Readers' Submissions

Western Sexual Dystopia & How It Went Wrong

  • Written by Anonymous
  • February 11th, 2015
  • 4 min read


Black Pagoda Patpong Bangkok



That there is something seriously amiss cannot be denied. Men and women are at odds with one another and the marriage contract has been devalued to the point of being meaningless as a contract. How did it come to pass?

First let's look how men and women interacted in other societies and in other times. Examining their interaction one sees that there was an equilibrium. The equilibrium held across the vast majority of societies and held over the millennia – until the last 100 years. So what was the equilibrium? We desire women more than women desire us. We feel good in the company of an (attractive) woman. Throughout our lives we feel more complete in a relationship. Women, once the child rearing years are over, have no strong urge to be mated. Girlfriends, offspring and family fully satisfy them. But to counteract the lack of female desire, there existed in former times a female need for us, not the same as desire but just as compelling. By 'need' I mean. economic need and a physical security need. If you examine a traditional society, anything except our own really, one sees that physical safety was not guaranteed. Men had an obvious utility. Correspondingly, many everyday tasks required muscle that most women could not muster. Today, in contrast, we are safer than ever despite the scaremongering and all sorts of workarounds have been devised for tasks requiring brute strength – too many to enumerate.

Turning to female economic need it is even clearer. Equal pay has liberated females from dependency (no moral judgment intended).

Now what we are left with is male desire and female equivocation; only the alphiest males warrant female attention. Worse still for all round life satisfaction is the female single-minded quest for babies. It is in the baby making years that females will go out and actively engage with males to satisfy their urge. But the males' role is quite quickly discharged (pun intended). Once sated with offspring the ladies look around and think "what do I need the big lug for' "how many times have I told him to put his used socks in the laundry basket" Weighty stuff like that.

The traditional equilibrium has been upset and the marriage fails.

Now in case some of you think that male and female sexuality are much the same (Yes, Virginia, there are people like that around) allow me to paint a scenario that highlights the difference. You are wandering around the supermarket and lean over to get an item on the bottom shelf. Just then you feel a hand on your backside, spin around and hear an attractive woman say "very nice!" Do you feel demeaned? Violated? Report the incident to the store? Hardly! Most men would be flattered and likely suggest a private viewing. Now turn it around ; you an attractive male decide to pat female backsides at the supermarket. (I suggest you put your lawyer on stand-by). The action of patting a butt is assault and the full machinery of the law will be activated by your indiscretion. Expect a snarling denunciation or worse. Still think men and women are much the same?

Sadly, there is no going back in the West. But many of us head to the East where the old equilibrium still holds.

So off to do a little field work to where the old verities still obtain. To the trading floor of dating sites, Filipino and Thai. Here we find men and women in earnest negotiation to determine the set-point of the equilibrium between male desire and female economic need. The discussion between them can be very direct and a little brutal. The ladies (sensu lata) are very keen, indeed, especially the Filipinas, all explicable by their poverty. They set out their terms of engagement very clearly – "no play", "no games" and some even say "no fun". No want butterfly man. "Sincere, take care" they stipulate. In return they promise eternal love, loyalty and affection in terms so sugary that even a Labrador could not deliver. Bitter is their condemnation of former partners who, it would seem, made off with some free samples or who sipped on the nectar but did not pollinate the flower. The proffered photos by all rights, should testify to the happy domesticity that awaits the luck man. Of course the women are not that stupid – they play to male desire, posting pictures of themselves in suggestive poses that hint at earthier pleasures. The dopey men have a strong preference for the more provocative pictures. Amazingly, they have not learned that overt sexiness does not equate to real sensuality.

Turning to the men, the less adept of whom post unbelievable stuff, completely missing the cues of the females. Some earnestly offer marriage to strangers, seemingly determined to walk into a buzz saw. Others more insightful play along in order to have their needs met. All in all a dispiriting spectacle but very real in its humanity. Do the results of Westerner / Asian relationships provide solace for jaded males? Yes, probably. And for that reason I need not be too forensic regarding motivation. These couplings answer to both parties basic needs. What is more, it is not pure gold digging on the female side; it is more nuanced. Women actually find wealthy men more attractive physically, research has shown. It is not merely a "hold your nose" exercise on their part. Men have always been realists about these things. No-one imagines that Rupert Murdoch truly believed that Wendy Deng was unmoved by his wealth.

So unedifying as it all is we, that is men, need to meet their needs and make the best of it. The alternative is too distasteful. (But as Seinfeld observed, it will double your wardrobe).