[Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: Mistress Judith (was Re: Butler on Spivak)]]

kelley oudies at flash.net
Tue Nov 23 08:12:55 PST 1999



>>
>>according to the research done on college studients it is...slowly. women
>>*still* say that a sense of humor and character are most important.
>
>Er, and that's to be discouraged?
>

they say it because, according to the theory, women have learned to find these qualities attractive as indicators for men's faithfulness. an attractive man will wander and marriage less likely in the first place and if marriage then less likely that it'll last. so women, having by and large less power and having been historically dependent on men's incomes, haven't had the choices open to them that men do. men's responses have been, since the 50s, that attractiveness and physicaly beauty is most important because they can. they don't have to worry about wandering so much because women had been financially dependent.

that's the theory anyway.

but whether it should be celebrated as an unqualified good thing, i'm not so sure.

the same career oriented attitude among women is also responsible for this fascinating attitudinal change: the dating and sex studies on campus done over the decades have revealed that, while students always had sex, women *used* to register feelings of shame that they slept around. today, this attitude is evaporating. in one study i was peripherally involved in, the qualitative interviews were quite fascinating to read. young women said they didn't feel bad about sleeping around because they weren't looking for the MRS degree to begin with, so why get attached to anyone? the sleeping around without fear of STDs was scary as all get out, imo. that just shocked me. but then i learned that i knew people who were STD counselors who slept around without worrying about it too.

whatever. i'm an old fashioned prude when it comes to these things. i did my share of dating people solely because they looked good in the retribution year after my divorce. while i did find it liberating had one point to drop a guy off at his house the next morning relieved i never had to see him again, i fail to find anything truly liberating about casual sex. but then i have a kid and am not particularly interested in 1. having him witness a parade of people rolling out of my bedroom at 7 am or 2. having to shove the person out the door at dawn

old-fahioned prude, kelley



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list