Toby Young refuses to get what's REALLY going on with women who are not having sexist sex with men

 

[image of Toby Young is from here] 

Toby Young is the author of How to Lose Friends & Alienate People (2001) and The Sound of No Hands Clapping (2006). In addition to being a freelance journalist, he is leading the efforts of a parent group in West London to set up a state secondary school. To learn more about that project, visit the school's website on www.westlondonfreeschool.co.uk. Toby's personal website is www.nosacredcows.co.uk and he tweets under the name of Toadmeister.

When het men can't figure out why women don't want to have sex with them, what do they do? Either blame the women or get all effemiphobic about the matter, rather than looking at what else is going on in women's lives. Even when they read feminist analysis, they reject it as "the explanation" because, after all, white het men know what's really going on, right? Wrong. What follows is from *here*. It's from the Telegraph.co.uk. My reply to him appears after his silly attempt at social analysis.

Why do so many women never have sex? Because feminised men are too busy fixing their hair

By Toby Young Last updated: February 17th, 2010

According to a report in today’s Daily Mail, a quarter of British women over 35 say they “never” have sex. The figure rises to 38 per cent in Scotland, while women in the Midlands are most likely to have sex regularly, with 32 per cent claiming they make love once a week.

Could the explanation be that men’s libidos aren’t what they used to be? No, according to the Mail. It was ever thus. It cites a new book called The Sex Starved Wife by American author Michele Weiner Davis. “As a society, we’ve perpetuated this myth about the ever-turned-on-male,” says Weiner Davis. “But all my research suggests that the differences between the genders aren’t as great as we’ve been led to believe.”

I’m not so sure. I think the male libido is in decline — and I blame the feminisation of men that has taken place over the past 15 years or so. Like most trends, this one began in America and has now crossed the Atlantic. I remember being shocked on first entering the bathroom of an American male in 1995. There, carefully lined up on a stainless steel shelf, was a larger array of beauty products than you’d expect to see in Cheryl Cole’s boudoir. Admittedly, this was a sophisticated New Yorker in his mid-30s — a metrosexual, if you will — but even so. Did he really have to go to bed every night wearing a mask of Kiehl’s Facial Fuel? It seemed extraordinary.

Fifteen years later, it is now the norm. British men in their twenties spend a small fortune on cosmetic products. Back in the eighties, we would have been worried about being called “gay” if we used fake tan, but that fear has gone the way of the Sinclair C5. When I find myself in the West End on a Friday night, I see young men who have clearly spent as much time getting ready as your average woman. And I’m not just talking about Old Compton Street.

At the risk of sounding like a Grumpy Old Man, I do find this trend pretty reprehensible. Vain women are bad enough, but there’s nothing more pathetic than a vain man. In Shakespeare’s plays, over-attention to dress is always the hallmark of a fool, from Osric’s bonnet to Malvolio’s garters. Since the dawn of time, manliness has always been synonymous with a complete indifference to personal grooming. It’s not simply that real men don’t eat quiche; they don’t moisturise, either.

Surely, it is this gender reversal — with men becoming more like women as women become more like men — that accounts for the decline in male sexual desire. It is hard to imagine a metrosexual throwing a woman over his shoulders and marching off into the primeval forest — he’d be too worried about messing up his hair.

I’m currently reading a book called Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism by the feminist writer Natasha Walter. She believes contemporary British women have recently taken a step backwards and begun to embrace sexual identifies — personified by glamour models like Jordan — that demean and degrade them. She sees this as evidence of a creeping misogyny, with men and women reverting to patriarchal sexual stereotypes:

It is still women who are dieting or undergoing surgery on their bodies; still women stripping in the clubs while the men chant and cheer; still women, not men, who believe that their ability to reach for fame and success will be defined by how closely they conform to one narrow image of sexuality. If this is the new sexual liberation, it looks too uncannily like the old sexism to convince many of us that that this is the freedom we have sought.

I don’t dispute her data, but I think her theory’s all wrong. When young women engage in sexually provocative behaviour, wearing short skirts, flashing their boobs, and so forth, they are not trying to please men. On the contrary, it’s a form of brutal triumphalism. Having won the battle of the sexes, leaving men broken and emasculated, women are now rubbing our faces in it by parading about in outfits that, not so long ago, might have triggered a sexual response. Hardly surprising, then, that 35 per cent of British women aren’t getting any. I’m amazed that 65 per cent still are.

*          *          *

See *here* for the comments. Here's my reply to him:

The issue isn’t the “feminisation” of men, as you so misogynistically put it. The problem is rather the opposite:
Men’s sexual lives are so increasingly and addictively entwined with and tethered to pornography that men would rather have sex with themselves in front of a computer screen than have sex with a human being.
If heterosexual, having sex with a female human being “annoyingly” (to boy-men) means men have to be “responsive” and… imagine this: unselfish.

As I see it, and hear about it from women, female human beings are fed up with men’s selfish sex being “all sex is” and would rather go without, for damn good reason.

And plenty of women are having sex, alone, or with other women. And they may not be reporting on just how much better that sex is than when they were with the wanker first husbands who would rather wank using their wives as their right hands, than figure out how to be emotionally and physically connected to another human being and showing interest in giving her pleasure that isn’t based on HIS (read: pimps’) fantasies. Maybe pimped women on drugs isn’t many women’s idea of “a standard” to live up to, including the women who are being controlled and drugged up by pimps.

Maybe women are getting tired of hearing their pathetic boyfriends whine for them to work a pole… for men’s pleasure, not women’s.

Maybe women are sick and tired of men with arrested sexual and emotional development.

Maybe women aren’t interested in men who think women should have helium in their breasts, flat stomachs, and hairless bodies.

Maybe women are tired of doing all the oppressive and annoying stuff women have been coerced into doing for men who don’t really appreciate them after they do all that stuff.

The women I know are having great sex with men who are poets, and artists, who care about women as people, and who don’t expect women to look twenty when they’re fifty. Men who actually LIKE and are ATTRACTED to women in their forties, fifties, sixties, and beyond. Maybe women are tired of having some silly version of sex with men who, aesthetically and sensually, are obnoxious boys in adult male bodies.

It’s easier to blame it on cosmetics, though, isn’t it Toby? The truth hurts. Check out the “Make Love, Not Porn” website and find out why women aren’t having sex with porn addicts. See: http://www.makelovenotporn.com/