducing creatures to engage in the fertilization process necessary to continue their species. The programming for these desires is not exact, thankfully. It allows us to have our sexual desires partially satisfied by ourselves, and also in ways more interesting than offspring-producing intercourse.
A close analogue to this is pain. Right now I am experiencing pain in my abdomen. My brain is capable of telling me something is wrong in my guts, but the specifics are unknown. By the power of consciousness, I know that it was because I took Tylenol and it does not agree with me. The pain is only a vague indication of how I should behave, but I get the message and will go easy on the acetaminophen in the future.
I agree that it is useful to differentiate between biological or sexual peaks and declines, but not for the reason you have given. You correctly assert that sex is immensely complex, but you say the word ‘biology’ as if it’s inadequate to explain it and we’re supposed to join you in assuming that it’s a boring and low value subject. Just because you don’t find biology to be terribly weighty or interesting to your conscious mind does not mean that this is not where the importance or intricacy of sex comes from. You are a creature composed of biological matter, and all of your basic assumptions about the universe are hard-wired in so deep that you cannot even consciously focus on the individual tenets. It takes great effort for all of us to identify what we most take for granted.
The fact that sexuality is complicated and expensive makes absolutely no sense if it developed separate from procreation. Artificially constructing standalone ways for organisms to be happy is utterly wasteful. Sex may produce happiness, but that is the result of engaging in activities similar to genuine fertilization.
The complexity does, however, make sense if you understand sexual desire and satisfaction as a general urge to get close to humans of the other sex that meet general guidelines of attractiveness. It explains why manual physical stimulation can invoke orgasm. You think the existence of homosexuals is evidence for sexuality being separate from reproduction, but the understanding of sexuality that I have outlined explains the outliers, too. Human minds are very diverse and many people have unique ways of satisfying their biological urge for sexual stimulation. This is totally within bounds if sexuality is an imprecise desire that still usually leads to humans properly interfacing and therefore propagating the species.
I correct myself.
Puberty usually ends around the age of 17. However, adolescence continues until 19-20 as physical changes occur much often before emotional and mental changes. The ability to produce offspring does not equate the ability to responsibly care for such offspring.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001950.htm
Compare to psychological development:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_psychology
(And if you’re one of those snobs who does not trust wikipedia, do check the references that they link as they are rather valid.)
As a result the age of 24 is an age in which most women are enough into their adulthood to understand the emotional and physical taxes in order to effectively produce and raise offspring. Please note this is SIX years younger than the stated 30 year old ‘peak.’
As I stated before, however, sexual and biological peaks are quite different. Sexual peaks are much more likely to occur when one is comfortable with one’s own self and body and comfortable in engaging in such activities. Confidence of one’s body and abilities generally comes with age, so it is of course that older women may indeed be more sexually active due to the increased experience as well as increased time to learn about themselves and others. It really has little to do with beauty– people are horny or not regardless of their physical appearance.
It was not my intent at all,
Sure it wasn’t.
Well played.
“Do you really think we do not have the power to overcome our own biology?”
Jesus Christ. What a diversionary tactic. How you got this question from what I said I have no idea. I can only expect that this was intentional.
LET’S RECAP!
You asked: why is such meaning attached to sex if it is only a biological act?
I replied: the very strength of the biological drive itself is the source of meaning which human beings attach to it.
HOW you went from THERE, to the idea that I believe people cannot control their biological urges, I DO NOT KNOW.
Here is my question to you: ARE YOU TRYING TO SOMEHOW IMPLY THAT I AM A RAPIST?
“This goes for divorce, if you are married to a woman during the years when she is at her most potent then do not complain when she takes half of your money for those years you have required her to remain exclusive.”
So you believe that divorce should be a female-only right; with brutal sanctions levied against men who are divorced, but not against women who get divorced?
“When women collectively quit worrying about sexual primacy and start focusing on their own innate human potential, …..”
Sex doesn’t, and never has, equalled intimacy, or security, or love.
Yet sadly, so many of us have tried to get there, through that route.
Personally I think that women need to be able to let go and grieve the loss of their sexual power, while at the same time be willing and open to have that replaced with the pure joy of a connection and partnership that by far outweighs an orgasm.
But then, I have always been (humanly) idealistic.
@Eincrou
I am not refuting biology. I find it rather quite interesting and of great value. And perhaps I should have worded myself more coherently. What I am trying to say is that our biological urges are not primarily geared towards just physically reproducing. YES it is true to say that we are ingrained with the need to advance ourselves and as such do so through following generations.
However, we are social creatures and we are interdependent on one another. If we simply created offspring and moved on we would be highly ineffectual, especially given that our young are so vulnerable and weak due to the necessary compromise between being bipedal and having a large skull in which to contain the brain that makes us so unique.
I should say that physical procreation is not, by any means, the purpose of sex. This is what I meant by biology. I am refuting the excuse many make in saying that we are just animals with a primary function of physically reproducing. If this were the case we would have more offspring at a time and they would develop more rapidly and be more self-sufficient at a younger age.
Because we are not it lends to the statement that sex is not merely for reproduction but as a means of establishing bonds between individuals and strengthening such bonds. Many gain pleasure in acts such as oral or anal sex (acts that do not ever lead to procreation) because they are acts that release chemicals in the brain that lead to people feeling content and connected. It should also be noted that an orgasm in men does not always correlate to ejaculation. There is one thing in common across the board with orgasms and it has nothing to do with increasing the likelihood of procreation: it is pleasure and pleasure caused by chemicals being released into the brain. These chemicals allow others to feel a sense of happiness, contentedness within themselves and a bond with others. Dopamine and serotonin are indeed wonderful things. The increase in blood flow is also helpful for the maintenance of such organs. Another thing; there are hundreds and hundreds of various sex acts and vary few can actually lead to the creation of a child. While in the days before artificial insemination sex was required to procreate, procreation is not required for sex. A square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not a square.
In point the primary purpose of sexual activity is not procreation.
No matter how hard I try, I can’t make comments that are actually comment-length. Maybe it’s because I’m only inclined to post when I am inspired by a big topic.
I don’t have any life experiences, so all I can do is think about these topics theoretically. I remember David being chastised for speaking from the foolishness of youth. I am 22, and as hard as this may be to believe, have literally no real world experiences. My situation is a dire and desperate one, but it has given me the opportunity to learn to think without all the interfering bullshit. Even so, if lack of experience dulls David’s understanding, it potentially renders me totally incapable of understanding.
I just wonder if I am terribly mistaken in all the posts I have made, and in the entire way I think. I am at all times reticent of my understanding of the world, and I have tried to focus on developing clarity rather than certainty, as I see most people do. It is only now, and on this blog that I have exposed my ideas to an audience.
I hope that the people reading my ‘comments’ will speak up if they perceive me to be in error. Don’t hold your tongues just because in general you agree with me. It’s hard to deal with criticism, and I know mustering the strength to face it is immensely challenging. This difficulty is exactly what makes it worthwhile.
“I should say that physical procreation is not, by any means, the purpose of sex.”
Take a good long look, brothers. This is what a deluded feminist looks like.
@Snark
I interpreted your comment “The strength of the biological drive.” as means of saying our biological nature is so strong that it compels us to attach meaning to such things. This is a common and usually less strong way of implying that we are controlled or at least so highly influenced by our biology that it is the reason for why we think, feel and act the way we do.
It may influence us, but it is hardly the only factor. Furthermore I find your sensationalist responses to be begging of attention without thoughtful support of your points to be rather distasteful.
@ Snark
*gigglesnort*
I’m not a feminist. Nor am I an equality for that matter. I appreciate justice and reason. I also support people not being assholes.
I dislike those who scape-goat others for selfish purposes or to cover for insecurities they may have. Refute me with logic or concede your point, as you are not helping your case by being antagonistic.
It is neither men nor women who are at fault for the way the world is, but people who cannot see past what others would like them to see. Stop assigning blame for the way things work and start taking responsibility.
@Encrou, your doing great.
Ophelia is explaining that the biological necessity of procreation justifies state socialism and feminine privilege. “it takes a village to raise a child” – fathers not required!
@Ophelia:
Thanks for the reply. In the final sentence of your reply, you clearly state your thesis, which is the exact opposite of mine. The strange thing is that this is the only part of your reply that is in any way oppositional to my thesis.
I totally agree with all your discussion of sex strengthening bonds, and it’s plain to see the value this has in raising children, which, incidentally, is just as important as actually getting their production initiated. Children dying immediately after birth due to neglect is just as species-extincting as not fertilizing in the first place.
The fact that this can occur without the creation of a child is exactly what is expected. There is no switch that flips that will bond a mother and father, only when a child is created; especially for men who have no way of knowing, absent modern technology, if a child is theirs. The act of sex bonding him to a woman is just as effective in getting children to maturity, regardless of whether it is his creation or not. It’s no stretch to see how this effect, which is produced via sexually interacting with another person, could occur with anybody at any time.
Ophelia, I get the sense that we essentially agree, but we just use different paths to getting to the same place. Your final statement is directly opposed to how I would state the “purpose” of sex, and I believe this to be due to our different paths, but given that we agree on the meat of the issue, I’m happy to let this particular issue rest.
@Denis
Where in the hell did you get the idea that I said father’s were not required? Children need role-models and multiple viewpoints. Indeed it does take a village to raise a child, and preferably that village would contain at least two primary caregivers. Two parents are better than one, regardless of gender.
Furthermore, just because you bore a child does not give you rights to take care of it. I am an advocate of children being raised by who is most suitable, be it mother, father or another more effective party.
The hell with it all, create children in test tubes and give them to worthy parents, I really could care less about this perpetuated womb/penis envy.
Proper education, nutrition, and a safe environment for children trump the rest of your gender biased babble. I don’t care WHO does it, so long as it is done.
@Eincrou
Glad to see we can agree to disagree. Thank you for discussing with me in a respectful manner.
However, “Children dying immediately after birth due to neglect is just as species-extincting as not fertilizing in the first place.”
Is not correct. Human children are particularly vulnerable at birth and need much more constant care for a much longer extended time as most other species.
This is due to the fact that we are distinguished by a large brain relative to our size. We are also bipedal this is because it allows much more blood and energy to support are unusually large brains. As a result the birth canal in women narrows because we stand upright (the angle and shape of our pelvic bone and all). As a result our children our born much more helpless because their sculls are born in several segments to allow them to expand after birth so that they can fit through the birth canal without issue.
Ophelia, yes, you’re right. I should have been more clear in saying I was talking about humans in particular, but what you just explained is what I meant to say. The point was, our ability to work together is what makes such vulnerability a viable path for our species. The bonding of pairs and of larger groups makes it possible.
I don’t think we’re “agreeing to disagree.” I think it would take a lot of work to reconcile our different approaches and integrate our understandings, but on this particular issue, I don’t find any disagreement other than how we word our conclusions.
Ophelia, you explained family law as “a simple exchange of goods”.
You accuse men of “quantifying a woman via her beauty and age”, which is arbitrary and not measurable as justification for the “takes half your money”, which is a real and measurable state-sanctioned objectification of men as a paycheck.
“I interpreted your comment “The strength of the biological drive.” as means of saying our biological nature is so strong that it compels us to attach meaning to such things. This is a common and usually less strong way of implying that we are controlled or at least so highly influenced by our biology that it is the reason for why we think, feel and act the way we do.”
No it doesn’t.
What is wrong with you?
Saying that social meanings have become attached to biological acts is not a ‘common way’ of saying that people are controlled by those drives.
Not even slightly. You would have to be an intellectual infant to claim such a thing.
Are you on pills? You’ve got me thinking. Your name is more common to older women, and you were so offended by this post on women’s sexual peak; are you perhaps taking medication which fuzzes your thinking?
“I’m not a feminist. Nor am I an equality for that matter. I appreciate justice and reason. I also support people not being assholes.”
Charity begins at home, Granny.
“It is neither men nor women who are at fault for the way the world is, but people who cannot see past what others would like them to see. Stop assigning blame for the way things work and start taking responsibility.”
Start taking responsibility? Who the fuck are you to preach to me, you old bag?
You sermonise to me as if you know anything about my life. Your lame shaming tactics are a poor substitute for real argument – and you demand that -I- must ‘refute you with logic’?
I don’t have to do anything, you wrinkly old cunt. Not a damn thing. Certainly I don’t have to respect you. Nor take any kind of responsibility which you demand. There was no point to make or concede; only your confused nonsense and implicit false rape accusations.
“Furthermore I find your sensationalist responses to be begging of attention without thoughtful support of your points to be rather distasteful.”
Fuck you, idiot!
And if you don’t like it, you can ram it up your cottage-cheesed, barren, cavernous cunt.
Mr. Elam seems awfully threatened by female sexuality. Females in general. The production of this article, not to speak of the rest of the content on this site, must have been driven by some desperate emotions.
Of course I’m sure he’d claim otherwise.
Guys, chill out, and stop letting women define you sexually. The vast majority of them aren’t trying to threaten you at all. It’s all ok.
XD
Your personal insults are hilarious. Let me go peruse some teen chatrooms to pull up some equally stinging insults.
Shall I start with your penis size? Or that you can’t get it up? Or the fact that you probably live out of your overbearing mother’s basement?
Besides if you’re going to insult me, at least be more accurate.
I’m an obnoxious, vindictive tart thank you very much, who enjoys riling men like yourself up for her own enjoyment. Bring it on you cowardly bastard. I’ll beat you with studies, books and logic or hilariously catty insults.
If we are going to play the insult the person behind the screen game you’re sure to lose.
@Ophelia, Please quote your scientific research. You’re opinions are suspect.
In regards to the latest scientific information I spoke about:
Orgasm without ejaculation:
http://menshealth.about.com/od/sexualhealth/a/male_orgasm.htm
Babies being born helpless due to the correlation between large brain size and decreased birth cavity size:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EPG/is_n9_v31/ai_19670453/
http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/resources/clarifications/HumanBirth.html
And as I cited before. Physiological development vs psychological development and the age gap in development between men and women:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001950.htm
Compare to psychological development:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_psychology
Biochemical responses to sex, human bonding etc:
http://people.howstuffworks.com/love7.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_bonding
I would quote more specifics had I the time and energy. I am, however, not going to write a research paper for you. You can do more research on your own.
MGTOWs seem to have another advantage in this regard, in that they are aware of the deception (that youth can be borrowed or bought) and have found other ways to keep amused, educated and stimulated. I am in my early 40s and look forward to the coming years, free of family and female drama.
It is incredible how much time is spent, during dating, on women’s self-absorbed identity questions. Where she weaves intricate layers, the male really just wants an ordered, peaceful life, monotonous sure, but safe and stable enough to handle the rough bumps.
When I decided that either a woman comes to me or not at all (meaning she accepts what I have to offer), the skies cleared.
And all it took was simply “no thanks.” They cannot do much to force your compliance.
Sexual peak, in most scientific literature, refers to the age at which we are most fertile. It as nothing to do with how much we want to have sex. It has nothing to do with how often we engage in sex. Now I’m sorry that I don’t have an immediate reference for this, but my background in medicine has afforded me the, obviously mistaken, luxury of assuming this was common knowledge. Paul is correct with his observation that women in their 30′s who are fucking everything in sight are doing so as a “hail Mary” towards motherhood. When people see the word “sex,” they attach to it the carnal associations. Take a course in human sexuality and you will discover that it focuses on anatomy, physiology, gender identity, reproduction, etc. It’s not about instructing naive individuals on the nuances of the “dirty sanchez.”
Of course, in my freshman year, I was very disappointed to learn this when I enrolled in SexEd 101 hoping to see how-to videos exploring doggie style.
Richard_Parker:
Shaming language.
So predictable.
@ scatmaster
I decided we needed to allow some degree of this stuff from the likes of Parker, so I approved his comment.
Fertilizer for the soil, IF and only IF he can actually post something to substance.
I am not holding my breath.
One thing I had noticed as a participant in a 24 year relationship is that my sexual drive would seem to peak on a monthly basis and seemed to coincide with my partners ovulation. Which leads me to buy into the pheromone argument. I have two children from that relationship. I found that being aware of this cycle contributed to birth control. I have never found any attraction to diesel perfume or cologne for that matter. My personal impression is we are not as sophisticated as we like to believe and surgery doesn’t help. Where pheromones fail to induce beauty in the eye of the beholder, alcohol has served as a replacement.
There is an old feminist saying, “A woman needs a man like a silicone implant needs a host.”
Or something to that effect.
@Ophelia
“This goes for divorce, if you are married to a woman during the years when she is at her most potent then do not complain when she takes half of your money for those years you have required her to remain exclusive. It then becomes a simple exchange of goods”
Regarding a simple exchange of goods, just what does it cost for 9 months and do you accept American Express.
Ophelia wrote: “Scientifically speaking. Women hit their peak around 24, while men do so around 17.”
I couldn’t find any scientific justification for your statement, could you be more specific.
Keith wrote “just what does it cost for 9 months”.
For 14 months it cost me half my house and 18 years of almost half my wages. She wasn’t even in her prime, not worth it.
I was thinking more of the uncomplicated approach of surrogacy. Without the marriage+exclusivity+divorce++++++. Rather a simple exchange of goods.
Sounds very uncomplicated, and somewhat agreeable.
I’ll take two.
What is the purpose of this sexist drivel?
It is to prompt the intellectually unemployed to stop in an pose really meaningless and rhetorical questions.
@ Denis
Now that this piece is out there and viral in a minor way, I wanted to tell you just how spot freaking on you were with your first post.
The whole point of this is depedestalizing, in the conceptual sense as far as men’s thinking goes. And whether we call it Game or some other name, doesn’t matter.
Most men live their lives thinking that women are in charge of the interplay between themselves and men, and frequently they are right, but that is only because men have such a hard time seeing through the thin veneer of women’s public persona.
Once the mystique is eviscerated, a lot more rational actions, actions in their own self interest, from men, is possible.
You nailed it, man.
“It is to prompt the intellectually unemployed to stop in an pose really meaningless and rhetorical questions.”
Hahaha. Good call.
Snark,
I don’t think resorting to personal attacks (against Ophelia or anyone else) is necessary. It might even do us good to refrain from PAs (just like Dr. King & his followers refrained from the use of violence in the 1950s & 60s). The most articulate of us MRAs (including Paul, Marc Rudov, Glenn Sacks, Warren Farrell & Christina Hoff Sommers) use logic rather than PAs to back up their arguments. When we respond to feminists’ PAs by throwing more PAs at them, they throw even more back at us, & the vicious cycle perpetuates & distracts us from the issues we want to address. The issues are divorce, child custody, child support, alimony, male-only draft registration, paternity fraud & false accusations of rape & domestic violence. Let’s keep the issues where they are!
Well…. there are scientists who are trying to make sex between males and females for reproduction totally superfluous:
The End of Males? Mouse Made to Reproduce Without Sperm
Bijal P. Trivedi
for National Geographic News
April 21, 2004
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0421_040421_whoneedsmales.html
http://www.damninteresting.com/two-eggs-hold-the-sperm
This is a complex thing for scientists, certainly — but only a few years ago I never would have dreamed of a 128-gig SD Memory Card, the size of a postage stamp, that I could use in my digital SLR camera.
If reproduction and the sexual act do become mutually exclusive for humans, then the next step will likely be immortalizing cells without making them cancerous. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa . I reckon there will come a day when a select group of humans will be “at their sexual peak” forever. Presently however, for a middle-aged guy like me, I take solace in knowing that providing security, making conversation, cultivating romance, and using proper technique will keep me desirable and at my “sexual peak” until I am DEAD.
There is more to sex than simple appearance, the old “in-out, in-out” or making babies. The only other thing that will make sexual peaks and reproduction irrelevant (at least for men) is the law — a quick read at False Rape Society http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com will banish a man’s libido better than a cold shower ever could, and turn his “peak” into an abyss.
@ Keith_Parker
Of course he’s threatened by female sexuality. It’s out of control in this country. It’s sending men to jail on false rape claims in the tens of thousands. People will abuse power that is given to them. The really good ones avoid abuse as much as possible. Women have FAR too much power right now. Divorces favor them in a way that most other countries (and I’m talking about today) think is ridiculous.
These women don’t realize it yet, but the safe habitat they have lived in called America is about to come crashing down around them. Umemployment, Mexican drug cartels literally taking over parts of our country, unending wars of convenience, police state level tyranny, sex trafficking is at an all time high, etc… Walk outside and point your damn finger and you will most likely land on something that is a good indicator of just how bad things are actually getting out there.
What is going to happen when these same women who are patting themselves on the back for a job well done realize that the shit has hit the fan and is spreading around the room? They will play victim and blame us for it. They have to grow up. That is the agenda Paul pushes around here. He talks to men because he is one. He brings these points up because they are RELEVANT. Not to women, but to the men who will have to be prepared to clean up this mess.
If you want to make fun of someone, look in the mirror and try to figure out why you chose a personal attack to begin a conversation here. Then you will understand all that Paul is villifying in women.
Edit, sorry Richard_Parker was reading through one of keith’s posts and got the two combined somehow
Thanks Paul,
I hear all the time that men just don’t understand women and that seems to be true. I see this as a result of social programming beginning with “sugar and spice” that teaches boys that girls are all good, rather than human like the rest of us.
I see my own girls teasing boys with “sugar and spice” and I see the boys reacting with frustration. Perhaps I will do a re-write of the popular poem that is flipped around to show what it feels like for boys to be denigrated.
Women are toxic – stay away from them, dont be around them for too long and most importantly when pumping them with man juice wear protection so you dont get infected with child support.
Until women regress back into their maternal/house keeping roles use them for the only thing they have to offer to a straight man – their vaginas.
Live your life to the fullest without a nagging bitch by your side.
Dang. A spot-on article. I’d have to say, “Your best one yet”.
…the power of most women in this culture is reduced to whatever is afforded by rote chivalry.
I would have mentioned that to most women, sex is nothing more than power – has nothing to do with love.
Ouch! The truth hurts… but only if you were living the lie.
Ophelia wrote: “Scientifically speaking. Women hit their peak around 24, while men do so around 17.”
I couldn’t find any scientific justification for your statement, could you be more specific?
Ophelia wrote: “I would quote more specifics had I the time and energy. I am, however, not going to write a research paper for you. You can do more research on your own”
You spent plenty of time arguing about other things, but can’t be bothered to quote a scientific journal for your “scientific” statements which are directly related to the subject of this article.
Not professional or believable.
Please… Please…. Please…. make a YouTube video for this. It’s always a treat to check out your material but this one is the undisputed champ. You need to make this one your first video whenever you get back over there.
Just out of curiosity, are there any women out there who are men’s rights activists? Surely there’s no way that all women buy into feminist garbage and get offended when people speak facts.
Promoman,
Will do.
@ Not to be named,
While I don’t think all of them would like the MRA label, there are alot of women out there that support men against feminism very actively. Kathleen Parker, Katherine Young, Christina Hoff Sommers, Phyllis Schiafly, Barbara Kay, etc.
There are some women who focus on their accomplishments, not their sexual primacy. Very, very few of them, and other women tend to hate and reject them. I personally have met one (she suffered from severe aspergers syndrome) and have read the work (and online comments) of a few others. They stand out, they don’t watch sex and the city or anything like it, they don’t wear makeup and they don’t dress to impress. The one I knew was actually very attractive, but without any knowledge of it at all and with no effort put in. She wore clothes that looked like they belonged on an alien in Star Trek, she kept her hair cropped short and as far as I can tell was the only woman in existence who viewed shoes as protectors for feet and nothing else. She also was doing AI programming at a level that I could barely follow, and I had more of an AI background than anyone else at our mutual workplace (of around 500 programmers). I was the only person who really talked to her because no-one else could even understand her conversations. Like I said, these women tend to stand out. If you have ever met one, you will know it right away.
drex, you may not appreciate this, but your unabashed, boisterous, um… “hard-hitting” post was quite the turn-on. Gotta love men!
It seems the main point this article makes is that the definition of sexual prime is not the demand of a person, but their value in the “sex market”. So while a women might want most sex in their forties (backed up by several results), their value in the market peaks when they’re in their 20s or so.
Then, confusingly you make an alternative definition: “Being in your sexual prime is about being ready to make babies, not about how willing you are to be ridden hard and put up wet.”
This third definition makes the sexual prime for women around 13 and 14.
@ Panu
The point is neither one. The point is that sexual prime, assuming we still remember that the biological purpose of sex is to make children, is the time when a woman is most viable in a reproductive sense. It is just the design of nature to make her the most attractive during those years.
So there is no confusion if you get the premise correct to begin with.
Slightly off-topic, old joke:
Monica Lewinsky: “There are battered husbands? I didn’t know that. I’ve been eating them plain.”
Alright. I’m going back to work…. gotta keep my day job.
Panu,
A woman in her 40′s can not keep up with a woman who is about 25.
a LOT of truth in this… some is BS. but still a good read. the whole “sexual prime” with women is about them i think is coming to an acceptance of who they are and their bodies. it’s a psychological prime. that’s all. and i think it gets misused as a physical prime. women have alot more going on in their bodies to get used to than men do.
“because they don’t rise above it and find relevance in other ways.
Like the ways men do.”
i have to ask. what ways do men do? we aren’t much better off when we get in our 40s and beyond.. midlife crisis anyone? still trying to show off how fit and Verile we are? rogaine, viagra, buying a sports car, having an affair with a younger woman, etc.
Great piece Paul!
I wonder if the current trend of women divorcing men, taking their money and power and placing men in enacted bondage may be their response to keep men from engaging younger women and running off with the money men have earned?
It seems that women are all about deception much like a magic show. Then you realize the lie and deny the truth just like them! There are exceptions though you know.
If you want to learn the secrets of how to pleasure a woman ask a woman. My experience has been that not all older women have more skill or knowledge about sex. It seems that lesbians have a whole lot of knowledge about pleasing a woman! I also find it far easier to get deeply aroused by a younger woman than one that is aged and beyond her expiration date. So my body naturally steers me in the right direction and naturally does what feels right and good. So give me an attractive young woman and there is no need for a blue pill!
In my view women have a far shorter sexual prime/peak time than men. I believe women know this and despise men for this pile of truth unlike the pile of lies they want us to hang our coats on.
Respectfully,
Attila L. Vinczer
I am a mature man but this article is so true. There are some nice looking women out there in their late 30s and even up into their late 40s. But these qualify as what I refer to as “ gandmaws’’ and for the most part I don’t go for them. I am an old dude and with patience and just not giving a shit about how they feel I still am able to date women half my age. The one thing I have learned marriage is out of the question here in the Anglo sphere.
@traverse davies I too have Asperger’s Syndrome am HIGHLY INTELLIGENT Thank god there is Women out there for men Like me I can’t stand those ditsy women the wallet-divers, Hoodwinkers and the like did you ever Y’know (with her as you’d be a fool not to!!) we AS people don’t show off as much as other people and we are METICULOUS about our cleanliness I bet her house would be “AIRTIGHT” did she let you touch her her skin is like silk isn’t it? you had the urge didn’t you (we don’t like being touched as our skin is oversensitive)
Nice job, Paul. I agree with you that women (and men too) try to deceive ourselves about our sexual prime. Younger people who can make babies are the most sexually attractive. It’s a biological thing. That’s not to say that us older folks can’t enjoy sex, but the prime happened some time ago.
You know, we women put a lot of pressure on each other to look a certain way. We might say it’s for the men, but much of the time the men don’t even notice. It’s probably, at some level, competition for male attention, but I think it’s also us giving in to the whole impossible Madison Avenue thing.
The less we can focus on our sexual selves, the more we can succeed in other areas of our lives. And, lets’ face it, 50 is NOT the new 30 when it comes to bods!
A commenter above made a good distinction you didn’t touch on Paul. Its probably a psychological prime, that they mistake for a physical sexual prime.
By the time they’re 40, women are the most ready to have sex, without guilt, without issues and most ready to go for it and GRAB IT. They’ve overcome most of the hangups and issues they had most of their lives… etc.. etc…
Honestly, maybe I’m spoiled coz of the super-hot young-ones that pursue me, but I find the horny desperate 40 year olds disgusting. Was just walking down the street earlier… And saw a bunch of 40-50 year old dressed like street walkers… I almost felt offended by the sight honestly… I was like “aaaaaaaaawwwwwww, don’t wanna see that, please don’t rub your desperation in my face like that”.
My experience is that women who accept themselves are found attractive at any age. I’m not too impressed with older women dressing like they’re still in their 20′s, just like I’m not impressed with older men driving a fancy sports car and using the same tired lines that worked when they were 25 and had both muscles and hair. I think that every person, at every age, wants to feel attractive and desireable. No one can fault someone else for that.
I’m almost tempted to say that people, in times of high stress and loss of self, revert back to a time when they felt most confident and comfortable. For many, that was in their 20′s, when they peaked (and they’ve been talking about “the good ol’ days” ever since then). Not everyone “peaks” at 20. Not every girl starts menstruating at 12. Not every boy gets a beard at 15. People mature at different rates physically.
In my family, the women tend to start menopause at 50. That’s a little on the late side, so a woman who’s 30 is still very much in the game. In my family, a woman at 40 is still 10 years from even beginning menopause and still quite fertile…just ask my mother, who had a child at 45 without any fertility treatments (or even really trying to get pregnant).
There are things that will always be attractive in a woman. For instance, class is attractive in a woman. Elegance is another thing that’s always attractive. These things are ageless. From the posts here, it doesn’t sound like many of the men have had much contact with ladies that exhibit these traits, which is a shame. However, that doesn’t mean that women like that don’t exist. It just means that they’re not as easy to find. They are out there, though. They just don’t tend to sit around waiting for someone to come save them from their lives. I hope you weren’t hoping for easy prey.
@Ophelia…
“”It is a problem with our capitalist society, selling unattainable dreams so that women will spend money on cosmetics and so that men feel as though they need to have excessive money or other assets in order to bait these non-existent women.”"
OH LOOK… A marxist
Sorry to burst your bubble ophie, but capitalism didn’t create hypergamy. Nice fairytale version of reality you want to build yourself. Capitalism doesn’t create anything, it simply ACCENTUATES human drives BY virtue of freedom.
It creates a free market and in it, the deepest instincts of humans are accentuated because it is a FREE market. When people are FREE, they do what they WANT to do. Deep inside, women want a high status man. And men, deep inside, want to be a high-status man, that has a harem of hot babes. Deal with it.
Capitalism doesn’t “make” people fat for example, it simply gives them the FREEDOM to stuff themselves fat… because deep inside we have those mechanisms. We can overcome them through growing character, or having a nanny state that prevents us from making mistakes. I prefer freedom.
This sounds like a very defensive article, written by some-one who gave in to the power of their hormones in their youth.
A females “sexual prime” according to the definition of having children, would be as soon as a female is fully “formed”. Ie as soon as she can have children. This, is around 14 yrs of age(on average). A female in her 20′s, has moved beyond her “sexual” or at least ‘breeding” prime.
There is also the belief, that the MAIN purpose of sex, is in fact breeding. I think this is completely erroneous, and does not fit with our behaviour, nor with our biology. Most primates, use sex for purposes other than breeding(look up bonobo’s). Sex, is primarily a bonding activity, that results in children. This is why oxytocin is released in both the male and female brain, and bonds us together. It also releases massive doses of testosterone in males, making them less aggressive, contributing to social cohesiveness and male protective instincts. If it was JUST for making babies we would go on heat, and the desire for sex, would stop until a female wanted another baby. It doesn’t. Nor would males who have sex with a female in the long term, develop an attatchment to her, as a result of sex.(Long term oxytocin attachment, takes much longer in males).
Pay attention to how humans and primates actually behave, instead of what society or people want to believe.
Having said all that, a females testosterone levels go up as she gets older. That’s why she feels she is in her sexual prime. She wants it more, she wants it rougher, harder..in fact, her desire FOR sex and the TYPE of sex she wants, becomes more masculinized. I am a woman in her 30′s, this is spot on. Males lose their testosterone and become slightly more feminized. This is why older females in part, like younger males. More stamina, and young sperm works a lot better with older eggs(just like young eggs, work better when you have older sperm).
And lastely ,A young female, who has small children, will often lose her desire for sex, regardless of wether or not she is stil highly fertile as her primary responsibility is toward the child, NOT toward creating another one.
All of this makes the above article sound more than a little ignorant, and is verging on sour grapes.
Sigh…are there any websites out there that are truly trying to discuss the issues between males and females, rationally? Or are they all just hysterical feminist/anti-feminist websites. I’d love to find one as I think these problems are real, men are being castrated and hysterical women aren’t willing to truly embrace equality. Now men, are starting to get hysterical and ridiculous in their anger. Very frustrating.
ROTFLMAO!!! You drop in, claim I am defensive, ignorant, indulging in sour grapes, hysterical, ridiculous, make personalized assumptions about my youth, and then say you are frustrated because you can’t find a rational discussion.
I’d say there may be something amiss in your approach, but it’s just a thought.
Oh, and also, go fuck yourself.
@ Alek
I think I did touch on it. Rather it was pretty much the point. I can buy a woman of forty saying she is at the horniest point of her life, but I think tagging that as “sexual prime,” is a pretty glaring misnomer, designed more to imply she is at her sexual best, which she is not. Even for sex without the intent of children, the average woman won’t lubricate like she did at 22, and of course, there will be a good many men with better options, like you, who won’t give them a second look.
They are just horny older women, well past their prime.
@ Peggy
I never deceived myself about my sexual prime. One little blue pill and POW, I am a sexual God.
Yes Paul, sorry but you sound very defensive. You may not be, but you certainly come across that way. Now, even more so.
Your views aren’t backed up with anything that we currently know about biology or human sexuality, indicating ignorance.
I’ve offered a different point of view, which you haven’t rationally argued or responded to and you’ve offered virtrol as the only response.
How can anyone possibly hope to address gender imbalance for males, when you can’t even discuss it without responding in anger? This is no different than the feminists, sorry to say. I’m tired of both sides doing it, and if that is all that will occur here, don’t worry I won’t stick around.
Okay, well I’ve re-read my post, and I could have put more time into the wording. I wasn’t actually trying to bait you Paul, so I apologize.
I have a very good male friend, who is a male activist and I’ve begun to realize that things are getting pretty bad. I really don’t want men to go through the same shit women went through(even if it wasn’t nearly as bad as we say it was).
I have been plowing through the plethora of male/female websites out there, and there is a very common thread. There are a lot of FU posts, given by both males and females whenever one gender “loses” their power. It makes both sound very defensive, and secretly thrilled that they’ve “one-uped” the other gender and sounds like sour grapes over the past. We are going to end up truly hating each other, if we keep doing this, and a world without love, is a dangerous one imo.
The reason for the “sexual prime” comments you hear, have nothing to do with a loss of power. As I explained, it is most likely physiological.
So yes, perhaps I shouldn’t share my frustrations, as this is a site for men to air thier’s, but this power struggle happens everywhere you go. It makes both of us sound as though we are more interested in putting each other down, than fixing the problem, and it worries me. There’s no-where left to go.
@ Annie
Now, read carefully, from the very top of the article.
(Authors note: For those interested, Chuck Ross did an excellent piece of writing on this, in The Sexual Peak Myth, He approaches the subject with a good bit more scientific diligence than I am willing to do here. I have already accepted that the subject is mythical and am much more interested in posing some questions about why this is the case.)
Now, once again for effect.
(Authors note: For those interested, Chuck Ross did an excellent piece of writing on this, in The Sexual Peak Myth, He approaches the subject with a good bit more scientific diligence than I am willing to do here. I have already accepted that the subject is mythical and am much more interested in posing some questions about why this is the case.)
Are we making any headway here?
Lol, you can accept the subject as mythical, and are much more interested in the reasons why this myth exists, but I accept it is not mythical and so called breeding theories are erroneous. So the reason this theory exists, is because it’s true.
Or was the headway you are looking for, more along the lines of scientific diligence?
@ Annie
Trying to debate this is like debating AGW. It really goes in circles depending on what research, and what criteria, you want to accept.
My point in this is that the average 40 year old woman who claims to be in her sexual prime is simply saying, “I am hornier than I have ever been in my life,” and I while I think science bears out that she is, if fact, near 20 years past that prime, we can only go in circles debating it.
And just from the observational standpoint, that statement, as I have always heard it expressed, is one of desperation against fading sexual relevance.
Of vanity, if you will.
“”My point in this is that the average 40 year old woman who claims to be in her sexual prime is simply saying, “I am hornier than I have ever been in my life,””"
Yep. I think everyone will agree to this (or most). So the problem is in how you define “sexual prime”. If you define sexual prime as horniness, then 40 year old women are in their sexual prime.
I had to admit I made the same mistake when I read your article. I completely missed the point first time until you replied to my comment with a clarification, that its about PRIME, not horniness. I actually originally read the article, with the filter of “prime=horniness”.
At first, I thought you were wrong, because I thought… “prime” means “peak”… So… I thought, well if they have the most sex when they are 40… then, maybe paul is wrong and they are indeed right? Their sexual prime is at 40? Maybe Paul is wrong and he’s mixing up breeding with sex (sex for pleasure)…
BUT THEN
Then I went to the dictionary, and here’s what it says…
1.of the first importance; demanding the fullest consideration: a prime requisite.
2.of the greatest relevance or significance: a prime example.
3.of the highest eminence or rank: the prime authority on Chaucer.
4.of the greatest commercial value: prime building lots
So prime, actually means “of highest value” or “highest preference”. And women of 40 simply are not of prime sexual value. The women I most want to bang are between 19 and 25. This is true for most men. They have the highest sexual value… DESPITE breeding purposes. I.e. for pleasure…
- Women at 14 are at their BREEDING/reproductive prime
- Women at 19-25 are at their SEXUAL prime
- Women at 40 are at their SEXUAL PEAK (not prime)
Dictionary definitions for prime (5. the maximum point, degree, or volume of anything: Oil prices reached their peak last year.
6.a time of the day or year when traffic, use, demand, etc., is greatest and charges, fares, or the like are at the maximum: Early evening is the peak on commuter railroads. )
Sorry, last paragraph has an error, should say:
#
Dictionary definitions for PEAK** (5. the maximum point, degree, or volume of anything: Oil prices reached their peak last year.
6.a time of the day or year when traffic, use, demand, etc., is greatest and charges, fares, or the like are at the maximum: Early evening is the peak on commuter railroads. )
peak:
8. a. the maximum value of a quantity during a specified time interval: a voltage peak.
b.the maximum power consumed or produced by a unit or group of units in a stated period of time.
17.being at the point of maximum frequency, intensity, use, etc.;
18. constituting the highest or maximum level, volume, etc
@Paul.
Women of my age, want a thick hard cock. It doesn’t matter what theories men put out. Nor what men say.
The sexual prime of a woman is true. MY god is.
@ Annie
OK, so you are a horny old broad. If you want to believe that puts you at sexual prime in the eyes of men looking for prime sexual material, be my guest.
My money is on someone half your age getting much more attention, and by men who aren’t willing to settle for someone whose shelf life is near the spoiling point.
“”"Women of my age, want a thick hard cock. It doesn’t matter what theories men put out. Nor what men say. The sexual prime of a woman is true. MY god is.”"”
Read the dictionary definition above Annie. I made the same mistake. I assumed that “prime” means peak. It doesn’t. Wanting to have more sex doesn’t mean you’re at your prime, it means you’re at your peak. Two completely different things.
1.of the first importance; demanding the fullest consideration: a prime requisite.
2.of the greatest relevance or significance: a prime example.
3.of the highest eminence or rank: the prime authority on Chaucer.
4.of the greatest commercial value: prime building lots
5.first-rate: This ale is prime!
6.(of meat, esp. of beef) noting or pertaining to the first grade or best quality: prime ribs of beef.
In other words annie, your prime is defined by how much OTHERS want to have sex with you. Not by how much sex YOU want to have with them.
I assure you… There’s a lot more folks fantasizing about and desiring 20 year old women, then there are fantasizing about and desiring 40 year olds.
“There’s a lot more folks fantasizing about and desiring 20 year old women, then there are fantasizing about and desiring 40 year olds.”
Alek – I believe you. There are also a lot more folks fantasizing about and desiring 20 year old men than there are fantasizing about and desiring 40 year old men. It goes both ways. Men’s sexual prime, if defined as their peak desirability and sexual attractiveness, is the same as women’s. Most women, if looking simply for sex, would rather have the young bodies in their bed.
Beyond that, there is the fact that we all learn with experience, which makes a 30 year old more attractive than an 18 year old. But nobody really likes to see Grandpa in a speedo.
Yep, that’s why an ideal version, is a 30-40 year old woman that looks like she’s 20, or a 40-50 year old guy who looks like he’s 20. I know some… I’m talking about physical fitness. I find female fitness models (who are like 30-40), extremely hot, because they have a certain sexual “confidence” and demeanor, while with the body of a 25 year old.
I’m sure its can be the same for a man. There are guys who have the confidence and charisma and suave experienced character of a 40 year old (because they are), but the well kept, ripped body of a 20 year old model. In fact, most men’s health cover models are 40+. I’d think they’re an equivalent for women.
She’d maybe rather have that guy, then an average 20 year old boy-man, just like I’d prefer the fitness model over an average 20 year old girl.
@ Peggy Spencer
I suppose I could fall into the Grand paw category ,and I am having the time of my life at a university in Texas. And I am broke going to school on the G.I. Bill. and having the time of my life with young women without children. And some of them with children (I find stretch mark somewhat repugnant)so single mothers will do on a pinch. I don’t wear a Speedo but I do wear boxers and am pleased that the younger ones still find their way clear to have Gramps over every so often. Just one man’s opinion here and that’s all. But a single 40 something single year old man always seems to do better than let’s say the 40 something year old cougar or old maid whichever you prefer.
I love the thought that if I live to let’s say hmmmmm 71. My sperm will still make a 22 old woman pregnant we just remain fertile until we die. Albeit highly unlikely, I would hate the thought of the State Attorney General to haveing the power to garnish my social security income. Wear condoms men no matter your age. And with the licentious women in the Anglo- sphere Gwad knows who was digging around prior to you getting your turn on the merry go round.
I know many of these older “cougar” types and I can certainly say that they are in denial. They all – ALL – think that they are more attractive than the 22 year old woman that are closer to my age simply because they can fuck a younger guy. This is obviously BS. After trying to talk with a few of them about the fact that these younger men are all just sleeping with them because they ARE considered an easy, desperate screw they all keep saying that it is really because they look better than the younger girls. 50 is the new 30, blah blah etc.
There is even a “Cougar” bar near where I live. I never saw so many sagging boobs, crow’s feet, bad fake tits, and liver spots in one place since I served the food at an AARP event a few years back.
Harsh. And way too dumbed down. Ugly men have less power than handsome men. Ugly women have less power then beautiful ones. Tis the way of the world for both genders. And besides, you must live in LA or something Paul because I hardly know a woman that would care more about being perceived by men as sexy than being able to provide for her family. You write about a very small percentage of women in the first world who have the luxury of caring about beauty instead of what to feed their children.
Speaking of dumbed down, where are you from, a farmhouse ouside Pocatello? The weakest measure of men’s power is in their looks. Money and other forms of power trumps all for men, leaving looks in the dirt every time. Or do you think Mick Jagger attracts all those women because he is hot?
And as to the women you know? Even in Pocatello, they are the primary ones to tear their families up with a divorce, so they can keep a man’s assets while getting rid of the man. Got news for you, OV, numbers speak louder than anecdote. And the numbers about women across western culture don’t lie.
Deal with it.
All women need to produce lots of testosterone and estrogen, these are both key sex hormones and are needed for both sex drive and sexual satisfaction. To boost libido, you normally have to improve blood flow to and into the sex organs and not only dies sluggish blood flow cause low libido, it can cause numerous other health problems too. In a woman’s life, numerous hormonal changes occur and such changes that take place in response to the Menopause, PMS and childbirth, can upset the bodies hormonal balance and when this occurs sex drive falls. Last but not least, the mind plays a key role in female sexuality and such negative inputs as stress, worry and anxiety, will leave a women unable to focus on sex.
hi there…
i don’t agree with you at all. i believe there is an increased feeling of sexual prowress and general confidence, drive and assertion that a woman experiences when in her early 30′s. i am 33 years old, and have been observing my female friends going through similar changes. it may not be hormonally based…perhaps, just a part of evolution that gifts self-acceptance, but i don’t think its just a desperate attempt for a woman to hold on to the last strands of her youth, and justify being promiscuous while doing so! your article is just another attempt to shame women regarding the experience of their sexuality. your article was pretty bad. you blanket state “all women” together as though their motives are one in the same. it’s clear you do not know women at all. and if you’re a women writer, you do not know yourself, and you probably do not have close female friends with whom you have sisterly bonds. anyway, you should read the book: “women’s fidelity” and maybe you’ll learn something.
Hi Paul! I have a lot to chime in here, so please bear with me.
“When women collectively quit worrying about sexual primacy and start focusing on their own innate human potential, when they learn to value their own accomplishments more than they value what they can sexually manipulate out of men, the plastic surgeons will be out of business and their bad self esteem, rather than their personal significance, will be facing expiration.”
I completely agree with you, and I am so grateful to hear a man say this. From reading many of your posts – some of which I find slightly hateful, but that’s beside the point – I do respect your overall theme that women should take responsibility for themselves and the lives they want to lead and not demand the world delivered to them on the backs of hard-working men.
However as a young – newly engaged! – woman, one who has always paid her way with her own employment, focus and attention to studies and tangible hobbies – I must say that there are many of us who go through life without the crutch of manipulating men. I can’t say that there aren’t men (as well as women) who have helped me along the way, but I certainly have never paid any sexual favors to get to where I’m at.
Unfortunately, there are many young men out there who do truly seem to value a woman’s looks over everything. Perhaps it’s a reflection of the maturity level of my peers, but I am often seeing men I know chasing after women who are objectively attractive but morally vacant, manipulative, talentless and just plain mean. They tend to ignore whatever woman doesn’t fit their “Perfect 10″ category. Perhaps the morals of my generation allow them to do this? I’m not sure.
Regarding the sexual peak. From my own experience, my interest in sex, my libido and my pleasure levels have all increased markedly in my 29th year. I watch pornography, masturbate frequently AND engage in sex with my fiance on a regular basis (twice per day). Whether this makes me a nympho or not, I don’t know. But I have attributed this to a possible hormonal shift – because up until about about a year ago, I quite honestly didn’t care about sex that much. Now I cannot live without it. My high sex drive is really in part what lead me to seek out a long-term relationship with the wonderful man who I will be marrying. I also feel that my body is getting better with age. I know I’m not as old as the women you were describing in your column, but I do have to say that from my experience I believe there is a time in a woman’s life where she finds more interest in sex than when she’s younger.
Thanks for reading my novel.
Hi EL,
Thanks for your comment. If you have read around the site a bit, then you may have stumbled on the acronym “NAWALT.” It stands for Not All Women Are Like That, and it is something we (most of us) regularly stipulate around here. More to the point the article addresses women in general terms (I know, taboo, lol) but as your first statement in agreement with what you quoted from me indicates, the ideas I expressed, as they apply to women, are not uheard of to you.
Also, hate is a very strong word, easily tossed around, especially when dealing with strong opinions or matters of passion. I don’t think you can make it apply here. I am just a guy with something to say that I believe in. Just for the record, I don’t hate anyone, much less the half of the population that is female.
Cheers.
Paul, thank you for a very good read. It’s an important topic you ‘discussed’ here.
I think many women try to cling to their ‘years of power’, when due to being in sexual peak they could pick and choose suitable mates at will. By doing so they make themselves feel unhappy and unfulfilled, often taking it out on men. For women past their sexual peak losing that power can be very difficult. It makes me feel of a junkie, being forcibly put into a rehab, who just can’t let go of his/her drug.
Sorry if my comment offends anyone but I really think it’s true. We’re all human beings, men and women alike, and as such we’re very much biological creatures with biological instincts to appease. The sooner a person accepts that the easier it is for him/her to live.
Of course I’m not trying to imply that that’s just what we are – we do have finer feelings, more developed brains and ability to think creatively, etc.
But, at the end of the day, as any other existing species we’re desperate to carry on doing just that – existing. And that means, that deep down inside we’re looking for a sexual mate in his/her prime. Where many of us have problems is accepting when that prime passes away. And, imo, true ‘sexual prime’ of women in their 20′s and increased libido of those in their the 40′s are 2 separate things, not be confused.
I’m now past my sexual prime (I’m 33), fully accepting the fact and damn happy about it
Paul, your articles are excellent and truthful and resonate with me a lot – thank you again.