To catch a prince: a treatise on male sexuality

Dear Hannah,

I want to apologize in advance for this essay: it's not anything a girl wants to hear from anyone, much less from her father; but I figure that if there's anything worse than an honest letter about male sexuality, it's a woman never being told how men think, and then finding out from experience.  One of the great cruelties of human existence is showing a girl lots of Disney films and never acquainting her with Solomon -- or in other words, giving her an ideal picture of the beginnings of romance, and never telling her that men are sexually insatiable.  They say Solomon loved his wives, and this much may be true.  But it's easy to love a beautiful woman and treat her well for a moment when you get to share the rest of your week with a thousand other beautiful women.  For the rest of us who deal with one exclusively, loving your wife is a more laborious task.  Solomon's love, however admirable, is really a matter of timing.

The hard truth about men is that there are many different kinds of ways for them to be attracted to a woman, and it's difficult to know which one a man feels for you.  In my experience playing the field, and having considered my feelings over many years, there are really two that stand above the rest.  The first is romantic, and the second is sexual.

These can be combined or they can be separate: ideally they're always combined, but the latter is most usually isolated.  And the most unfortunate thing is that they can be easily mistaken for one another.  I can give you tips about how to distinguish between them, but to know them you'll have to work for it.  To win this game you have to be willing to resist a handsome and charming man for a time; and if you don't you'll most likely discover, after promises and sweet words and all kinds of affection, that he doesn't really love you the way he said he did.  Men can be victims of this too, and I have personally been one.  But I've been much more the offender than the offended.

A good place to begin, then, is by distinguishing between romantic and sexual affection.  The first relies primarily on what a man thinks of a woman's face and the way she carries herself about; the second relies primarily on what he thinks about her body.  Now, there's nothing wrong with being sexually attractive: everyone should want to be sexually interesting, on some level, and in an ideal world everyone would be.  But if you've relied upon your body to catch a man, and if you've dressed to get his attention any other way than by being exceptional and cultured and drawing attention to your face, then you should know he's probably sexually attracted to you, and is unlikely to stick around for long.

Sexual attraction is so common for the male that he rivals the dog.  A man can be romantically attracted to a single woman for a year, and sexually attracted to five thousand in the same period.  When he's enthralled by either one, the less introspective man can't tell the difference between them: either kind of attraction will make him say stupid things and feel butterflies in his stomach.  Only one will outlast ejaculation. 

A man can be sexually attracted to a woman one day and feel nothing the next.  He'll feel for her again, or maybe he won't.  Perhaps even stranger to the woman, he can be sexually attracted to her and not even think she's beautiful, or up to his standards.  A man in a serious fit of sexual attraction will oftentimes feel compelled, not only by himself, but by the easiness of circumstances, to enter a relationship based upon sexual attraction; but he will despise the woman when he's had his fill.  Schopenhauer once wrote that a married man has been hoodwinked, because the woman he "loved" would become unattractive after a couple of children.  This is true -- but only if Schopenhauer and the men who think like him never consider the difference between sexual and romantic attraction.  A woman's face and her character outlast childbirth.  The rest of her is unlikely to.

A man in a state of romantic ecstasy is much different: his attraction is steady and strong, and he thinks a woman is beautiful almost regardless of her body.  Sometimes he thinks she's beautiful because of the way she carries herself about; and if I can say something that most women aren't expecting, he can be strongly attracted to her without even thinking of sex itself.  His attraction will certainly lead to sex, if pursued and accepted.  It may lead to an whole lifetime of sex.  But it isn't only because of sex.  Romance is more spiritual.  Romance considers a woman as an entire picture; sexual attraction considers everything below her neck.

A woman with a beautiful body can make a man horny for a day.  A well-cultured woman with a beautiful face can make him sing praises for a lifetime.  Neither will help you if your man isn't interested in keeping his promises.  Dressing provocatively is for women who can't compete in class or beauty: they rely upon a man's sexual attraction which he can have for a million women and forego the things that keep him interested in few.  In short, by attempting to avoid the more difficult things that keep the right man, they get the wrong man's attention for a few seconds and lose him for a lifetime.  Scientific studies have shown that men who look at a woman's face think of her as an intelligent human being, while looking at a woman's body turns off his brain and makes her an object.  You can wish men were different but you can't change them biologically.  This is a fact of life, and if you're smart you'll work with it.

If you want a man to love you for a long time you'll have to have your head on straight.  Only a man knows what he's feeling, and he isn't going to tell you if he's just feeling a fit of sexual attraction: you will have to take charge of circumstances yourself.  Limit the amount of sexual attention you receive, and rise above objectification: talk like a lady, dress modestly, publicly despise a crude approach, and you'll get rid of a hundred scoundrels who'll hate you in a month otherwise.  If you're easy and men know it, you'll attract a lot of worthless men.  If you're attracting worthless men, you will have a more difficult time telling the difference between the princes and the villains -- because both will be saying sweet things.  If you have a hard time telling the difference, you'll end up falling for stallions.  If you fall for stallions, you'll eventually hate men.  A giggly thirteen year-old girl never hates men because she hasn't been used by them.  It's sexual experience that turns stupid girls into angry feminists.  A smart girl with good advice loves men, because she knows how to avoid the bad ones.  Some women think that by getting rid of what they call slut-shaming they'll make women more respectable.  The truth is, they will have made them more disposable -- or maybe we should say despisable.

So much for sexual and romantic attraction.  Remember that playing hard to get is only playing: being hard to get makes women valuable.  Chastity and modesty are the woman's only weapons against man's insatiability: chastity works positively, and makes good men attracted to you not only because of your character, but because things that are difficult to get are more desirable.  Modesty works negatively, by sending the horndog elsewhere.  Porn is popular because men love sexual diversity, but nobody sensible ever thought to himself that he'd like to marry the woman in the pictures.  A man wants to play with a porn star; he wants to own a princess.  A princess gets less attempts from the peasant masses, and more from princes. 

One last word about man's insatiability.  Gay men are known for being the most promiscuous, and are also known for suffering more than anyone else from sexually transmitted diseases.  The problem isn't that they're gay.  The problem is that gayness involves too much man.  Women keep the human race from ruining itself in the pursuit of sexual pleasure: the modesty and chastity of women are the only reasons sincere romance exists at all.  So stand your guard.  Most men, if given the chance, will not.  Solomon was one of the wisest men who ever lived, and women ruined him.  Who could expect any other man to do better?

Your father,


  1. A provocative essay, full of smart and based on common male knowledge. You are bravr and talented with words. Keep it up.

  2. This will make the rounds in my family. Thank you for expressing so eloquently a true, without a doubt the most, Inconvenient Truth.


Post a Comment