Support NeoGAF

[Mumei]

I was reading a different (and for this discussion, very relevant) post in Jezebel when I also came across this article. I thought it was interesting, particularly the gap between overall self-reported figures and what our perception is.

Men are dogs. Guys only want one thing. The human male evolved to be promiscuous. From Charlie Sheen to David Petraeus, our cultural landscape is littered with seemingly endless examples of men who in one way or another live down to these low expectations. Perhaps men are just hardwired to disappoint, and the sooner we all accept that grim reality, the more inured to heartbreak we'll all be. Or so the popular stereotypes tell us.


For decades, the dominant direction in popular science has been towards a dim view of male self-control. That trend may have reached its nadir a few years ago when the authors of A Natural History of Rape suggested that sexual assault was simply an evolutionary adaptation –- and one which could be best circumvented by urging women to cover up. This science (which is often misrepresented in media coverage) is reinforced by a relentless barrage of stories about philandering public figures. Men and women alike end up buying into a myth of male weakness, deploying suspicion and cynicism as a prophylaxis against the pain of betrayal.

But what if everything we think we know about men –- and boys –- is wrong? A new book suggests that our stereotypes about guys are rooted more in myth than in science. In Challenging Casanova: Beyond the Stereotype of the Promiscuous Young Male, psychology professor Andrew Smiler argues that most young men would rather have emotional and physical intimacy with one partner than rack up a slough of numbers on the bedpost.

If there's one mistake we consistently make about men, Smiler argues, it's that they aspire to be "Casanovas" (promiscuous men, after Giacomo Casanova, the 18th century Venetian womanizer who documented sleeping with 116 over a period of 40 years.) Whether motivated by a hunger for status in the eyes of other men, or driven by the (supposed) evolutionary imperative to spread their seed, most men want one thing -– but never with just one person. So goes the myth.

Smiler cites the findings of the International Sexuality Description Project which found that when asked about what they'd like to have happen in the next month, 25% of young men wanted to have two or more sexual partners in that time frame –- something that only 5% of young women admitted to wanting. The researchers themselves, he notes, focused on the obvious takeaway: men are statistically more likely to admit to wanting multiple sexual partners than women. Smiler points out, however, that the researchers downplayed the more significant conclusion: 75% of young men, despite the cultural pressures towards heterosexual male promiscuity, wanted only one (or zero) partners in the upcoming month.

In Challenging Casanova, Smiler notes that heterosexual young men tend to fall into three categories: a small percentage of "players" with a high number of sexual partners; an equally small percentage of young (almost always devoutly religious) dudes who are determined to remain abstinent until marriage, and a much larger third group whom he argues want to follow "a reasonably traditional, romantic approach to dating." Even when they're "hooking up" (a practice that is neither as novel nor as ubiquitous as wistful and censorious aging pundits imagine) these guys are engaging in the gateway behavior into what they hope will be a relationship.

These findings contradict most of our received wisdom about what young men really want. "I'm constantly told that the ‘boys are lying' to me about what they really want," Smiler says in a phone interview. "The Casanova myth is so deeply ingrained that people are convinced that boys who claim to want relationships rather than casual sex are either incredibly rare or full of crap." The small number of genuinely promiscuous boys is explained away by absence of opportunity rather than absence of desire; the myth that most young men would be Casanovas if they could is as tenacious as it is unfounded. There seem to be few other aspects of human sexual behavior where the disconnect between reality and perception is so vast.

The new research about young men and romance is hard to accept because the emerging trend of "caring, romantic boys" doesn't gibe with our experiences of an older generation of men. Yet Millenial guys are genuinely different in their attitudes towards sex than their Gen X and Boomer elders. A substantial part of that evolution can be explained by a much-more widespread acceptance of cross-sex friendship. "Today, most boys have at least one friend who happens to be female –- a ‘girl friend' but not a ‘girlfriend,'" Smiler writes; until recently, "that was incredibly rare." The mainstreaming of platonic friendships with the other sex has transformed young men's attitudes towards sex, Smiler suggests -– and it has done so for the better.

Yet while guys today are much more likely to have female friends than their fathers did, they remain at a key disadvantage in terms of receiving accurate sexual information from their parents. Smiler notes that far fewer boys than girls received "the Talk" from an adult. Those that do get the talk tend to get it from their mothers; while many moms might prefer that their boys get the "birds and bees" discussion from their fathers, too many dads are still reluctant to talk seriously and candidly with their sons. Paternal reticence explains why boys, to a greater degree than their sisters, get sexual information from peers and the media rather than parents. That boys have "evolved" as rapidly as they have despite being immersed in a Casanova-celebrating culture — and despite the continued absence of parental direction -– is all the more remarkable.

Perhaps the biggest take-away from Smiler's work is that men's sexual choices are just that, choices. Physiology and evolution may influence desires, but they don't override any man's capacity to reflect before acting. The myth of male weakness and the Casanova Complex suggest that men are ultimately powerless in the face of their sexual impulses, and that it is the responsibility of those who are less horny -– women — to cover their bodies, set healthy boundaries, and generally prevent civilization from collapsing into orgiastic chaos. Young men today don't have any less testosterone than did their dads, but when it comes to sex, they're thinking and acting differently. Biology hasn't changed, but boys have, and for the better. May they teach their parents well.

Link

This reminds me of part of an ethnographic study detailed in Dude, You're A Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School. The author spent eighteen months at a California high school, essentially going to school with the students and observing their behavior, as well as conducting one-on-one interviews with students. She found something interesting in talking with the boys about their views about romance:

When not in groups - when in one-on-one interactions with boys or girls - boys were much less likely to engage in gendered and sexed dominance practices. In this sense, boys became masculine in groups (Connell 1996; Woody 2002). With the exception of Chad, none of the boys spoke with me the same way they spoke with other boys about girls, girls' bodies, and their own sexual adventures. When with other boys, they postured and bragged. In one-on-one situations with me (and possibly with each other) they often spoke touchingly about their feelings about and insecurities with girls. While the boys I interviewed, for the most part, asserted the centrality of sexual competence to a masculine self, several of them rejected this definition or at least talked differently about girls and sexuality in their interviews.

[...]

In interviews boys often posited themselves as "different from other guys," while in public they acted just like the guys they derided. Heath, for instance, told me that he was "probably less" like an average guy because "I don't try and get with every girl I see." Like others, Heath became a "guy" in public, not in private interactions. Heath was the boy who had dressed like an elf for Halloween and accosted the passing girls in order to procure a kiss. Outside this sort of group setting, Heath dismissed lecherous behavior as something "other guys" did, but when in public he acted just like these "other guys."

It seems as if the public and private selves of adolescent boys and young men are very different, and it causes misperceptions about what the typical guy is actually like, which causes them to act differently in groups than what they consider their "true" selves to be. And when she mentions this idea that "boys became masculine in groups"; she is essentially applying Judith Butler's thoughts about how we construct our gendered self in opposition to a "constitutive outside", which is itself constructed from various "abject identities." These "abject identities" consist of unacceptably (by social standards) gendered selves. In her interactional model this "abject identity" must be named in order to give it social power and create a "threatening specter." And in her book, she identifies the "fag" as occupying this space as that "threatening spectre" in the California high school she performed her ethnographic survey. Anyway, it is the social pressure of other boys, primarily, that serves as the enforcement for this paradigm. I think this is basically a good deal of why the behavior publicly and privately is so different; publicly there is such strong pressure to "perform", particularly demonstrating (or at least claiming to have) sexual competence, even if one is an adolescent with limited sexual experience.

 

[shinobi602]

A positive article on men?

No no, this won't do.

 

[Jacob]

In Challenging Casanova, Smiler notes that heterosexual young men tend to fall into three categories: a small percentage of "players" with a high number of sexual partners; an equally small percentage of young (almost always devoutly religious) dudes who are determined to remain abstinent until marriage, and a much larger third group whom he argues want to follow "a reasonably traditional, romantic approach to dating."

I feel like this really shouldn't be news to anyone who has been or knows young men.

Good article though. I think it's cool that Jezebel posted it.

 

[Solo]

A positive article on men?

No no, this won't do.

The war on men has a cease-fire!

 

[shadyspace]

I don't know. Because they're idiots? I don't know any men or women who believe this. Can't see how you can have actual social interactions with humans and hold onto this notion.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

I just wanna be loved!

 

[Count Dookkake]

I prefer holes to hearts, but it's not like they are mutually exclusive.

 

[Emily Chu]

SURPRISE!!!

theres a <3 pumping blood to that dick...

:3

 

[mltplkxr]

In Challenging Casanova, Smiler notes that heterosexual young men tend to fall into three categories: a small percentage of "players" with a high number of sexual partners; an equally small percentage of young (almost always devoutly religious) dudes who are determined to remain abstinent until marriage, and a much larger third group whom he argues want to follow "a reasonably traditional, romantic approach to dating."

Huh. Interesting quote. A cynic would interpret that as saying there's a high number of girls going for a small percentage of players; a small percentage of women left for a small percentage of abstinent dudes and an equally small percentage of women for a much larger group of guys who want to follow "a reasonably traditional, romantic approach to dating."...

 

[Mumei]

Can't see how you can have actual social interactions with humans and hold onto this notion.

I don't see how, either, and yet the myth persists nonetheless. I have had family members express similar views, and I've seen those views expressed in media. The whole "men are insatiable and not really in control of their sexual urges" myth is the underpinnings of something like this:

Last summer, then-DPS Officer Robb Gary Evans got lit, drove himself to a bar, flashed his badge to get in for free, walked up behind a woman who was a friend of a friend but whom he had never met, put his hand up her skirt, and ran his fingers across her genitals. July 2, he was convicted of felony sexual abuse. September 6, he was released with two years of probation and 100 hours of community service and won&#8217;t be required to register as a sex offender. His victim was released with a good talking-to.

The judge sentencing Evans, Coconino County [Arizona] Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Hatch, said she hoped both the defendant and the victim would take lessons away from the case.

Bad things can happen in bars, Hatch told the victim, adding that other people might be more intoxicated than she was.

&#8220;If you wouldn&#8217;t have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you,&#8221; Hatch said.

Hatch told the victim and the defendant that no one would be happy with the sentence she gave, but that finding an appropriate sentence was her duty.

&#8220;I hope you look at what you&#8217;ve been through and try to take something positive out of it,&#8221; Hatch said to the victim in court. &#8220;You learned a lesson about friendship and you learned a lesson about vulnerability.&#8221;

Hatch said that the victim was not to blame in the case, but that all women must be vigilant against becoming victims.

&#8220;When you blame others, you give up your power to change,&#8221; Hatch said that her mother used to say.​

And I think you also see it in much less ugly ways in the way that you see people talk in topics on GAF about platonic friendships between boys and girls, for instance; boys might be more interested in the possibility of sex in those friendships, but some people act as if that possibility is the only reason straight guys have those friendships in the first place.

 

[Emily Chu]

Huh. Interesting quote. A cynic would interpret that as saying there's a high number of girls going for a small percentage of players; a small percentage of women left for a small percentage of abstinent dudes and an equally small percentage of women for a much larger group of guys who want to follow "a reasonably traditional, romantic approach to dating."...

thatswhyIdon'thaveaGF.jpg

 

[G-Fex]

I don't have a one track mind, in fact I think my mind is off it's tracks.

 

[Pimpbaa]

SURPRISE!!!

theres a <3 pumping blood to that dick...

:3

I want more than sex. But I still like to have a lot of it.

 

[Eidan]

I attribute sleeping around as part of the pursuit of a fulfilling relationship. So when I was single I did my fair share of sleeping around until I found someone cared about. I'd think that was fairly common.

 

[border]

I think it's only half-right.

Men don't actively desire to be promiscuous, but they value sex over so much else that they end up in relationships they don't really like because of it. Then they start looking elsewhere once the sex has stopped being as fun as it used to be.

 

[eastmen]

And I think you also see it in much less ugly ways in the way that you see people talk in topics on GAF about platonic friendships between boys and girls, for instance; boys might be more interested in the possibility of sex in those friendships, but some people act as if that possibility is the only reason straight guys have those friendships in the first place.

Once I hit puberty all my relationships with girls came about because I wanted to have sex with them. Sure after awhile they settled into being friends only but if chance opened up I wouldn't pass it up.


As for adult males cheating. This is harder but I firmly believe in many cases its because the relationship is already over nad has been for some time . The only reason they were still together is because of the expectations of family / friends and society.

I've broken up with many girls because as the relationship settled in sex because more infrequent and the emotional attachment lessoned along with it.

Popular media shows sex as a big part of any young healthy relationship , it also shows the flip side that after kids there is little to know sex. So of course you would look else where for sex.

 

[Aguirre]

some men just want a little spoon :>

 

[Conciliator]

I'm a little skeptical of this(not to the point of being dismissive), for at least a couple of reasons, one is which how the survey was conducted I expect change the end results immensely(was it on paper? if so, what was the context of the other questions? if not, were they asked by men? were they asked by women?), another of which is that there's just really convincing evolutionary evidence that men would be more prone to promiscuity(not least of which because men are just able to reproduce with way way greater frequency).

That said, in terms of ethics it just doesn't matter that much. Evolutionary psychology is never a reason to behave or not behave a certain way, just a possible reason why me might behave the way we already do. We don't need evolution or primitivism to back us up to declare rape to be vile, or to be men who want to have long-term relationships.

 

[Bleepey]

Considering how there are few guys looking to just smang on the OKC thread. There might be some truth to it. Out of ky circle of friends, a lot of them are man whores, but man-whoring ain't easy.

 

[Mudkips]

I don't know. Because they're idiots? I don't know any men or women who believe this.

Check out a GAF female teacher, male victim(s), rape thread. Half of the posts are "Nice!" or "Where were these teachers when I was in school?". Plenty of people believe that men only want sex, or that if you dangle a vagina in front of a man he will be compelled to fuck it.

 

[Count Dookkake]

Check out a GAF female teacher, male victim(s), rape thread. Half of the posts are "Nice!" or "Where were these teachers when I was in school?". Plenty of people believe that men only want sex, or that if you dangle a vagina in front of a man he will be compelled to fuck it.

Not if it is too dangly.

 

[Chinner]

some men just want a little spoon :>

do you want a little spoon?

 

[Aguirre]

do you want a little spoon?

uhm, im not a guy? so no

 

[Angry Grimace]

Because its both true and not true; sure, obviously most men are deeper than just grunting and thrusting, but its basically true that the desire for sex is so deeply ingrained in the male instinct it has a tendency to override logic, i.e. when people with everything to lose like Clinton or Petreaus or whoever will take sex at the risk of their entire livelihoods.

Sex is the Grand Champion of All Time&#8482;

 

[YoungHav]

It's obvious that highschool age men will posture in public. I dunno, I can't speak for everyone but from what I remember from that age, a good amount of people attempted to mimic adult romantic relationships or had naive outlooks on love. As they got older (in college) there was less focus on 'going steady' and more on casual relationships.

And there's a false equivalency going on, they interview highschoolers and young men about their honest views, and bring up Patraeus and Sheen for the promiscuous side of the argument. Uhhhh, the latter men are men of power with groupies, of course they are "dogs". Give those highschoolers fame overnight and they will go look for The One after a few dozen one night orgasms.

 

[Zzoram]

IIRC there was a study a while back that showed that men actually like to cuddle more than women do, in complete contradiction to the myth portrayed in the media.

 

[The Anti-Monitor]

Because its both true and not true; sure, obviously most men are deeper than just grunting and thrusting, but its basically true that the desire for sex is so deeply ingrained in the male instinct it has a tendency to override logic, i.e. when people with everything to lose like Clinton or Petreaus or whoever will take sex at the risk of their entire livelihoods.

Sex is the Grand Champion of All Time™

With all the female teachers getting caught nowadays, you'd assume people would stop thinking this is a male-only issue, at least.

It's a dumb cliche, but society keeps expecting guys to be only desiring of sex and REAL MEN and stuff so it all comes with the territory. And I thought everyone knew high school guys in presence of their friends will say almost literally anything to be seen as "players".

 

[Macmanus]

Finally a respite from these decades of browbeating.

 

[BuggyDClown]

Check out a GAF female teacher, male victim(s), rape thread. Half of the posts are "Nice!" or "Where were these teachers when I was in school?". Plenty of people believe that men only want sex, or that if you dangle a vagina in front of a man he will be compelled to fuck it.

Not fair. Just because guys (like women) want sex doesn't mean that it's ALL they want. I want water but it doesn't mean I dont like or need food. I love to swim under water but I still need to breathe.

I also love food, but if you put it in front of me I won't eat it unless I like it or I'm hungry.

Those 50% of comments come from the fact that in highschool we guys are horny as fuck. I also had a lot of hot teachers, and I don't know a single guy whom I've ever met who has never wanted to smang one of his hot teachers. That's where those comments come from.

Sex and Love are not mutually exclusive. Even guys turn down sex, I know I've been too tired or not in the mood. Yet other times It's all I care about. I don't get this strange black and white mentality.

 

[KevinRo]

So, basically %25 of male population are Alpha.

 

[Alucrid]

I just want a girl who wears Isabel marantz sneakers

 

[Wiseblade]

Is the idea that "men can't control themselves" really that bought into? I always thought the majority of people understood it was a myth.

uhm, im not a guy? so no

Suuure.

 

[G-Fex]

let's not listen to aguirre anymore.

 

[hawkshockey11]

uhm, im not a guy? so no

Yes you are.

 

[Wiseblade]

let's not listen to aguirre anymore.

It's hard when the fourth post in every thread is some variation of "As a woman, my opinion on this topic is..."

 

[FStop7]

I want to cuddle so hard.

 

[Drinkel]

I'm curious to as whether the guys answering the question assume that wanting more sex partners means not having a relationship cause that's how we traditionally view it. Would the answers be different if they suggested an open relationship with a primary close partner but with the ability to sleep with others on occasion.

I was under the impression that human desire was evolved in an environment similar to that of the Bonobos and this seems to kind of go against that assumption.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

I'm a little skeptical of this(not to the point of being dismissive), for at least a couple of reasons, one is which how the survey was conducted I expect change the end results immensely(was it on paper? if so, what was the context of the other questions? if not, were they asked by men? were they asked by women?), another of which is that there's just really convincing evolutionary evidence that men would be more prone to promiscuity(not least of which because men are just able to reproduce with way way greater frequency).

That said, in terms of ethics it just doesn't matter that much. Evolutionary psychology is never a reason to behave or not behave a certain way, just a possible reason why me might behave the way we already do. We don't need evolution or primitivism to back us up to declare rape to be vile, or to be men who want to have long-term relationships.

I generally agree with you. I suppose the crux of the argument is "Is there free will?" Does the "person" include an entity or process separate from purely perceptual biological processes which can exert ultimate control of that person's actions in spite of influence, or is all behavior just the sum total of neural impulses and thus entirely deterministic and subject simply to the environment interacting with preset biases (though still nearly infinitely complex)? Can the mind operate independently of the brain? According to my understanding, quantum theory seems to be tangentially exploring this concept with the ideas of the "observer" and randomly collapsing wave states, but even then I don't think science has enough information on either the brain or the mind to draw any conclusions as of yet. Anecdotal evidence in this area, as has been said, is highly contentious and dependent on the circumstances involved, so studies like these are rather flawed as far as gaining any meaningful data.

 

[Brian Griffin]

IIRC there was a study a while back that showed that men actually like to cuddle more than women do, in complete contradiction to the myth portrayed in the media.

Cuddling rules. Especially after some hot sex with the wife.

I've never known anyone who actually believed the "men only want sex" stuff. I always thought it existed for the purpose of jokes or plots of movies/TV but no one really subscribed to the idea if you asked them. I guess people are dumber than I thought.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

Because they're feminist?

 

[Zzoram]

Men probably do like sex more than women though, even if men want relationships as much as women.

 

[Entropia]

Because they're feminist?

Men cannot be feminists! They can be "allies of feminists" but not actual feminists. They haven't gone through the hardships of being a woman and therefore cannot speak to those experiences and call themselves feminists.

 

[Tesseract]

we're 10^9*7 peoples strong.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

Men cannot be feminists! They can be "allies of feminists" but not actual feminists. They haven't gone through the hardships of being a woman and therefore cannot speak to those experiences and call themselves feminists.

No, I mean Jezebel are feminists. And I say that in a negative light. You would have to be one to assume something as stupid as all guys just want sex.

I'm glad they are finally reaching this moment of enlightenment.

 

[Lambtron]

Men cannot be feminists! They can be "allies of feminists" but not actual feminists. They haven't gone through the hardships of being a woman and therefore cannot speak to those experiences and call themselves feminists.

You're wrong.

Societal ideas of gender performance are fucked up and incorrect. I am shocked.

No, I mean Jezebel are feminists. And I say that in a negative light. You would have to be one to assume something as stupid as all guys just want sex.

You definitely destroyed that strawman. Good work.

 

[Metrotab]

I didn't know this "Casanova Myth" was still seriously considered. None of my friends ever acted like one.

 

[phosphor112]

We have our sexual urges, but I think this article is correct. I honestly couldn't ask anything more than settling down with someone. I didn't want to have girlfriend after girlfriend or partner after partner.

Glad I'm married now.

 

[shadyspace]

If you only value women for sex you'll never have anyone to clean your apartment

 

[Malvolio]

Fuck this. How will women know I'm special if I can't tell them that I'm not like the other guys?!

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

If you only value women for sex you'll never have anyone to clean your apartment

But my apartment is always clean . Am I too clean. WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ME SHADY.