This will be my 11th edition of “Feedback from Readers.”
If you are a regular reader and loyal follower of my column, you already know that after every five-to-seven articles of mine that get published, I tend to feature responses I receive from my male and female readers. Usually I receive these responses either from my personal Email address (email@example.com), or via my Facebook inbox.
Click here to read my previous edition of “Feedback from Readers.”
Usually, I tend to feature only one response for each of my last five, six, or seven articles that I have written over the past few weeks or months. In this edition of “Feedback from Readers,” I am going to do things a little different. Why? The vast majority of the responses I received from readers (and more specifically, female readers) had to do specifically with my very last article entitled, Delusional women (and men) need to ‘wake up’ before anger and resentment takes over.
The “good” news regarding this most recent article: My last article attracted the most page views and “likes” (over 1,000) of any article I have ever written and had published since August 2009. Before this last article, the other article of mine that had previously garnered the most page views and “likes” within the first 48-72 hours after it was published was my article entitled, When you understand the Madonna / Whore Complex, you pretty much understand men (which in its own way, indirectly relates to the content of this most recent article).
The “bad” news: I received at least a dozen or more responses from female readers who were either angry about much of what I expressed in that article, or at minimum, had passionate disagreements about what I wrote, and they did not hesitate to write me and let me know.
In fairness to me though, I received many more responses from women who agreed with just about everything I wrote than I received responses from women who disagreed with what I wrote.
Per usual, I generally only highlight those responses from readers that fall into one of these three categories:
- A response that is representative of a strong disagreement to one or more of the opinions I expressed in a previous article;
- A response that is representative of a very strong agreement to one or more of the opinions I expressed in a previous article;
- A desire for further clarification and understanding to something I expressed or asserted in a previous article.
[Note: Also per usual, all first names have been changed for the sake of anonymity, and many questions and/or comments may have been edited, condensed or paraphrased to some degree in order to either save space or correct spelling and grammatical errors]
Email feedback #1 in response to my article, “Delusional women (and men) need to ‘wake up’ before anger and resentment takes over”
From Melissa W.:
“Hello Mr. Currie. I have read a few articles of yours on Facebook because you and I are actually Facebook friends (even though I have never met you in person). I typically enjoy reading your articles, but this last article of yours really left me agitated!! I disagree with your opinion that most women who are ‘Side-Chick Suzy’ types fall into that category voluntarily or enthusiastically. Most of my girlfriends were duped and lied to by men. These men told my girlfriends that they were their #1 girl, or would soon become their #1, only for them to later find out that what they were told was a lie. I do not know ANY woman who would volunteer to be a man’s #2 or #3 woman. If you have met women like that, shame on them! They are beyond delusional. They are trashy women with no self-respect!”
Alan’s response: Tell me how you REALLY feel Melissa! Also, are you SURE that it has been only your “girlfriends” who have been a ‘Side-Chick Suzy,’ and not you? You seem really passionate about this issue for you to have never been a man’s mistress or ‘on-the-side honey.’ Just sayin’.
It is hard for me to believe that you have not met ONE woman who volunteered to be a man’s mistress or ‘on-the-side honey.’ If you are telling the truth, good for you. I have been friends and acquaintances with both types. The group you describe … the women who are frequently lied to and misled by the men who they are dealing with … and the group I described in my article, which are the women who know what category they initially signed up for, but later on, they start wanting more from the man.
I am not going to be as harsh as you toward the women in the second group. I would not label these women as “trashy” or “lacking self-respect.” I would say what I already said, which is that these women are a combination of delusional, confused, and misguided. They initially thought they could be content with being a man’s on-the-side woman, but then they allowed their emotions to take over and it motivated them to demand more. It’s really that simple.
Email feedback #2 in response to my article, “Delusional women (and men) need to ‘wake up’ before anger and resentment takes over”
From Tywanna C.:
“This is the third or fourth article of yours that I have read, but this one is the first one to provoke me to want to write you and share my thoughts, agreements and disagreements. I will confess Alan: I have been a Side-Chick Suzy type a handful of times. Not one time did it end well for me. I would replace the word ‘delusional’ with the words ‘unrealistically hopeful.’ I constantly and repeatedly found myself believing that these men would see how special I was, and come to value and appreciate what I had to offer them as a partner, and that I would get – as you put it – ‘upgraded.’ That day never came, and it hurt. In one of your previous articles (can’t remember which one right now), you said that women tend to be most attracted to men who are already receiving a lot of attention from women. On this point, I will wholeheartedly agree with you. I am a sucker for a man who is handsome, charming, and already being pursued by dozens of other women. His popularity with other women makes me want him to be mine even more. I don’t know if I agree with your assertion that being a Side-Chick Suzy is all about good sex though. Sex was not the only thing that attracted me to the men I was attracted to, but of course, the good sex did not hurt! :) Overall, I thought the article was enlightening and something I needed to read. Props to you Alan. I was ‘asleep,’ but now thanks to your article, I am WIDE AWAKE!”
Alan’s response: Shame on you Tywanna … you have only read three or four of my articles? You better catch up on all of the rest! (Note: I actually tweeted that last comment of yours on Twitter yesterday)
For me, being “unrealistically hopeful” and being “delusional” are essentially the same thing. The first phrase just sounds better to the mind, ego and ears. Hate to break this to you Tywanna, but in each instance you knowingly accepted the role of a Side-Chick Suzy, but later on you expected to be ‘upgraded’ to being that woman’s wife or long-term girlfriend, you were being delusional. I know it hurts to hear that, but it is the truth.
As you alluded to, I make a comment in my third paperback, Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex, where I say, “pu**y attracts pu**y.” I have found this to be very true starting with as far back as my high school days. Generally speaking, I have found that when women observe that a man has a lot of women offering him their romantic and/or sexual companionship, it makes even more women become curious, interested, and intrigued in that particular man. Just a couple of months ago, I had a female friend of mine call into my talk radio show and acknowledge this concept. I am pleased that you also admitted that this has been the case with you.
Finally, I am just going to be real Tywanna. I have *never* met a woman who was willing to be the mistress or ‘on-the-side honey’ of a man who was average or less-than-average in bed. Never. The only exception would be if that man was very wealthy and financially generous. Financial favors and great sex are really the only two factors that motivate a woman to accept the role of a “#2 woman,” “#3 woman,” and so on. Keeping it “one-hundred” as they say, if a man is broke, cheap, and sucks in bed, that man will never have the opportunity to have “mistresses” or “women on the side.” Just won’t happen.
For example, just recently (and I posted this on Facebook), I had a female acquaintance of mine tell me, “I would rather be apart of a man’s ‘harem’ who was really, really exciting and satisfying in bed than to be in an exclusive relationship with a man who sucked in bed.” I have met many women who have expressed similar sentiments.
Email feedback #3 in response to my article, “Delusional women (and men) need to ‘wake up’ before anger and resentment takes over”
From Amber Lynn M.:
“I listen to your radio show and have read many of your articles. Usually, I enjoy reading your articles, but this one left a bad taste in my mouth. The part that bothered me the most is when you said, ‘We (men) do not want to be upgraded by a woman who is cheating on her man because if she is cheating on her man she is not worthy of our respect anyway’ (or something like that). Talk about a double-standard!! So it’s okay for men to cheat, but not okay for men to cheat? You are so sexist and one-sided!! And on to you specifically. I read where you said you don’t mind being a woman’s #2 or #3 guy in bed. Really?!? All men are egotistical and competitive. At least the men I have met in my life. I have a hard time believing that you are totally ‘cool’ with being a woman’s back-up guy. Needless to say, I thought this article was chauvinistic and misogynistic. It did nothing to help relationships between men and women.”
Alan’s response: Well, well, well . . . it sounds like someone is upset! Blunt truth? At times, I love to get many of my (female) readers “riled up.” It brings more attention to them and provokes more feedback from them.
That said, I hate when men and women “misquote” me though. Amber Lynn, you are very guilty of this in your response. I never said in my article that “it was okay for men to cheat on their wives and girlfriends, but not okay for women to cheat on their husbands and boyfriends.” Show me one sentence where I wrote that. I think cheating is wrong on both the part of men and women. If you would have read any of my four books, you would already know that.
I was sincere when I said that in my younger years, I did not mind being a woman’s “on-the-side” guy (I say younger years, because as I matured, I stopped interacting sexually with women who had husbands, boyfriends, or significant others). You have to understand that men and women tend to think far differently when it comes to casual sex relationships.
Here is the difference: many women typically feel angry, hurt, and frustrated when a man expresses a desire to interact with them strictly for sexual pleasure and satisfaction. That makes many women feel ‘used’ and even ‘disrespected.’ Men very rarely if ever share these same feelings of disappointment or frustration.
Men are almost just the opposite. We feel angry and frustrated when a woman wants to spend time with us for every reason BUT sex. I do not think I have ever heard one man in my life complain, “That woman makes me so mad! She only calls me up when she is horny and wants sex!!!” Uhm ….. no. I know, speaking only for myself, I have never felt “used” or “disrespected” when a woman only wanted sex from me, and nothing else. I usually felt flattered in those situations. On the contrary, I tend to feel very agitated and egotistically frustrated when a woman wants nothing but a purely platonic friendship with me. I literally feel insulted when a woman wants me to be a platonic “play brother” to her rather than a sex partner. I think I speak for the vast majority of single heterosexual men in society. Bottom line: Men love to be treated like “sex objects.”
Therefore, the vast majority of men do not have a problem being a woman’s “secret lover” or “on-the-side part-time lover.” Again, most men actually prefer to have just a strictly sexual relationship with a woman … especially if it is a woman that they cannot see being their future wife or long-term girlfriend.
Finally, I stand by my comment that most men do not respect women who blatantly cheat on their husbands, boyfriends, or significant others. When men “talk amongst themselves,” this opinion is expressed very frequently and emphatically. That is why you will you rarely see a man pleading with a woman to ‘upgrade’ him to the status of husband or long-term boyfriend when he is currently that woman’s ‘on-the-side guy.’ That might happen maybe 1% or 2% of the time, but not much more. Men’s feeling is, “If you are cheating on your current husband with me, what would make me believe that you would be faithful to me if you and I got married?” Simple logic, if you ask me.
Email feedback in response to my article, “‘Maybe’ women will usually leave men feeling agitated and bitter in the long run”
From Danita S.:
“Alan, I found your article on ‘maybe’ women both entertaining and irritating. I have often been a Quick No, Quick Yes, Slow No, and Slow Yes woman, depending on the man I was dealing with. I never really saw this as a problem. Your article seems to be very critical of the Slow No women, and you say or imply that all Slow No women are gold diggers, users of men, or d*ck teasers. I disagree. What about if we want to just take some time to really get to know a man? It’s like you believe that all women should be Quick Yes and Quick No women. That is not real life. I am only a Quick Yes woman with a man who I click with immediately. But most men, it takes time before I feel like I have clicked with them. What is wrong with that?”
Alan’s response: Thank you for writing me Danita, and as I promised you privately, I will not use your real name or real email address in this article (and as you can see, I have not.)
Right now, I want you to Google articles on women’s interest in men, and more specifically, how long it usually takes for a woman to decide if indeed she is genuinely interested in having sex with a man. Do you know that research has shown that the vast majority of women know within the first five-to-fifteen minutes after they interact with a man whether or not they would potentially have sex with them? 5-to-15 minutes!! My attitude is, why should I spend an hour, two hours, or three hours conversing with a woman when 99% chance, that woman knows at roughly the fifteen minute mark whether or not she is definitely going to have sex with me, or definitely not going to have sex with me? That does not make sense (in my mind).
So, you are trying to tell me that it takes days, weeks, or months to arrive at that decision? If so, I say that is B.S. I usually know within the first three-to-five minutes of my first conversation with a woman whether or not I would have sex with her. Sometimes, I know just looking at a woman’s physical appearance whether or not I would have sex with her. I would assert that most men are like me. It may take me a bit longer to decide if I want long-term vs. short-term sex, or monogamous sex vs. non-monogamous sex … but as far as sexual desire and interest in general, it does not take the vast majority of men a long time to arrive at their decision to have sex with a woman.
At least you are acknowledging that ‘Slow No’ women exist. Some women (and even a few men) have argued with me that this category is not even valid. Some men and women believe that there are only Quick Yes, Quick No, and Slow Yes women. Read my latest book for more on my thoughts on “Timewaster” types.
Email feedback in response to my article, “Ladies: Do you ALWAYS expect to have sex when you “go back to his place?”
From Nancy A.:
“Sounds like you had some interesting discussions during your visit to Berlin, Germany! I had no idea that your message of ‘Mode One’ was worldwide. As far as answering the question to your most recent article, I usually know a man wants to have sex with me when he invites me to his house or apartment. I think all women do. But that does not mean that all of us are going to agree to have sex with that man. Believe it or not, I kind of agree with that guy Paul Janka. You said that Janka believes that if a man is too quick to express that he wants to have sex with a woman right away, then this might diminish some of the sexual tension. I partially agree with that. I do not want a man to approach me at a bar or club and simply say, ‘Hey … you want to go back to my place so I can f**k you?’ That would potentially be a major turn-off for me (unless he was really, really hot). I would want him to take time to get to know me and slowly seduce me. That’s just my thoughts and opinion.”
Alan’s response: So … you are a fan of Paul Janka. Interesting. Did he pay you to write me and endorse him and his methods? No … just kidding. I respect that you have opinions that are different than my own.
Read my response to “Danita S.” above. It sounds to me that you do not mind being a “Slow Yes” woman (what I refer to in my books as “Pretenders”). I do not have many problems or criticisms of the “Slow Yes” women. I have problems with the “Slow No” women (what I refer to in my books as “Timewasters”). I believe most women know if they are attracted to a guy and interested in having sex with a guy within the first ten-to-fifteen minutes of their first conversation with him.
For clarification, my book Mode One does not encourage men to just walk up to women and immediately say, “Hey … you want to go back to my place and f**k?” I do not totally discourage that approach … but neither do I specifically encourage that type of approach either.
As you probably already know, I am not into engaging in a high degree of “entertaining small talk” and “trivial chit chat” with women. I believe in getting-to-the-point when it comes to my desires, interests, and intentions in regard to sharing a woman’s company. Particularly if my interest is geared more toward short-term non-monogamous casual sex rather than a potentially long-term monogamous relationship. Why does a man need to “get to know you” in order to have casual sex? I have heard a number of women say that, or suggest that, and I do not get it at all.
As I told you privately, I think it would be very misleading and manipulative for a woman to agree to go home with a guy if she has no interest in having sex with him. That is a recipe for an uncomfortable situation for both the woman and the man. If you are interested, just say something along the lines of, “I will admit … I am very attracted to you, and I probably would not mind having sex with you tonight … but can I ask you some questions to find out more about you before I give you a definite decision?” That type of response is honest, straightforward, and non-manipulative.
So for you, if a man is “really, really hot,” you do not mind him exhibiting Mode One Behavior (i.e., upfront and straightforward with his sexual desires and interests), but if he is ‘average’ looking, you would prefer that he exhibit Mode Two Behavior (i.e., being more cautious, conventional, and ‘beat-around-the-bush’ in expressing his sexual intentions)?? Am I reading that right? I need you to further explain and elaborate on that point.
Email feedback in response to my article, “Why men are attracted to porn and women love ‘chick flicks'”
From Heather F.:
“Alan, you need to quit generalizing men and women!! I like reading a lot of what you write, but I totally disagree with your assumption that women do not like watching porn, and instead love watching ‘chick flicks.’ My girlfriends and I HATE most chick flicks. Seriously! We talk about how corny and stupid they are all the time. I am a Junior in college and about to be a Senior. Guess what me and many of my girlfriends do on many nights when we are together (with no men around)? We watch porn!! Not to sound like a total nymphomaniac, but I love watching porn. All of my girlfriends do too. We probably watch just as much porn as the guys on campus do. One reason I could not wait to get out of my parents’ house is so I could watch porn more regularly. I have even read articles on the Internet that have said that now and days, women watch just as much porn as you men do. My hand is raised in the air!! Take care Alan and keep being you!!”
Alan’s response: Heather, there are always “exceptions.” I would categorize you and your girlfriends’ love for porn over ‘chick flicks’ as being representative of the “exception” more so than the norm, although I will admit … in ten or twenty years, you probably will be the “norm.”
You are right about one thing. Since the advent of the Internet, research has shown that more and more women watch porn videos than they did before access to the Internet was available. In my lifetime, I have probably interacted with at least nine or ten women who had a larger collection of porn DVDs than I did (I actually only own the same three or four DVDs that I have owned for years).
Actually, I have female friends on Facebook who send me porn clips all of the time (not joking). They always want to know If I would give the clip “one star,” “two stars,” “five stars,” and so on. I am very nitpicky with porn. I think 80-90% of porn today is garbage. I only give five stars to about maybe ten percent of the videos or video clips that I have seen. I actually warn guys against watching “too much” porn. It can have a negative effect on your love life and sex life. Men (and women) should only watch porn occasionally, if at all. That is only my opinion though.
On that note, I will conclude this edition of “Feedback from Readers.” As always, keep the feedback coming …. even if what you have to say is a harsh criticism of my content and opinions.
Look! Just that quick, more feedback from a male reader. His question? “What college campus does Heather attend? I need to be on THAT campus!”
That is for me to know, and you to …. well, you the rest.
Alan Roger Currie is the author of a number of books, including Mode One: Let the Women Know What You’re REALLY Thinking and Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex. Currie’s latest eBook is also available exclusively on Amazon.com in their Kindle format. You can also download a copy of Currie’s eBook on your iPhone, Android Smartphone, or other Smartphone.
Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie, the most-listened to talk radio podcast program in the category of “Romance” and dating & relationships on the BlogTalkRadio Internet Radio Network, can be heard LIVE every Thursday evening at 10:00pm EST / 7:00pm PST. Visit http://www.blogtalkradio.com/modeone and http://modeone.net for more details
Currie will be a featured speaker at the upcoming Direct Dating Summit Weekend Conference for Men in New York City on Saturday, July 27, 2013 and Sunday, July 28, 2013. For more details, visit http://directdatingsummit.com Currie offers email, telephone, and Skype consultations to both men and women; Visit http://modeone.net/products to purchase a consultation