In light of the recent rash of allegations of inappropriate sexual behaviors of celebrities, I want to bring up an angle that the various talking heads are steering away from: How does promiscuity play into this issue?
Back in my oilpatch days, I was away from home a lot. I just needed a room to store some belongings and have a nice place to stay when I was in town. So I answered an ad in the newspaper of a “professional man” looking for roommates. He agreed to let me in his house, and I stayed there for three months before I got transferred. In this time, I probably spent one out three nights in my room, so I got a good look at the action going on in this house.
The man was a walking hormone. Hardly a day went by where he didn’t get laid. He was always bringing home a classy looking gal of some kind, anywhere between 20 to 50 years old. He would bring them home after work. He would bring them home after an hour or two at the local yuppy bar. Sometimes they would phone him for a quick roll. Sometimes he had three rolls in one day. I don’t think I saw the same woman twice.
I got to know this guy somewhat well. His technique varied for scoring. Sometimes he was quite direct; other times he was like a fisherman patiently and skillfully working his hook and line. I think it’s safe to say that these women were looking for casual sex before they encountered my roommate; he only needed to play a certain game to get them.
I have read several sociological studies that estimate that about 10% of the population is promiscuous. So the promiscuous can’t select sexual partners randomly for they are more likely to fail than to succeed. So there is a game that each partner needs to play: locality selection, appearance, body cues, verbal cues, tone and content of conversation, light touching, etc. all play a part in helping the promiscuous connect with each other. For example, when my roommate was direct (i.e. “do you want to f**k?”), he probably already knew she was going to say “yes”. Even so, sometimes he was wrong, which did not bother him as there were other women available.
So when I hear of celebrities being accused of inappropriate sexual behavior, I have to wonder how much of this behavior was part of the culture of the promiscuous trying to find each other out. “He touched my knee” may be a sexual advance, but this same fellow probably found this same cue worked quite well many times in the past. If he is rejected, he either moved in too fast or he didn’t read the signals properly about the woman’s availability for sex. Or maybe he was just playing a numbers game: touch enough knees in an evening will eventually find sex.
If we still insist on calling this fellow a sexual predator, what do we call the women who accept the advances?
And if a woman puts herself in a position to be perceived to be promiscuous, should she not accept that she is going to get some sexual advances?
If the man accepts a rejection after making an advance, should we cast him in the same light as a rapist?
Of course, the politically correct people will pounce on my questions as being misogynistic, so let’s ask some questions in the other direction.
If we come to know a man as an effective player with women, should we not recognize that he is probably not giving full potential to his occupation?
Or should we not realize that sooner or later, he is going to do something to embarrass our organization, institution, or profession?
Or maybe he is setting himself up for an allegation (founded or unfounded) in the future? If so, does this not mean the man is somewhat lacking in good judgement?
In this world of free choice and consenting adults, maybe we should ask: Why do we consider a promiscuous lifestyle as a virtue?