Why this is wrong: Good news! It’s not just common human decency to pay attention to someone – it also works as an aphrodisiac for the speaker! Perhaps that’s why politicians frequently get caught up in sex scandals: giving regular speeches to captive audiences must mean they are horny all the time. Just think about that next time George Osborne talks about the deficit.
What you should do instead: If you want a positive response, be attentive, but also interactive. Communication between two people should be mutual, not one-sided. Oh, and just so you know: the “female equivalent of beer” is “beer”.
Why this is wrong: Sincerity will always get you further than deceit, which is why it’s ironic that the How To Be An Arsehole 101 in men’s mags involves avoiding honesty at all times. Whatever happens, they say, men should never tell a woman thanks, they had fun, and that they want to leave it at a one-night affair. Because no woman could possibly respect a man who tells the truth, could she?
What you should do instead: For those men interested in The How Not To Be An Arsehole 101, it’s simply this: be kind, be genuine, be honest.
Why this is wrong: Don’t play games, just be genuine. Not all women want attention. Not all women are “used to” getting attention. Not all women will be wondering why men “aren’t hanging on their every word”. If talking to a woman involves pretence - eg. trying to make other women “feel a pang of jealousy” - then that’s a mark of someone unable to communicate in an adult way.
What you should do instead: All men need to do, when it comes to talking to women, is, you know, actually talk to women.
Why this is wrong: Focussing on a body part, not the person, never ends well. Yes, because every woman who has even “slightly sagging” boobs worries that the men they are intimate with will be “alienated” by them. Clearly, men are terrified of breasts unless they are “buoyant and round”; and women will only be mentally relaxed if they feel their tits would keep a sinking ship of men afloat.
What you should do instead: Be enthusiastic about all of your partner, not just one aspect.
Why this is wrong: According to men’s mags, men should be stoic and not be at all receptive to what someone else’s needs are beyond the initial ‘are you enjoying this?’ check. And what women really want is a man so unable to communicate that he is unwilling ask what she likes, how she likes it, or whether she would like him to do it differently. She may as well be fucking a robot – at least she could hit an off switch.
What you should do instead: Talking in bed is one of the best forms of oral sex, don’tcha know?
Why this is wrong: Using ‘tips’ from pick-up artists will only result in you being ignored. Nothing says ‘dickhead’ like a man ‘negging’ a woman. For bonus arrogance points, men should try it on a whole group of women! Yeah, that’ll work.
What you should do instead: Ignore ‘The Game’, focus on The Reality and be genuine.
Why this is wrong: Talking can be just as stimulating as sex. Speaking of robots… Apparently, sentient beings, aka men, are not capable of, or remotely interested in, conversation.
What you should do instead: Captivate someone’s attention by being engaging, and mutual attraction is far more likely.
Why this is wrong: Trying to “convince” someone to do something you want, and they might not, is coercion. “Subtly establish” if a woman likes porn? What is this, the 1950s? Women can speak, you know; how about just asking her if she enjoys it?
What you should do instead: Communicating openly about sex with one’s partner will always produce better results than manipulation and dishonesty. And as for screening a film with explicit sex scenes so that a man can watch, and attempt to interpret, a woman’s body language? That’s just creepy.
Why this is wrong: Don’t be manipulative or lie about what you want. Obviously, women truly need a “cover story”, because sex is shameful and they couldn’t possibly be seen to - wait for it - actually want sex. Better for a man to just hope they’re up for it, rather than say they’d like to have sex with them, because honesty won’t get anyone laid, am I right?
What you shoud do instead: We’re all adults here. Be upfront and be honest. Consent is sexy.
Why this is wrong: It’s not about endurance, it’s about enthusiasm. Apparently, because “intercourse does not have to lead to female orgasm 100 percent of the time”, it’s a “far better thing” for men to come, than it is to offer up tongues or fingers or sex toys for her pleasure, right? Newsflash: sex is not solely about penises.
What you should do instead: Generosity and kindness go much further in bed than stamina or selfishness.
Why this is wrong: Sex isn’t a game in which you keep score and where the only thing that matters is a penis in a vagina, but, according to this article, oral and manual stimulation don’t “technically” count as “sex”.
What you should do instead: Being responsive to your partner’s needs, whether they be physical, or emotional, is much more important than being “the best” at sex.
Why this is wrong: The silent treatment never works. Say “nothing” until she tells you to stop? We’re back to the robot once more, aren’t we? Because what a woman really desires in bed is a perfunctory automaton, unable to interact or be receptive to another’s needs, and which will continue repetitive thrusting until the command ‘sudo kill intercourse’.
What you should do instead: Both you and your partner will benefit if you communicate with more than just your cock.
Why this is wrong: Magazines exploit the idea that men and women are fundamentally different. Women: so complicated! Mysterious! Difficult creatures! Men? That’s simple: horn; shag; relax. Done. Oh, what’s that you say? Men can be stressed too? Men might lack arousal or the ability to climax? Nonsense! Men are SEX MACHINES which have no ‘off’ switch. Fact.
What you should do instead: Ignore all the nonsense advice and just remember one thing: women and men aren’t so different, really.
- 26 people, thought to be refugees and migrants, were discovered in the back of a truck in Austria. ›
- Oliver Sacks, the famed neurologist and author, died Sunday from cancer. He was 82. ›