Skip to main content

See also:

The history of 'casual' sex: feminists wanted sexual freedom ... and they got it

Can a woman engage in sexually promiscuous behavior, and still find a husband?  In today's society ... yes.
Can a woman engage in sexually promiscuous behavior, and still find a husband? In today's society ... yes.
Google Images and JenniferWilliams.com

If there is one criticism I receive from a number of women regarding my books (usually from women who have yet to thoroughly read one or more of my books), it is that I place too much emphasis on the pursuit of short-term and/or non-monogamous 'casual' sex rather than the pursuit of emotionally profound, monogamous 'relationship sex.'

For starters, that criticism is not altogether valid. In my first book, Mode One: Let the Women Know What You're REALLY Thinking, I discuss the power of effective interpersonal communication skills for all aspects of dating and relationships ... not just the pursuit of short-term or non-monogamous sex. Even though the book is targeted toward male readers, many women have read the book and benefited from it.

The book of mine that does focus almost exclusively on the pursuit of casual sex would be Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex. In that book, I basically teach single heterosexual men how to identify and seduce women who I refer to as 'Pretenders' (i.e., women who will publicly give off the impression that they are prudish and not really into short-term or non-monogamous sex, but behind closed doors, these women are very kinky, free-spirited, and have no problem engaging in a few episodes of casual sex).

You know what is most interesting to me? The fact that the media will have you believe that men are the ones who primarily benefit from the idea of 'hooking up,' when the reality is that it was actually women who first pushed for more sexual freedom and 'ownership' over their own bodies.

If you do your research, you will find that men have always wanted their female sex partners to be totally monogamous to them. Very few men wanted to marry a woman who had already exchanged orgasms with another man. Let's take a brief look at some factors that play into today's more "open-minded" attitude toward sex.

I. A Brief History: Previous century marriages and how Dr. Sigmund Freud's 'Madonna / Whore Complex' factored in those marriages

First, please read my previous article where I break down the ins and outs of Freud's Madonna / Whore Complex. If you are too lazy to read, I will give you the short version: In the 19th Century, famed psychologist Dr. Sigmund Freud asserted that a majority of the men in society wanted at least two women in their lives: one woman who presents herself as a "prudish good girl" who would share the best qualities of that man's mother, and be a great nanny and nurturer to his offspring; and another woman who would present herself as more of a kinky 'sex siren' who would be willing to help him fulfill all of his sexual fantasies, and who he could enjoy many episodes of erotically uninhibited orgasmic pleasure with.

The concept of the 'mistress' existed many years before Freud was even born. One of the first incarnations of the mistress role was the 'Courtesan.' A Courtesan was similar to a woman today that would be known as a high priced Call Girl or Erotic Escort.

In previous centuries, many of the men who had wealth, power, authority and a high degree of social status did not marry women for the sake of enjoyable sex. A good number of these types of men married a woman who was attractive, classy, intelligent, and well-spoken. The wife's role was to be a complement to the man's social stature, look good on his arm at formal social functions, and to be a great mother to his children.

One of the man's close friends or business associates would then identify and hire a sexy, erotically uninhibited Courtesan to become the man's primary sex partner. Plain and simple, her job was to obey and submit to each of the man's requests for sexual enjoyment and satisfaction. The role of the wife in this scenario was neither to satisfy the man in bed, nor be satisfied in bed. The wife's role was to engage in sexual relations primarily for the sake of reproduction.

Many of the wives knew about their husband's mistresses, and generally did not object. Their attitude was, "I am being taken care of financially .... I am living a great life ... who am I to complain?" Well, as you can expect, some women did begin to complain. Which leads us to . . .

II. The First Wave of Feminism: The Growing Disdain for Mistresses and Courtesans

As mentioned, many women who were the wives of men with wealth, power, and prestige did not mind their husbands engaging in sexual relations with one or more Courtesans. You have to remember that back in the day, not all women could just go to college, be offered a high paying job, and then subsequently take care of themselves.

In previous centuries, snagging a husband with great wealth was the equivalent to a woman being offered a job with a six-figure salary. So think about it: If you were a woman in this era, and your husband was having sex with one or two Courtesans, what would make you go from being "lenient" and "forgiving" toward that scenario to becoming angry, bitter, and spiteful about the same scenario? "Ah ... okay, got it," you're saying to yourself right now.

Wives were willing to tolerate their husbands having a mistress, as long as those mistresses "knew their place" and did not in any way threaten their lifestyle. Soon, many of the Courtesans were not satisfied with just being the "other woman." Many of them wanted to be upgraded from #2 to #1 (have things changed today? I think not). So some of the Courtesans started allowing themselves to purposely get pregnant in order to gain more access to the lavish lifestyles experienced by many of the more conservative wives. Many men began replacing their older wives with younger Courtesans, and that did not sit well with the recently dumped wives.

As a result, the married women started finding ways to undermine the appeal of the more free-spirited Courtesans. Soon, terms like "whore" began to be used more and more, as well as the similar term of "slut." Basically, to refer to a woman as a "whore" or "slut" was the same thing as essentially categorizing a woman as being "only good for sex." In other words, once a woman got branded as a 'whore' or 'slut,' she was viewed as being "not good enough to marry." Many times, if the Courtesan became pregnant, the husband and demanding wife would pressure her to have an abortion.

Consequently, the end result of the Victorian Era was that all women in society were highly encouraged to present themselves as "marriage material." Many women felt that if they presented themselves as a candidate to be a man's wife, they would attract men who were willing to financially support them and enhance their level of social status. Conversely, if a woman was to continue to present herself as a 'whore' or 'slut,' she would never get married, never have children, and would only be seen as a 'sexual play toy' for men to use and then later discard.

III. The Second Wave of Feminism: Women not only want Equal Rights in the Workplace, but they want to 'Control Their Own Bodies' in Life and in the Bedroom

During the second major phase of feminism, the rift between women who respected the institution of marriage and the women who could care less about marriage became more prominent. In the media, it was men who were labeled 'the bad guy.' For those who really took a closer look at what was going on, they knew there was more to it than women who were being taken for granted vs. their more controlling male bosses and husbands. Feminism was really as much about 'prudish, marriage-minded women vs. kinky, promiscuous type women" as it was "women vs. men."

On one end, you had women who were married who wanted their (wealthy) husbands to pay more attention to them, put forth more effort to please and satisfy them in bed, and protect themselves financially in the event that their husbands decided to dump them and replace them with a younger woman when they reached their mid-to-late 40s or early 50s (Think of Michael Jordan's ex-wife, Juanita. She is set for life financially). Let's call this group 'The Disrespected Wives Club.'

On the other end, you had the women who had traditionally been the 'mistress' or 'on-the-side' types that wanted more opportunities for employment, more freedom over what type of men and how many men they could have sex with, and they wanted the women from 'The Disrespected Wives Club' to stop labeling them 'whores' and 'sluts' and instead be treated like women who were worthy of respect ... and even marriage (if that is what they wanted). Let's call this group 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club.' (Ever heard of Lola Montez? What about Christine Keeler? Both of these women would have been part of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club')

You starting to get the picture? On paper, feminism seemed like it was all about women coming together to form a monolithic mindset and a greater sense of solidarity in order to gain more respect and opportunities from men in modern society.

Underneath that public façade was the fact that the women who were part of 'The Disrespected Wives Club' hated the women who were part of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club.' Do you think that former First Lady Hillary Clinton has any genuine love for Monica Lewinsky? Clinton would probably share a dinner with Rush Limbaugh or Dick Morris before she would Lewinsky.

The advent of the birth control pill and other forms of contraceptives played right into the hands of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club.' You mean, they could enjoy sex with men (and particularly married men) and not risk becoming pregnant? Hallelujah!!

Both groups of women ultimately seemed to achieve most of their goals. The women of 'The Disrespected Wives Club' were able to become financially empowered and financially self-sufficient if they needed to, and they put themselves in a better position to earn a percentage of their husband's salary and net worth if their husband chose to divorce them and replace them with a younger woman. The women of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club' acted as the impetus for what is known as 'The Sexual Revolution,' and now they were free to openly show their sensuality by wearing sexually provocative clothing and engaging in sex outside the context of marriage if they chose to.

To the more naive factions of society, the 'Wives' and the 'Mistresses' appeared to be on the same page. When it came to better employment opportunities and financial opportunities, they actually were. But when it came to who they wanted to have sex with, and in what manner, the two groups were worlds apart.

The members of 'The Disrespected Wives Club' wanted their husbands to appreciate them more, be more faithful and monogamous, and look to please and satisfy them in bed just as much or more than their mistresses. After all, there are over twice as many nerve endings in a woman's clitoris than there are in the head of a man's penis (the average woman's clitoris has approximately 8,000 sensory nerve endings; the head of a man's penis has approximately 3,500 sensory nerve endings). Also, once again, they did not want to be just discarded when their beauty began to fade and be left struggling financially.

The members of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club' wanted to basically emulate the sexual promiscuity of men. They wanted to be able to 'have their cake and eat it too' just like they observed wealthy, powerful men doing so. Their attitude was, "We're not stupid. We know if we hold off on having sex until marriage, we are eventually going to be cheated on and taken for granted. Therefore, we are going to have our fun while we're young, and then maybe - just maybe - get married when we get older."

If there are women in today's society who genuinely frown on the notion of 'casual sex' and 'hooking up,' they have no one to blame but the members of their own gender who were active in the feminist movement in the late 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s. The main mantra of women during that time (and particularly those of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club') was, "These are OUR bodies, and we want to do with them what we desire!"

IV. The Third Wave of Feminism: "You can call me names ... but I am going to make you pay to have sex with me!"

As we all know, many aspects of society have changed between the 19th Century and the 21st Century. This is why the appeal of marriage is not the same as it once was.

Today, many women in society have accumulated just as much, if not more wealth than many men. Many women are also in positions of power, authority, and prestige. Feminists encouraged women to not stand for professional or personal "disrespect" by men, and included in that change of mindset was the declaration that no wife should have to put up with her husband having another woman as a 'mistress' or 'side piece.' Prostitution now remains legal in only a few countries (see list).

Despite these wide array of changes to societal customs and traditions, what aspects of male-female interactions have generally remained the same? I think you're beginning to surmise where I am headed.

Even as women have become more financially sufficient and empowered, most women still do not like the idea of another woman who may be more attractive than them, younger than them, sexier than them, and more free-spirited and erotically uninhibited than them trying to "steal" their husbands away from them. Women who are more prudish and focused on finding a husband - and more importantly, keeping a husband - still frown on the idea of women who tempt their husbands with quick, easily available sexual companionship.

Hence, why women of today still push for the idea of those free-spirited, promiscuous women to be categorized as "whores" and "sluts." And more importantly, many of these sexually conservative marriage-minded women have persuaded many of the men in society to share and maintain their judgmental attitudes and subjective labels toward the women who have a reputation for being sexually promiscuous.

On the other end, the women who are more of the "temptress" types have gained more influence and power over men. The freedom to engage in short-term and/or non-monogamous 'casual' sex is actually a form of financial power for many single women in society.

Laws against prostitution can easily be circumvented by women who are calculating and savvy, not to mention beautiful and sexy. They can simply get a man to 'wine and dine' them in exchange for sexual favors. A woman who allows herself to be open to short-term and/or non-monogamous sex increases her chances of having sex with men who are essentially "out of her league." To put it more bluntly, if all women were committed to remaining celibate until marriage, many women would end up married to men who were either poor, boring, or unsatisfying in bed ... or worse ... they would never be proposed to at all.

If you read my last book, The Possibility of Sex: How Naive and Lustful Men are Manipulated by Women Regularly, I briefly discuss an experience I had while a member of a cult-like church in Los Angeles. Every single man and woman in the church was obligated to practice premarital celibacy. Guess which gender had the harder time with this? On paper, you would assume the men. Nope. It was the women. During my two-and-a-half year membership in that church, I witnessed more women leave that church because of romantic and sexual frustration than there were men who left the church for the same reasons.

So much for the 'myth' that it is men who are more impatient to have sex with women prior to marriage.

V. How feminists have brainwashed men to feel guilty about the pursuit of casual sex

Talk about having your cake and eating it too. +1 for members of 'The Disrespected Wives Club,' +1 for members of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club,' and -2 for men who suffer from The Madonna / Whore Complex.

The women who were in the 'Disrespected Wives Club' said, "We are not going to stand for this type of disrespect by our husbands any longer!" End result: Far fewer women are willing to be 'Stay-at-Home Moms.' Women now cheat on their husbands as much as men previously cheated on them. And if you think about dumping your older wife and replacing her with a younger, more erotically uninhibited woman, you are going to pay for it in the form of a large divorce settlement.

The women who were in the 'Disrespected Mistresses Club' said, "We deserve just as much respect as married women receive, and we deserve the right to have sex outside the context of marriage with as many men as we choose to!" End result: If you choose to criticize any woman for being 'too promiscuous,' and subsequently label her a 'whore' or a 'slut' you will be labeled a 'chauvinist,' a 'misogynist', or if you are a woman, a 'jealous hater.'

What the feminists from 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club' did not anticipate were men like Hugh Hefner and other savvy businessmen (even street pimps) who knew how to exploit this new "free-spirited" type of woman. These men persuaded women to use their looks, their bodies, and overall sex appeal as a means of making money for the businessmen and the women (of course, more for the businessmen). Put simply, these 'sexually adventurous' women began to get exploited. Who got the blame? Men.

In the short-run, the original intentions of the feminist movement appeared to be a 'good' thing for all women, but in the long-run, their efforts basically backfired. In their attempt to prevent men from "having their cake and eating it too" (i.e., a husband being able to have a wife and one or two mistresses), they opened the door for women to be objectified and exploited for money both by men and by their own gender.

The feminists - both the frustrated 'Wives' and the frustrated 'Mistresses' - decided to play the middle from both ends, and they failed. What the feminists have never owned up to is the fact that in their attempt to combat a problem, they unintentionally created new and different problems.

Here is what the feminists of 'The Disrespected Wives Club' ideally wanted to happen:

1) They wanted married women to have more say-so and their own sense of financial earning power, instead of just having circumstances dictated to them by their control freak husbands;

2) They wanted married women to stop being treated like "child birthing machines" and nannies, and be treated more like complete human beings whose sexual needs are just as great as their husbands;

3) They wanted to stop the practice of married men maintaining mistresses and 'on-the-side women' while their wives were between the ages of 18 and 44, and then replacing the dutiful wives with a younger mistress when the wife reached the age of 45 - 50;

4) Similar to #3, they wanted the "dumped wives" to be able to earn a percentage of their ex-husband's net worth in the event that they are dismissed and replaced by a younger new second (or third) wife.

Being objective, those goals were not undesirable or unfair at all. They were reasonable.

Here is what the feminists of 'The Disrespected Mistresses Club' ideally wanted to happen:

1) They wanted the freedom to be just as sexually free-spirited and promiscuous as men;

2) They wanted married women to stop labeling them a 'whore' or 'slut' and categorizing them as 'unmarriageable';

3) They wanted the opportunity to use their looks and sex appeal to earn a living for themselves;

4) Similar to #2, they wanted men to treat them with the same degree of respect that they offer to the more prudish type women.

In other words, this group wanted to have their cake and eat it too.

Here is where things went wrong:

1) Once women were given the opportunity to gain just as much power and social status as men without being married, and earn just as much money as men without being married, guess what? Many women lost interest in getting married and many men lost interest in marrying these types of women.

2) Now, instead of women being treated like nothing more than glorified nannies and housekeepers, many women in today's society are treated like nothing more than sexually promiscuous nymphomaniacs who can be 'rented' for a few hours or a few days, and then discarded.

3) Before, you had men who would marry the more 'prudish' type women and just engage in casual relations with the more 'free-spirited' types. Now, the lines between those two types of women have become more "blurred." In other words, most of the women who used to be more 'prudish' have now become more kinky, promiscuous, and sexually adventurous ... and many of the promiscuous women who used to be totally indifferent toward marriage now want to know what it feels like to have a husband and children. A good number of men have become wary of both groups;

4) Today, society is full of women who are not getting married or pregnant because of 'true love,' but rather, many women identify men with wealth, fame, power, and prestige, and they set their sights on getting pregnant by these men so that they will have a regular income check come their way in the form of alimony, child support, or both. Many successful men have become "materialistic targets" rather than objects of love and affection.

5) The vast majority of men never wanted women to have the freedom to sleep with anyone and everyone, but once the sexual revolution took place, men bought into it, and started sowing their wild oats like crazy. Now, men are looked at as the "bad guys" for taking advantage of that new found 'sexual freedom' that women themselves pushed so hard for.

Some women decided to seek a "compromise" of sorts. Introducing the idea of the long-term "boyfriend and girlfriend relationship!!" This relationship is not quite marriage (you will not find mention of a 'boyfriend-girlfriend' relationship in the Christian Bible or other religious books), but at least it prevents Daddy's little girl from being labeled a 'whore' or a 'slut.' The young women can experience sex with different men while maintaining some degree of civil and social respect.

The reality though is this: If you believe in God, and you call yourself a devout Christian, then you know deep-down that 'boyfriend-girlfriend' sex is just another variation of casual sex. Especially if that 'boyfriend-girlfriend' relationship does not result in marriage.

Knowing what I know about history, I now laugh at women who call themselves "admonishing men" for choosing casual sex over relationship sex. It is one big hypocritical joke.

Women wanted more sexual satisfaction, and they got it. Women wanted more freedom to do whatever they wanted to do with their bodies, and they got it. Women wanted to earn more money in the workplace, and now they are able to.

Now that you have read this article, you realize the heart of what the TRUE scenario is and always has been.

The truth is, this was never really a "men vs. women" issue. Initially, this was an issue of "sexually unsatisfied married women vs. the women who wanted to steal their rich, powerful husbands away from them," and now it has evolved to an issue of "women who want marriage, indefinite monogamy, or financial favors in exchange for sex vs. the women who just want to enjoy sex with a number of different men who are going to satisfy them in bed (without the men promising monogamy or financial favors)."

Men have just been caught in the middle of these various battles between two groups of women with different sexual agendas and different sexual morals and values, and have been somehow tricked into taking some of the blame for it. If women never wanted 'casual' sex to take place, they would have never opened their legs unless they had a ring on their left hand. No wonder Book Author Esther Villar received death threats from feminist types when she wrote and published, The Manipulated Man. In that book, she basically pointed out a lot of what I am highlighting in this article: Women are playing the role of the 'victim' for a scenario and social environment that they themselves created.

If there was no such thing as marriage or all women in history had committed themselves to only having sex with a man who was their husband, most of the tenets and major principles of feminism that related to heterosexual women's love lives and sex lives would have never existed.

I, for one, will not express any "guilt" for engaging in casual sex. I know what the real deal is. Divorce rates are rising, marriage rates are decreasing, and women like Kim Kardashian have become celebrity superstars because of a sex tape. I will never apologize for wanting to engage in casual sex with women, and I will never allow myself to be made to feel guilty for 'using women's bodies for my own self-gratification.'

Men are by no means "innocent" in all of this. Many men with wealth and power have always wanted to have their cake and eat it too. The problem is and was, for many centuries, women were willing to (reluctantly) allow it. Then, all of the sudden, you had one group of women that said, "No more! Enough!" and another group of women that said, "Let them have multiple partners ... as long as you allow us to enjoy multiple partners too!!" And then the concept of 'feminism' came to the forefront. Women vs. women with men in the middle.

Not quite the ménage à trois us men were looking for, but we'll deal with it.

Like we always have.

Alan Roger Currie is the author of a number of books, including Mode One: Let the Women Know What You're REALLY Thinking and Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex. Currie's latest eBook, The Possibility of Sex: How Naive and Lustful Men are Manipulated by Women Regularly is also available exclusively on Amazon.com in their Kindle format. You can also download a copy of Currie's eBook on your iPhone, Android Smartphone, or other Smartphone.

Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie, the most-listened to talk radio podcast program in the category of "Romance" and "Self-Help for Relationships" on the BlogTalkRadio Internet Radio Network, can be heard LIVE every Thursday evening at 10:00pm EST / 7:00pm PST. Visit http://www.blogtalkradio.com/modeone and http://modeone.net for more details

Currie offers email, telephone, and Skype consultations to both men and women; Visit http://modeone.net/products to purchase a consultation.