I don't think it's really anything new. The "girls of the world ain't nothing but trouble" mentality is something that's often expressed, especially by guys who are bitter about ended relationships (it's also a pretty good song by Fresh Prince). The only difference is advertisers trying to cash in.

I often hear women make similar pronouncements (ie "all men are jerks"), in much the same way. It's more something people say to express bitterness than something to be taken seriously.

As far as the commerials go, and keep in mind I smashed my television 8 months ago for a film so I haven't seen any of them, but as far as the descriptions go, it doesn't read to me - necessarily - like "women rate below men's other appetites," but like "man this is a good fucking taco! Better than sex!" Which leaves the female form and sex as still the predominant appetite. With the exception of "this amazing product!"

But then maybe I'm wrong for the aforementioned reasons.

The articles other comments about heretofore unseen languishing of the male libido, I can't comment on , as I have no experience with such.

i just found it odd that "pretty good song" and "fresh prince" occupied the same sentence :)

otoh, parents just don't understand.

it's hilarious to see in the article's comments how many things are to blame for the man-boy phenomenon. mothers? birth control pills? society? advertisers? classism?

surely not man-boys themselves.

but who cares if a loser who prefers bud light to a good woman likes her or not?

i agree.

guinness maybe

but bud light?

I really think this is a case of the patriarchy shitting on hetrosexual men and feminists laughing from the side lines. If these guys were out buggering each other no-one would bat an eyelid. But because they're more interested in beer and tacos than girls it's suddenly a big crisis, talk about enforced hetronormativity.

If they prefer beer and tacos, that's fine, and I hope they're happy. I can't see where all the animosity - "regression", "man-boy", "loser", "weird" - comes from. If I'd have thought anyone would be sympathetic to people being pushed into unwanted gender roles it'd be you lot. There isn't a problem here at all, if these guys think girls are more trouble than they're worth that's a perfectly legitmate choice.

I think her hypothesis that the supposed decrease in male libido is enviromental or caused by antidepressants is interesting. But considering that masculinity has always been measured by libido, and very important for a man to project, it may just be that some men are now feeling more able to be honest about the fact that they don't, in fact, want to fuck everything that moves. At least not once they pass 14. Male libido does have peaks and valleys too, after all. It was just not acceptable to say so.

And there have always been ads/sitcoms that featured women choosing chocolate over sex.

On a smiliar topic, what do women think of websites ranting against marriage how it is such a bad deal for men because they could loose everything and that they should avoid it especially in the uk and USA. I would just like to hear a female on the subject

I realy dislike those websites because of their overt and unashamed misogyny and chauvinism. There are basically two schools of thought on the subject of men's reluctance to marry:

(1) One group of feminists oppose marriage as a patriarchal institution, and feel women are best served by maintaining their independence. So they don't have a problem with men not marrying, though may have a problem with their motivation.

(2) The other group feel cohabiting as opposed to marriage leaves women financially vulnerable, and worry about this. They don't really have a problem with people not marrying - that's an individual choice and you can't force people to marry. But they do want to protect women, so they're in favour of laws which extend marriage-like protections to cohabiting situations.

you know, i dont even like most girls. most girls are annoying and neurotic, and most men i know become complete losers once they start dating a woman, who is usually completely insane. she calls 800 times a day, she whines, she uses all sorts of manipulative tactics. i mean i am a woman and a feminist, and i think the majority of women suck.
most women who are cool and fun to be around, in my mind, are feminists. its just funny that guys never seem to see past the "feminist" label to see that we actually are much cooler and more stable than non feminists.

To be fair the phenomenon isn't new, nor is it exactly all that shocking. The idea has been around forever and the fact that the media are using it to their advantage to promote something should come as no surprise. This type of advertising has been used in the past; consider the usage of it in the other direction for example. Women have often been encouraged to consider a product as being more important than a male. The aforementioned example cited by emjabbee of chocolate is barely the tip of the iceberg.

More to my point, this type of advertising simply represents a certain facet of heterosexual relations that many choose to ignore. Some more extreme women, (AND BY NO MEANS DO I CHOOSE TO CATEGORIZE THEM AS FEMINISTS OR STEREOTYPE FEMINISTS AS REPRESENETING THEM) push for the idea of no longer being desired. They reject the suggestion of a man longing for them; they declare it sexist for a man to see them in a sexual manner.

I recently met a feminist who is NOT of the caste that believes that sexual advances are an insult to women (a woman who sees the potential for sex to be a natural and enjoyable event.) But as a result of her feminist colleagues, (those pushing for the elimination of sexual innuendo in heterosexual relations,) I expected her to believe otherwise. I expected to be slapped for the mere suggestion of anything more than a good night kiss. More so, I expected to be kicked in a very tender area should I suggest that she return to my apartment with me.

I am a straight male. When meeting a female who publicly declares herself a feminist I’ve found that I need to caution myself. With some women, it’s basically “God forbid that he expresses interest in a sexual manner.� In my experience, the expression of sexual interest has been (on more than one occasion) labeled as sexist and chauvinistic. As a result of members of the female gender that behave like this, I and my fellow heterosexual males have learned that there are other human urges that are much easier to succumb to.

Extreme feminists have managed to elope with the Christian right in declaring that any fornication outside of a serious relationship is evil. They have made men feel guilty about their basic instinctual attraction to the opposite sex.

Now, men see their basic instincts that find women attractive to be evil.
Now, men see their libido as a fault.
Now, men are embarrassed to find a woman attractive.
Now, men are scared of the idea of wanting to kiss a woman, let alone sleep with her.
Now, men see nourishment (a taco perhaps?) as a homosapian urge that they DON’T feel guilt, embarrassed, or scared of.

The basic human urges are few and far between, but with some members of the female sex having created a degree of nervousness when it comes to pursuing one of them, men have turned to the ones that they can still indulge in without guilt. Advertising companies picked up on it, and went with it. Should we be surprised?

the (first wave at least) feminist mantra was/is that marriage is a male designed institution designed to subjugate women, and benefit men.

believe it or not, there are many women (and men) who would argue that it benefits women more than men. i think it depends, but there are certainly many unhappy men who, ex post divorce court proceedings, would make that argument.

frankly, i don't think marriage was designed to benefit either gender. i think it evolved as an insitution to provide a good environment for children to be raised in. i think both genders can get some benefits from marriage, while also obviously making sacrifices.

certainly, marriage is not "natural", but the whole point of society is that we can rise above our natural urges and create/participate in societal institutions that better us all, while respecting individual liberties to opt out from most (apart from the rule of law and such obvious necessities of the social contract)

Hoi! Ick, WandererNotLost, just ick. Women tend to prefer sex within a relational context, not neccesarily a serious or even romantic relationship, just in that context. Studies of women's sexuality consistently come up with women having more satisfying sex within that context. Why should feminism advocate for a sexual framework the majority of women are attempting to avoid that tends to be exploitative of women? So that you can feel like a good feminist while having sex on your terms? Ok, kudos if that's how things pan out for you to mutual satisfaction, of course, but it's not likely to become feminist policy to arrange it for you.

Second, "attraction to women" is patently not instinctual, if anything being sexual might be and even then there are enough happy asexuals to suggest otherwise. The way you express whatever sexuality you have is entirely uninstinctual, it's up to you, so don't be surprised if anyone takes anyone else to task for their voluntary method of expression, even feminists. Treating a woman as a means to an end, by bringing up sex artificially early in your interactions, is not going to go over well and is generally considered rude. Women vary, but we can avoid making an ass of ourselves by reading cues. Sometimes we slip up, that's social interaction for you. Feminists frown on treating women as less than human sexually, while religious folks expect you to treat them that way and leave no room for the woman's choice. Your ability to get off is not feminism's concern, her ability to make free choices about her sexuality is, if you happen to get off, that's a happy ending for everyone.

"Feminists frown on treating women as less than human sexually, while religious folks expect you to treat them that way and leave no room for the woman's choice. "

where do you get these unsubstantiated lies from? fwiw, as a counterexample, according to Jewish Law (torah), in a marriage, it is the man who has a DUTY to provide sex for the woman, NOT the other way around. are jews, or at least orthodox jews (who are torah observant) thus nonreligious by your reasoning?

i don't know ANY religious folks who "leave no room for woman's choice"

get off your antireligious lying bigotry please

tia

I'm finding these last few posts a little strange...

From my experiences with my fellow feminists it seems that they are more, not less, interested in casual sexual relationships than their less enlightened counterparts. I find that being a feminist helps you to over come terms like "slut" "whore" and "tramp" so that you are able to have sex on your terms. (And by that I don't mean that all feminists sleep around, but that they are more likely to do what they want, whether that is abstenance or bed-hopping).

And Jabosian is kinda right. If you look back at Puritan American Lit. you'll find that women were considered the hyper-sexed ones because they were weaker against the devils temptations. It was the husbands job to sexually please the woman to keep her from straying, and one of the few ways to get a divorce back then was if the husband was failing to perform his "husbandly duties" in the bedroom.

Um, katie, I hate to break it to you but a hatred of women is called "misogyny" and not "feminism." Standing up for your own rights is one thing, but when you're doing it in such a way that you're putting down all other women, you're just falling for homosocial crap.

I'm reminded of Jules Feiffer's comment about Superman (in the early years) stubbornly ignoring Lois Lane: "The opposite of the guy who can't get a woman is the guy who can get all the women he wants, but isn't interested."

But Labyrus, your point about the message is pretty sound too.

i'm "kinda right"?

wow ... talk about "damning by faint praise" :)

there are basically two schools of thought here. one goes like this. the double standard is wrong. women who have lots of sex with lots of doods are 'sluts' whereas men who do so are "studs". therefore, women should rebel against this and have lots of sex with lots of doods and demand that they are not 'sluts' etc.

the other argument goes that men who have meaningless sex with women are just interested in them as objects and women shouldn't play that game. the other side would say - "no, go ahead and use men for ThEIR bodies" just like men have done with women, and that's "empowering"

regardless, the fact is that (generally speaking), women are the "deciders" (lol) when it comes to sex in most circumstances because the reality is that many guys (especially younger men) will pretty much have sex with anything with a pulse, and if women didn't have a double standard and act as the "regulators" by saying "no" and demanding more than meaningless sex, people would be having meaningless sex willy nilly

wait a second. i think i just described college :l

I think this is a positive development. Let us face the facts: men and women are not compatible in modern society. The only solution is to abolish heterosexuality and liberate women from man's libido, and liberate man from women's rapacious greed. Neither sex desires to be exploited as they are.

I agree with Susie Bright that the "cooties" may really be about the prevalence of antidepressants and maybe the estrogen analogs polluting our environment.

Among people I know around my age and many younger, I am one of the few people I know who is not on any kind of medication.

In regards to mental health talking things out with friends, thinking logically about your problems, being proactive with your problems, vigorous aerobic exercise, a good diet, and plenty of rest will get you far unless you have a serious, serious condition.

I doubt that many people have that level of whatever problem they have. People are just being over medicated.

Katie, that phenomenon is called, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Average dudes inexplicably devour that high-maintenance crap. Later on, they just shrug their shoulders when aforementioned women become Bridezillas.

And there have always been ads/sitcoms that featured women choosing chocolate over sex.

I hate these ads, even more than the Yoplait girls.

you know, i dont even like most girls. most girls are annoying and neurotic, and most men i know become complete losers once they start dating a woman, who is usually completely insane. she calls 800 times a day, she whines, she uses all sorts of manipulative tactics. i mean i am a woman and a feminist, and i think the majority of women suck.

This was hilarious and made my day.