Ask Polyamory Paradigm

Check out my new question and answer blog!

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Guess what I want for Christmas?

Once in a while when the poly world is quiet, I'll write about other things. With only a single arrest, an attempted takeover, and some mild backstabbing over the past few weeks my poly community has been quiet and, this is one of those times.

So here I am, relaxing after a busy week and thinking about a couple of women I have been interested in dating. (Ok, so maybe this article is a little bit poly after all). It is actually a bit more complicated than that. I've entered a relationship with one of the women, the other one and I are still flirting. But, you get the picture.

These two ladies are almost as different as night and day as well. One tall, slender, and dark haired. The other short and curvy with red hair. One is well educated, the other a sci-fi gamer girl. One is older, one younger. Once experienced, and one not.

It was those differences that got me to thinking a bit. I wondered what it was that attracted me to two women who are so different from one another. Maybe they both have interests I enjoy. Maybe their differences compliment one another. Maybe I just like variety! Whatever the reason my mind drifted as it often does and I got to thinking about my physical interests in the two ladies, each of which has different *attributes* I find appealing. And no, I'm not just talking about physical attributes. Get your minds out of the gutter people!

That got me to thinking about why guys find different types of women appealing.

I think there are a lot of things that make a woman interesting to a man; lifestyle, beliefs, intelligence, stability, security, sanity, insanity, attitude, and yes sometimes simply physical attributes.

We have all heard the old saying (or a variation thereof); Men want a princess to take home to their Mom, and a slut in the bedroom. And it appears men often follow that saying as you see them court and win the princess only to be unsatisfied with their sex life later, or disappointed their princess isn't a slut in bed. Or on the other hand, they take the less than pristine girl home to mom only to have problems when yep, mom thinks she is a tramp. Men seem to want both in a woman which is somewhat rare.

Now, we can argue psychology all day long. We can debate genetics, society, women's rights or liberation, men becoming emasculated. We could even dissect how global warming could be causing some of our problems. But I have a different theory on the matter; Men don't want a woman who is pure. And despite popular opinion, they don't want a woman who is a slut.

What they desire is a pure woman who wants to be a slut.

That's right; they want a woman who has dreamt her whole life of the white picket fence life, saved herself for marriage, and will devote herself to her man. They also want her to be a closet nymphomaniac with dreams of doing the dirtiest, naughtiest things she has never done before in the bedroom. In line with the quote above, they want a woman they can take home to mom who won't drop a 4-letter bomb, have upsetting opinions of her own, or challenge family beliefs. They then want to take her home and have her wearing 4-inch heels and a garter 30 seconds through the door, prone on the bed with a come hither look while in a deep sexy voice whispering "You can do whatever you want to me". The key here is they want to be the one to do those things to (or with) her. They don't want to ever hear how she learned this from Bob and that from Bill. In other words, she can be a dirty, shameless slut with them but not with anyone else.

I think this because the guys who do get a princess aren't often happy with her. Yes she can meet mom, but she can't imagine new ways to screw 3 times a week. On the other hand, the woman who is already experienced and in touch with her kinky side must have learned it from somewhere and the poop will definitely hit the propeller if mom finds out! Besides, if she knows more than her guy, and is in touch with her sexual desires, maybe her guy won't be enough for her or she will go get her insatiable needs met behind his back.

Now don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying there are absolutes nor am I trying to park women into two categories. Nor am I saying all men fit into two simple categories either. My point is simply that the old saying may not quite be right. Men want a princess who wants to be a slut rather than a princess who is a closet slut. That might even be more rare. (By the way, I use the term *slut* with the utmost respect in this case).

What are your thoughts on this one? Ladies, do you see it this way or do you think I'm off the reservation again? And what about the guys . . . Is it time to update the old saying or was it fine the way it was?



  1. This is the first time I've come away from your column offended, which I realize isn't your intention. (And I do get your use of the word slut) But seriously? What is the point here? It seems to me you are perpetuating the double standard-a sexually experienced, slutty women by definition is incapable of being a lady/princess/classy? I violently argue this assumption, as well as the idea that it's a rare woman who can embody both. I think that's simply nonsense. And....what standard is the man held to? Your column assumes that HE is outsexing HER and trying to get her to do what he wants sexually. I also think that's a very narrow view.

    How about, "A man who wants a closet slut better get the hell over himself and examine what he's bringing to the table too?"

    Maybe what really get me is the idea that it's *OK* for a man to try to control, judge, or shame a woman for her sexual choices.

    Argh I'm not being articulate today and this just rubbed me the wrong way. I've encountered too much of this crap online-she's poly, she must be a slut, so must be stupid and I don't need to bother talking to her with respect. Drives me CRAZY. I'm intelligent, educated, well read, well spoken (although do drop tons of F-bombs with friends, but can turn that off) and.....I have yet to meet a man who has outsexed or outkinked me. And I don't think I'm all that unique. There are plenty of intelligent, classy chicks that like and enjoy sex as much as, or more than their male partner.

    Lastly.....why the hell would your mom know anything about your sex life?! If she finds out, you're doing something wrong. If she brings it up to you, she's doing something wrong.

    End rant.

  2. Walkietalkieooo,
    Thanks for commenting and I’m sorry you felt offended. Though offending anyone wasn’t my intention, shaking the tree a bit was :)

    You make some very good points, which I agree with.
    Where is the male in all of this? Purposely left out. I was talking about an old saying and addressing how men actually feel. From that perspective, and being a male, I seriously doubt I could write about the female perspective in this case without bias. As much as I pissed you off already, trying to do so would probably only piss you off even more.

    I also agree that there are biases everywhere, including in the poly community. “She’s poly so she must be a slut or stupid” equates to “He is poly so he must be a Player and all he cares about is getting laid, not a relationship” for the guys. That isn’t a one way street by any means. But again, I was just poking some fun at an old saying.

    Speaking of fun. . .the mentions of “Mom” in the article were meant to be humorous :)

    So thank you! I was hoping for some solid emotion and that is what you gave!

    My goal here was to simply examine some of the common attitudes (by men in this case) that perpetuate a saying such as the one mentioned. I wasn’t trying to determine if the saying was fair or justified, or even examine it much from the female perspective. In doing so I hoped to stir some emotions and generate some conversation, which it seems, is happening. I don’t necessarily agree with the saying or the reasons behind it but nonetheless, it exists. What is interesting to me is how some people find such a saying extremely offensive, while others agree with it, and even others almost take it as a compliment.

    One thing I must make clear though is my use of the term “slut”. I think with expanded consciousness around sexuality it is time to reclaim some of the words that have come to have negative meanings. Thinking back, only about 10 or so years ago if you had called a woman a “bitch” you probably would have gotten slapped, male or female. These days even men can get away with using that word once in a while. As I was using “slut” in the article I meant no disrespect, only to imply an experienced woman. Heck, The Ethical Slut is often considered required reading for polyfolk :)

    Thanks again for the comments, and for slapping me around a bit!


  3. PP-for the record, I do realize that you are a respectful, logical, open minded, non-judgmental person. Which is why this column threw me. I understand you were wanting to open a dialogue about this idea, but I still read it as a somewhat endorsement the whore/madonna concept in general. Which maybe wasn't what you were saying-I'm not sure.

    This is a big trigger, as a sexually open-minded adventurous woman constantly having to battle these outdated notions of female sexuality.

    Love your column-and maybe getting worked up is good, every now and then. Being challenged is positive. :)

  4. Isn't that the point of polyamoury? That you don't have to have a complete package in anyone? That you can have one woman to bring home to mom, then go fuck someone else on your way home to a houseful of "partners"? Call them all "relationships" and "love" and never have to actually have an honest relationship with a complete person at all? Poly totally negates that dichotomous dilemma of Madonna/Whore. You can just see what you want to see in people, never who they really are.