The Borgified Corpse wrote:
I'm not saying women have to be having more sex. But it seems as if women don't really respect the sexual desires of men. Respecting them doesn't mean that you have to indulge them. Respect means not regarding male sexuality as an ignorant beast that needs to be civilized to the point of obscurity.
What do you think? Am I on the right track here?
An interesting idea, but I disagree. I think you're placing too much of the burden on women, when, historically, it has been men, not women, who have dictated a woman's sexual role in society. And while women have been gaining more power over their gender roles and sexuality in Western society, I there is a lot of history yet to overcome.
Women have been venerated for their sexuality, worshiped for it. Some of the earliest evidence of human beliefs is of fertility religions, with symbols of the woman's sexuality worshiped -- the snake, the tree, the moon. Then of course that sexuality came to be feared, as in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Woman's sexuality became the evil, and those early symbols of fertility religions, the snake, the tree, the shapely woman, became the images of Original Sin.
For centuries it's gone back and forth, with female sexuality being either demonized or honored. I think the current image of the woman as frigid and nonsexual is a holdover from the Victorian mode of thought, which shifted from women being dirty to women being innocent and in need of protection lest they become corrupted -- hence women (or at least "good" women) being seen as less sexual than men.
Putting the burden on women to "respect" men's sexual needs is actually completely off the mark, as it has generally and historically been men who set the precedent for how women's sexuality is viewed. It's certainly not as simple as saying it is the fault of one gender or the other, and so neither is it the responsibility of one gender to repair misunderstandings or misperceptions.