MICHAEL DAVIS WORLD

You can't make this stuff up, so we don't!

The Girlfriend Experience, by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise

December 19, 2009 Martha Thomases 13 Comments

love_cards-797889Keeping with the spirit of the season, I’m going to offer this column as a gift to my colleague, Keu Reyes.  I don’t think we’ve ever met, but from reading his column, I feel like I know him.  It seems like he’s going through a tough time.

And his column last week would seem to indicate he has even tougher times ahead of him.  Here’s hoping that my experience and perspective helps him out.

I’ve lived a lot of my life with women.  I have sisters and girl cousins.  I went to an all-girls boarding school and lived in a dorm for my high school years.  I had women as roommates in college, and spent a few years on a commune that was 75% female.  I’ve worked with feminist groups.  I’ve written for fashion magazines.

Therefore, I think it goes without saying that I’ve heard women talk.  A lot.  About men.  About sex.  About relationships.  And about sex and relationships with men. I’ve had these conversations with all kinds of women – beautiful, smart, plain, stupid, single, coupled, with kids and without.  I’ve had these conversations with lesbians.

I don’t want to shock you, Keu, so maybe you should sit down for this.  Women like sex.  Individual women vary, but I’d be willing to bet that most women like sex more than most men.   We have a different perspective, however, because we tend to want sexual partners who know what they’re doing.

Notice I didn’t say we wanted sexual partners who are dominant.  There may be a subset of women who do (not that there’s anything wrong with that).  However, unless that’s the only kind of woman that interests you, you’re limiting your possibilities with techniques that require you to establish dominance.

I haven’t always been a married Jewish lady.  Before I met my husband, I was a wild woman.  It was that Golden Age, after the Pill and before HIV.  I was involved with a lot of men, for periods lasting from a few days to a few years.  And not one of them caught my eye because he was dominant, or because he asked me a lot of questions and directed me to talk about happy times.

Actually, I never met anyone through the stereotypical ways, like hanging out in bars – not even in my rock’n’roll days in clubs.

I met guys in classes, at work and in political groups, or through friends.

So take a class, even if you’re out of school.  Not a cooking class (unless you enjoy cooking), because that has become a cliche.  My friend, Janet,  tells me jugglers are animals in bed, so maybe a juggling class would be fun.  I know that when a man walks into a knitting store, he’s surrounded by women who want to make sure he’s comfortable and taken care of.  Maybe some of those women are too old for you (in New York, lots of young women knit, but I’m told that’s not true everywhere), but they have friends, and daughters.  And they’re good with their hands.

Get involved in your community.  Volunteer at a hospital, or plant flowers in a community garden.  Take your pet to the dog park.

The advantage to strategies like mine are that they are deniable.  If you’re flirting with a woman at a dog park, and she turns you down, you can laugh it  off as a misunderstanding.  You can say you were talking to your dog.  You can stay on good terms so she might introduce you to her friends.

You’ll notice none of these things involve going to a bar, or flashing any cash.  If that is your strategy, you will attract drunks who are after your money.  And they can be a fun time, but you shouldn’t be surprised if they turn out to be clingy and crazy and greedy.  Similarly, women who only try to attract men with their youthful good looks shouldn’t be surprised when they get dumped by these men when they age and sag.

I met my husband at press conference for Hustler magazine, when Paul Krassner was named publisher in 1977.  We talked about feminist pornography.  He recommended Anais Nin’s Delta of Venus, which I didn’t find to be a very sexy book, but I was intrigued that he had an opinion about what feminist pornography might be.

And he made me laugh.

It’s a cliche to say that women are attracted to a man with a sense of humor. Not necessarily.  But a man who can make us laugh is a man who can stimulate us to a physical reaction in response to stimulus.  And that’s promising.

Martha Thomases, Media Goddess, is still on good terms with most of her exes.  Most of them still make her laugh.

Previous Post

Next Post

Comments

  1. Howard Cruse
    December 19, 2009 - 8:50 am

    So this Q guy is telling his seductyion-minded guy friends, “You have to make it all about her. NEVER talk about you. Ever. That’s the quickest way to get her disinterested.” But when I was a teenager, the “How To Be A Successful Teenager” books always advised the girls to be sure and ask the guy about himself, because guys really liked that.

    This sounds like a recipe for long lulls. Thank goodness I figured out that I was gay so I could get some decent conversations going

  2. Eddie
    December 19, 2009 - 8:54 am

    I love you, Martha, and I love what you had to say. But I may never forgive you for exposing me to the thinking of Mr. Reyes. Is that really how (a lot) of straight men think? I mean really, seduction? You may coerce an uwilling person to sleep with you (though you might want to call that rape), but the closest thing to seduction in real life is making someone comfortable (or excited) enough that they give in to a pre-existing yen to have sex with you.

  3. Mike Gold
    December 19, 2009 - 2:03 pm

    I love it when people try to figure sex out.

  4. Alan Coil
    December 19, 2009 - 4:37 pm

    If you haven’t figured out sex by the time you are eligible to be an AARP member, you never will.

  5. pennie
    December 19, 2009 - 5:53 pm

    Ooooohhhh-weeeee!
    I may crash the server with this one so apologies in advance MOTU.
    I believe in freedom of speech. Bask in it.
    I read all of the columnists on this site with interest. After hanging out here for a while, I think the ownership a. has a sense of humor; b. permits a variety of opinionated columnists to express themselves without restraint; c. for the most part I am entertained, learn new things, and when moved, express my own thoughts and feelings; and d. my best friend Martha writes here and I love her.

    For me, the column which Martha refers to is so misogynistic that if it I hadn’t read its author’s past posts, I would have thought it was a sarcastic treatment of how many men believed they needed to think or some actually did up until many of them confronted women who were no longer afraid to think, talk, lead and shake their tailfeathers. Many man were forced to grow real fast and get up to speed if they wanted to peacefully coexist with us. Or even get lucky on a regular basis.

    In a similar vein Martha mines, I have spent my life among women—many women on different continents, from different cultures, races, ages, religions, and sexual or gender identities. Never met a single one–save for a purely submissive woman who was in a particular type of relationship with her lesbian dom–who enjoyed being conquered, forced, or outside of some spicy role play, being overtly submissive.

    I don’t hate or dislike men at all. I am simply more comfortable among women. Always have been, always will be.I can honestly “say,” I’ve never known a single woman who sought to be conquered. We aren’t Mt. Everest. And if you take that approach, you might die frostbitten on our slopes.

    I’m sure there are women out there who sign on for this treatment but in my not-so-limited experience, most I’ve know who have taken that plunge come to regret it and eventually attempt or succeed in escaping this not-so-mutual and ultimately confining relationship.

    The author strikes me as one who finds his macho approach comfortable. From his musings, I’ve seen we have little common ground. That’s okay. Long ago I accepted that there are people with whom I will rarely if ever agree.

    So where does one draw the line between “conquer” and rape?
    When does no mean “NO!”

    Does the author honestly conceive of himself as some contemporary Don Juan–the legendary womanizer who Byron cast in reverse? Is it so shocking to me that of late, the
    author writes about his difficulties with women? These days, I imagine it might be more difficult than ever to find a girl to play Barbie to his Ken.

    My friend the always helpful Jewish Mother Martha turns the other cheek and offers suggestions to Q. I’m just not that compliant. Most of my close friends–all women—are feisty by nature of the own accords. I have no helpful hints other than to suggest that if you really want to understand women–button it and spend your time doing a lot less talking and more listenong with the sole purpose not of dominance but of acceptance of women as complete equals. I don’t believe you do right now. In your case, this might take some doing.

  6. Whitney Farmer
    December 20, 2009 - 12:13 am

    Martha —

    I’m glad you tackled this one because I was drawing a blank after reading Keu’s blog. I didn’t know if I could help him, knowing that my opinion on this would be subjective.

    There is a vast difference between getting laid and getting loved. No news flash. And being alone for the right reasons has underappreciated benefits. Rather than live on junk food, some people prefer a feast. It’s nothing personal, but sometimes women (and men) say no to a seduction and not the person — even the most high tech and strategized efforts — because they simply don’t want to spoil their appetite. Just like momma said when we wanted to grab a Twinkie right before supper…

  7. Martha Thomases
    December 20, 2009 - 6:49 am

    @Eddie and pennie: I prefer to think Keu has limited experience rather than misogyny. If he’s only seen/been attracted to one kind of woman, that’s what he knows. The rest has been sold to him by people claiming to be successful. I was trying to offer anther perspective.

    @Whitney: I have nothing against getting laid. I think it’s a great thing. Perhaps it’s better with true love forever, but it’s also plenty fabulous without ASSUMING you actually like the person. Hence, your chances of getting laid are improved when you behave likably.

    The best way to seduce a woman is to encourage her to seduce you.

  8. pennie
    December 20, 2009 - 8:11 am

    Martha, your last line!
    I make no assumptions concerning how, what why, where Keu absorbed his thinking and behavior. Don’t know. For better or worse, he may not realize he’s getting some pretty good feedback from real women—and men—here. Problem is that although we are all different individuals, we are all independent thinkers, aware of our bodies, needs and possess snapping synapses. Those qualities probably disqualify us as potential role models in Keu’s panorama.

    Maybe you’re right. Maybe Keu has never actually had a real experience with a thinking, breathing, sexually alive woman who lives independently. Maybe. But this is nearly 2010, not Mad Men Ville. Haven’t seen much swooning with uncontrolled lapping at male heels lately. Probably not hanging in the right places.

    I certainly don’t claim to speak for anyone but myself. Women come many different ways, colors, shapes, and perspectives. So it could be that there are boatloads of clingy, submissive women out there seeking to be dominated. I just don’t know any. Go figure.

    Whitney, I so agree. Maybe I want to get laid, maybe not, As I’ve come to understand, sometimes the waiting is not the hardest part. It may offer some fine just desserts.

  9. MOTU
    December 20, 2009 - 2:14 pm

    Mr. Gold,

    I HAVE figured sex out. Read more about it in my upcoming book…”The Best 3 minutes of your life’

  10. Steven Atkins
    December 20, 2009 - 3:02 pm

    I can have sex for an hour and twnety minutes…on the night the clocks change. 😉

  11. Reg
    December 20, 2009 - 3:15 pm

    So where was all of this estrogen when the menfolk were flailing about on the abortion topic?? I keeed, I keeed. 😛

    Martha, to be honest, I thought brother Q was initially repping with tongue firmly in cheek…and to a degree I still feel that way. But he’s the only one that can confirm whether that’s the case or not… and he’s not yet tellin’.

    But if indeed this is true reflection of his thought process in terms of female/male interaction on a romantic level, it’s very possible that some of the framing can be explained under a cultural context.

    With the exception of two regular posters (Tatiana and Cheryl, I’m pretty sure that the rest of the feminine talents that grace mOTuLand are of Euro-Semitic extraction. And only Tatiana (although she could in no way be considered the arbiter of all things Latina) could validate whether some of the characteristics that Q alludes to are traits that *some* Latina women admire or respond to in respect to the rules of attraction.

    And if that is indeed the case, then perhaps they can be viewed and understood thru the prism of culture. However, I wholeheartedly agree with your last word on this ‘crazy little thing called love’…that being “The best way to seduce a woman is to encourage her to seduce you.” And that’s applicable even (and probably most especially) true even after the band of gold has been exchanged.

    @ Whitney…”And being alone for the right reasons has underappreciated benefits.” Speak the truth, Lady!

  12. Mike Gold
    December 20, 2009 - 4:28 pm

    MOTU: Yes, it WAS the best three minutes of my life. I never thought you could do all that with bacon!

    Reg: “Euro-Semitic”? C’mon, I just learned how to spell “Ashkenazi.”

  13. Reg
    December 20, 2009 - 4:56 pm

    Mike: I meant to type Euro $ Semitic…but Ashkenazi will do too! BTW, does Ashkenazi mean the same as Mulatto? :-/

Comments are closed.