Skip to main content

Men as gatekeepers of sex is lose-lose

In response to Mary's comment on my last post arguing that it's actually men who should be the gatekeepers, I thought we could try this thought experiment:

Imagine a world with 100 women and 100 men. Rank them by attractiveness and put them in ten groups. Let's pretend the top decile is composed of ten drop-dead gorgeous women who also happen to be "wise", that is having self-respect and able to discern men's character. In the bottom decile are women so hideously ugly and incredibly insecure that they would never converse with another guy. And in the middle, the remaining eighty women are the "foolish", insecure, young, impressionable women that Mary is referring to. They may have varying religious commitments but it doesn't make much of a difference.

As for the men, the top decile are the alpha alpha males - good-looking, successful CEO-types who are aggressive  in everything, including women. The second decile from the top has the alpha jerks and players -  maybe not as good-looking or successful, but definitely confident with the ladies. The bottom two deciles of men are the hopeless losers who have no chance of conversing with a female (male vs. female variability is well-documented). And finally in the middle are sixty men committed to being gate keepers. They "protect women's hearts" and "make sure they don't cross any physical boundaries". They may be religious, it doesn't matter. The net is they don't take many risks with women, don't initiate very often, and certainly don't threaten any woman's personal space - all in the name of gate keeping.

Let everyone loose and and the alpha males in the top two deciles start mowing through the middle eighty women. Since the women are young, fragile, and insecure, they're eager to spread their legs for any good-looking or confident guy who gives them attention - jerk, player or otherwise. Once a woman realizes her mistake in sleeping with a jerk, the alpha male moves on to the next woman. Eventually though, the top decile of men will end up coupling off with the virginal top decile of women. That leaves the alpha player/jerk decile to continue cycling through the remaining eighty women. Since the women aren't capable of guarding their gates, the bed notches accumulate.

Meanwhile the middle sixty gatekeepers have been faithfully standing alongside the women at a safe, respectful distance, unaware of the sexual mayhem unfolding before them. They may do favors for the eighty women, help them move in, run errands, etc. but they certainly won't initiate strongly or be dominant - that is poor gate keeping.

Eventually, the gatekeepers realize this strategy isn't working and they begin taking some action. And these men find that while they have been busy guarding the women, the women haven't been guarding themselves.

The point is this: You can tweak the numbers however you want, but if women don't watch who they have sex with, it only takes a few aggressive (older, good-looking, fill-in-the-blank) men to alter the landscape. You could have 90% of men guarding the gates but the remaining 10% are going to deflower a whole mess of women. The women who slept with a jerk lose and the men who were busy protecting them lose.

This is the world of the Asian American Christian male. His strategy of purity and respect has back-fired. Now he is relegated to the same plight of the bottom deciles: a date with a laptop and his right hand.

If you turn it around, it works much better. Women filter out jerks and players and look for men of character. Men are not saddled with the dual and conflicting responsibilities of being both initiator and white knight protector. I believe men should certainly respect and protect a woman's purity. But that's her primary responsibility not his.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Dad's Review of Passport 2 Purity

[3,100 words, 11 minute read] The sex talk is one of the most dreaded conversations parents anticipate having with their children. To make things easier, an entire industry exists to help parents with sex education. Dozens of books have been written to help parents navigate this treacherous topic with their progeny. One of the best known among evangelicals is called the Passport 2 Purity Getaway package . It is produced by FamilyLife, a division of Cru (former Campus Crusade for Christ) and consists of a five lecture CD package including a journal and exercises designed as a weekend retreat for a pre-pubescent child and his/her parent(s). Passport 2 Purity was not my initiative. Our trip came about because Judy had heard from several home-schooling mom friends how they had taken their daughters on a road trip to go through the CDs. She even heard how a mom took a trip with husband and two sons to through the curriculum. So a couple months ago, Judy suggested we take our two older boy

Why Asians Run Slower

My brother got me David Epstein's book The Sports Gene . It is a fascinating quick read. If you're interested in sports and science, it will enthrall you.  I finished it in three days. Epstein's point is that far more of an athlete's performance is due to genetics than due to the so-called "10,000 hour" rule promulgated by books such as Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell and Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin (both which are very good). The 10,000 hour rule states that any person can reach expert level of performance in a sport if they devote 10,000 hours of deliberate and intentional practice.  That's a lot of hours. Most people aren't capable of anywhere close. And that's precisely Epstein's point. Someone who devotes 10,000 hours of sport-specific practice is likely genetically gifted for the sport in extraordinary ways AND genetically gifted in their ability to persevere and benefit from practice. Therefore, a person who can pra

Unsolvable Problems in Marriage I: Lowering Expectations

Different expectations of conflict From a recent Facebook post: Working on a post about unsolvable problems in marriage: For those who have been married five or more years, on a scale of 1 to 10, how much expectation did you have entering into marriage that communication could resolve any conflict between you and your spouse? How would you rate that expectation now? People often enter into marriage thinking that most if not all their conflicts can be resolved. Women come into marriage thinking "I can make my husband a better man". Men come into marriage thinking, "My wife will learn to see things my way". This idealistic view of marriage does not survive contact with the enemy. Even for couples for whom the first years of marriage are conflict-free, raising children is its own brand of unsolvable problem. And then there's sickness and mental health issues, job changes, unemployment, moving, and shifts in friendships. Conflict in marriage is inevitable. A number