On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Heather Fleming wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Heather Fleming wrote: > > > > It seems to me there may simply be biological aspects to women's > > > sexuality - say slower arousal or less automatic sexual response - > > > that might lead to fewer female customers in brothels despite complete > > > social equality between men and women. And note that there is still > > > some residual chivalry apparent in the Paarfiad - e.g., women can > > > chastise servants. > > > > Not to get into any kind of feminist argument here, but, let's not > > postulate on the "slower" arousal time or lack of "response" women have > > to sex, o.k.? Because I do believe that your ideas on that matter are > > either baseless or, at the very least, not thought out. > > > >I'm a bit bewildered here - we're talking about human >beings, right? In > >this universe, the one where the sky is blue and getting >from 0-60 fastest > >is not considered an accomplishment except among >circle jerk devotees? (I > >should perhaps write devote's as I can't imagine the >female equivalent). > >Where many a young man walks around with the engine >running while many a > >young woman wishes her lover would adjust the mirrors, >check the oil, > >squeegee the windows, and rub on a fresh coat of turtle >wax before taking > >her out for a Sunday drive? > > >Maybe I and my heterosexual male friends and all the >sex-column > >writers have been misled by feminist theorists into believing men > >>should learn to go slow and indulge in foreplay, and our observations > >>that doing so is appreciated were colored by the aforesaid propaganda, > >>and maybe our partners were misled into believing that they shouldn't > >>have an orgasm- centered view of sex when in fact they should expect > >to >come effortlessly every time. Maybe I should go rent some porn to > >pick >up pointers. > > Wow! That is so way off what I meant it's almost ridiculous. I was > merely suggesting that to assume a woman biologically would be unlikely > to enjoy the pleasures of a prostitute was a bit misguided. Women's > "engines", like men's can run fast or slow, depending on their current > moods, I assure you. Assuming that one is either one way or another at > all times due to some biological factor is what I object to, not the > rise in male sensitivity. . So I just had some discussion offline which convinced me that my last post was much too vivid and red in tooth and claw, so I'm pleased that you weren't offended. (Apologies to anyone who was.) We have apparently misread each other. What I would have originally said if I had felt my poorly informed opinions about prostitution deserved going on about at greater length, is that I suspect aspects of both male and female biology could lead (please not that I used "may" and "might" in the original post in question) to disparaties in the rate of women and men frequenting brothels. Such as the difficulties faced by the male tags in providing all services on command. And if it's at all controversial to think that the average man has a shorter arousal time than the average woman, nurture aside, and that this might lead to "fewer female customers in brothels", then my mistake.