Our past charismatic President, John F. Kennedy, and his brother former U.S. Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy, were very, very horny and prolific guys in fulfilling such horniness. They made love to any lady that moved, anywhere from the White House swimming pool to their limousines. There’s strong evidence that they even shared the company- not ménage a trois style- of Marilyn Monroe, among others. You wonder when they had time to run the country. Tough to conceive in our modern times, the media and everyone else including members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, gave them a pass and ignored their obsession with women and their quest for endless orgasms.
Now poor President Clinton had a simple blow job in his White House office and was, as a result, impeached! Many think Obama could use a little extracurricular sex to get rid of his increasing agita, but can you imagine what would happen if his wife and Valerie Jarret, his guru, caught him in bed with the maid? The next day Joe Biden would be president of our great country!
RFK Jr. is -like his father and Uncle Jack- a very, very horny guy, and his second wife, who committed suicide, and others knew about it. The mysterious code, “G”, was found in his cell phone which was a list of all his lady friends describing certain details of their relationships. They were even rated on a scale of 1 to 10, the latter meaning that he had intercourse with the woman. I don’t know what 3 or 6 or any of the others meant. His ladies were all over the place from Paris to Pensacola, Florida. He also became emotionally involved with some of them- it must have been exhausting! One summer, would you believe, he called one of his lady lovers five times a day! http://nypost.com/2014/07/13/dozens-of-suspected-mistresses-found-in-rfk-jr-s-cellphone/
A friend of mine, who read about the man’s sexual affairs, called me and asked if the RFK Jr. “G” was the Lorenzo Baccalà’s one. I, in a test to see if he read the book, asked him about how many women did the guy make love to. He didn’t have an answer but said a hell of a lot. I then asked him how many women did the “G” in the book make love to, he replied, “About 300”, which confirmed that he knew at least something about the man, but he could have read it in a press release or book review.
I decided to give him one more test and asked, “How many times did my “G” make love to the same women?”
He laughed and answered, “I bet you think you got me on this one. Well, my friend, your “G” rarely made love to a woman more than once for he always walked away while the RFK Jr. “G” came to the same plate many times.”
He and Cheryl Hines, the subtlety sexy wife of Larry David on the television series, Curb Your Enthusiasm, are planning to be married. Best wishes to RFK Jr. and learn to curb your enthusiasm!
I’ll begin with my often repeated mantra that sex studies, especially surveys, are mostly faulty and conclusions not to be fully embraced. But, even so, certainly some clues of what’s happening can be made. The same holds true with this mini-survey that G and I conducted coupled with our many years of experience.
In a recent post we discussed what, in the past, men and women thought about and characterized sexually promiscuous men and women. The men called the women sluts or pigs but, nevertheless, were eager to hit the sack with them. They were not viewed with any particular emotion such as disgust but there was a 100% consensus that they would never even think to marry one. Once in a while a guy fell for a pig and invariably paid the price of jealousy and suffering.
The women labeled promiscuous men as “lovers” or “ladies men.” This was followed by a “they’re- bad- boys- smile” along with “that’s-the-way-it-is” shrug of the shoulders. With few exceptions, hostile remarks were absent. (For the historic record, the most common term by men to describe a “lover” was an “ass man” such as Marlon Brando and Elvis Presley.” In certain circles, it’s still used today).
Jumping ahead in time, the word “womanizer” appeared. Sparked by feminists, the media and universities effectively trumpeted the word and its message into our daily lives warning the women to avoid these bad hombres. Even some men, who were obviously not in the class of womanizers, bought into the message. But here’s what’s interesting: The word has largely disappeared from our national vocabulary!
I, as a physician –scientist, instinctively wondered why this happened. Though, during the womanizing era, the Nicholson and the Beatty types were being hammered by an increasing spectrum of organizations and media, G and I observed that the women were still flocking to them. Based on that and other observations, my conclusion is that the concept behind the word has no long-term staying power simply because, deep down, most women don’t consider womanizers as men do with sluts, creatures to be shunned except for having orgasms.
Getting back to the previous post, we believe that modern men’s attitudes toward sexually prolific women haven’t changed. They are still called sluts only to be taken to the sack but never to marry. In our recent survey of women’s attitudes towards ass men, the initial findings are as follows: We interviewed 18 women from ages of about 20 to 50. We asked them what they called “promiscuous men” and what they thought about them. Regarding the former, 8 replied, “manwhores”; 2, “pricks”; 2, “players”; 1, “a typical man”; 1, “womanizer”, 1, “pigs” and 3 had no specific name. What was perhaps a new finding were their attitudes toward these guys. Unlike men’s cavalier attitudes to sluts and pigs, G and I both detected feelings that were clearly emotion driven in about half of the ladies. The others were that of simple resignation to “the way it is.” Though difficult to precisely describe the expressed feelings of the former, we would characterize them as a mixture of hostility and betrayal coupled with frustration. As with the first group of ladies there were also definite feelings of resignation or “that’s the way it is.”
We were surprised by this finding for we thought that, because of the sexual revolution, manwhores would become commonplace and acceptable to women the way sluts are to men.
What’s the message? Once more this is not a definitive medical study, but G and I are comfortable with making certain conclusions. For this post let’s deal with a single major one. Before the sexual revolution, there were many fewer ass men or manwhores and far fewer sluts or pigs. So it wasn’t a pan- cultural thing and lacked national prevalence, attention and analysis. After the sexual copulation exploded, it then became possible to determine what impact it would have on men and women. Attitudes of men haven’t changed much regarding sluts because that’s probably the way their natural mindsets are. Women’s natural mindsets, however, did not really change but were brought out into the open, perhaps for the first time in history, by them experiencing sex on an epidemic scale.
G and I also believe that there’s a huge difference between how women regard womanizers versus manwhores. A womanizer is more romantic and exciting to be with while a manwhores is more of the animal type. It’s our prediction that the term manwhores will never reach the level of popularity and duration as womanizer, and it too will fade away.
Our conclusion? Putting all the pieces of the pie together, women undoubtedly want more out of sex than men.
When I was in my early teens, way before the sexual revolution and, would you believe, before oral contraceptives, most men and women experienced sex for the first time during their first honeymoon night. There were, however, a few sexually prolific women who bedded with more than a few men. For protection against pregnancy and venereal disease they relied on men’s condoms and their diaphragms. Depending to what man you were talking to, these ladies would be called either “sluts” or “pigs” after which frequently followed, “Imagine marrying a pig like that.” But they, unsurprisingly, welcomed the opportunity to hit the sack with them.
Now here’s a point that reveals alot for it was prevalent throughout our national culture and not just in the territories of my experiences. Women generally expressed overt disgust and, might I say, “condemnation” toward the prolific women. But their take on prolific men was entirely different. If I had to sum it up, their general expressions on these guys would be something like, “That’s the way men are.” These words of apparent resignation were not infrequently accompanied by a slight smile either on the lips or in the eyes or both. Yes, there were negative expressions but usually lacking conviction reflecting the values of the times. I cannot remember any woman, though I’m sure they existed, who claimed she would never marry a man who has bedded with multiple women.
For many years after, my conversations with many men and women regarding their take on prolific sexual ladies never changed.
But I became convinced that after the sexual revolution began energetically moving forward, both the male and female mindset had changed and everything was copacetic. To support my belief, I understand that discussing the number of previously bedded partners among couples is becoming increasingly commonplace. Frankly speaking and as I mentioned in previous posts, I am disturbed about multiple partners because it will inevitably lead, among other impacts, to a surge in national jealousy- a pervasive destroyer of man- woman affection and love.
Let me tell you about a recent encounter I had at my home with an attractive, intelligent, divorced and well-to- do lady in her upper 40’s. (To you cynics, women at that age are still attracted to geriatric me- occasionally)! She was delightful company, the kind of woman that you love to dine and converse with over good food and good drinks. There’s nothing like it. Ask G. Also, I was considering asking her for a date, which I rarely do these days.
During the conversation she, for reasons which puzzled me, volunteered the fact that she had slept with about 20 different men. That immediately diminished my desire to see her again. The reason? Frankly speaking, I’m not sure. If I were a younger man, the reason would be one that G always talks about. If you are a man or woman in the early phases of potentially falling in love with someone you can’t trust, draw the line and walk away in order to avoid debilitating suffering. But in this case, that wasn’t the issue- or at least I think so.
Then during the last month I had three different enlightening encounters with men. The first was with three college students of a reputable Catholic university which is somewhat conservative. The second was with two college students of a reputable, very liberal university. The third was a very unique and extremely enjoyable encounter with about 15 men ranging from ages 25 to 50, some divorced, some married and the rest single. It was a mixed group including public servants, postgraduate students and successful businessmen. Boy, did I have a good stimulating evening on this festive occasion. I relentlessly quizzed them, and they gave it back. I was proud of them.
I asked their opinions on sexually prolific women. What a surprise! They all unanimously echoed what I heard in the past. “We love to hit the sack with them but no-way marry them. They’re sluts.” Only a couple used the pig term.
The five college students were virtually unanimous about prolific women and echoed what the 15 men had expressed. There are college women who are prolific and the guys seek them out for sexual relief but none had respect and would never consider marrying them. Also like the 15 men, most of the guys called them sluts and pigs only intermittently.
What I don’t know is how today’s women view prolific men and women. In fact, I’m not sure in today’s world when a woman is considered prolific. There is pressure on young ladies to surrender their virginity and many parents know and accept this. But that is not a definite sign that it would be OK with them if their daughters bedded indiscriminately.
But there’s little doubt that today’s women take a more flexible position when it comes to judging their sexually prolific counterparts. But I have a hunch they still have some serious reservations, and I’ll make the effort to interview them to find out.
Regarding their take on prolific men, in my interviews with the women I’ll bring it up. I’m curious as hell to find the answer! I must be honest. I have a hunch what they will say. After all, most women who I know are attracted to womanizers like Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty.
There’s a larger message regarding these mindsets which, frankly speaking, is not clear to me. After my lady interviews, some thinking and bouncing off G, I’ll get back to you in Part II.