Who is Hornier?

Some time ago, I was reading that part of "Playboy" where they answer questions or respond to statements of opinion sent in by readers. One letter writer claimed that males are much hornier than females and, in support of this contention, pointed out that most prostitutes are women, and that they served men. The writer of the letter concluded the reason for this imbalance in the world's population of prostitutes is that women usually have no reason to hire the services of professional male sex partners because they are generally less interested in casual sex than men are. Those women who do have a stronger sex drive have their choice of thousands of men, and practically all of them are available for free. The writer's opinion was in agreement with mine, based on what I had observed up until that time, and which opinion I still hold.

The columnist, true to his magazine's stated doctrine and financial interests, pooh-poohed that notion, and pointed out that prostitution is the result of economic necessity. He asserted that it is poverty that compels families to put their daughters out on the street, and it is also the reason why many American women take to hooking. His further stated opinion, which also reflects the magazine's corporate opinion, is that women are just as hot to trot as men, and that all that the males of the human species, especially in the United States, need to do to benefit from those powerful female sexual urges is to subscribe to their magazine and buy the clothing, booze and other overpriced merchandise advertised in its pages.

I agreed with what had been said about economic necessity, but asked the columnist why those impoverished families didn't put their sons to doing the same kind of work. I also wanted to know why, since men are also faced with financial needs, there aren't more midnight cowboys going around alleviating female sexual urges that, he says, are as potent as those of men. The magazine didn't answer me. One advantage of writing a column where you express opinions is that you always get the last word.

At the time I read the magazine, and ever since, I have been of the opinion that men are hornier that women, although I am willing to concede that this is an individual thing. There are women who love sex, casual and otherwise, and are very active. There are also men who have little or no interest. However, I have always believed that men, generally speaking, are more eager to indulge in sex than their female counterparts, especially sex with no strings attached.

Unfortunately, there has never, to my knowledge, been any kind of research into this question. Doctors Masters and Johnson, and Doctor Kinsey and others have asked men and women a good many questions on the subject of sexual activity, and have compiled a substantial amount of data, but not on this specific detail. This might be completely understandable. I would expect that most persons would have no problem recalling the time they first had sex and can easily cite what kinds of sexual acts they have performed and what they prefer, but those are just statistics, and can be compiled and compared. Degrees of horniness are qualitative. That is, they will vary from one person to another, and nobody can tell just how horny another person is, nor can individuals describe accurately how horny they are, outside of generalities, such as somebody saying: "I'm hornier than a mountain goat."

There are objective ways of determining how sexually aroused a person is. The degree of stiffness of a cock can be observed, as can the ruddy flush of a woman's chest and the amount of lubrication her pussy is producing or how erect her nipples are. However, this is just sexual arousal, not horniness, which is the amount of desire a person has for sexual intercourse. The two are related, of course, but they are not the same thing. A man or a woman may not be hard or wet, respectively, at a specific point in time, but can still be horny and desirous of achieving that state and having some form of sexual intercourse as soon as possible. Conversely, he or she may be in a high state of arousal but, for personal or other valid reason, prefer to refrain from having intercourse, even though a willing partner is available. This is the question I am asking here: Generally speaking, is it men or women who are hornier? Or are they pretty much equal in their horniness?

As I said before, although it varies from one person to another, it is my strongly held opinion that men are hornier than women; that is to say that men tend to be more desirous of having sex than women are. I base this opinion on several factors, one of them being the almost total lack of male prostitutes available to service women. A while ago, I heard of a famous madam who spoke of plans to open a legal brothel in Nevada, with men there to serve the sexual needs of women. I doubt if the operation will ever even begin and, if it does, it will go broke within a year. I say this because, among other problems it would face, there is no reason for most women to pay a man for sex when there are so many guys who are willing to provide all she wants for free. Unless she is grotesquely ugly or stinks like an outdoor toilet in August, men will line up around the block for the opportunity to get into her pants.

I am referring here to most men. There are some, whom I usually think of as "Makeout Artists" who would not be in that line. They would have no need, because they get so much pussy from willing women that they would consider it to be a waste of their valuable time. I have known such men, and have always been envious of them, and wished I knew their secrets. There are others who would also forego that waiting line because of some strong need to remain unlaid, such as a vow of chastity or a desire to be true to a wife or significant other. I would fit into that latter category, and I am not criticizing such men, since I can respect and share their forbearance, but we are distinctly a minority.

Some things have changed since my youth, which was many years before Al gore invented the internet, but some things still remain the same. Back then, a common answer by a young woman to a young man who implored her to have sexual intercourse with him was: "No. I'm not that kind of girl." Another common answer was: "No. I'm saving myself for marriage." These were only things that females said; I can't imagine any male giving such a ridiculous answer. Of course, it was also exceedingly rare for a woman to ever importune a man for sex, unless he happened to be Elvis Presley or somebody such as that.

If a male were ever propositioned and he responded by saying "No, I'm not that kind of boy," it would, essentially, mean that he was saying he was gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that, to paraphrase a famous "Seinfeld" episode, but it would be highly unusual for a man to want to pass himself off as gay when he was actually straight. The fact is, virtually all straight boys or men are "that kind of boy" or want to be, if they can find available partners. There might very well be a few boys or men who actually are saving themselves for marriage, or were back then, but I've never known any, and I probably wouldn't want to know any.

On the forums of Literotica, I have debated this question, and most of the women who responded said something to the effect that they wanted to avoid having a reputation for being "easy" or promiscuous. They were afraid the guys who got into their pants would tell others about the conquests. Those fears were well founded. Unless the couple was in a fairly committed and long-term relationship, the male half of it would have bragged, especially if she had been a virgin. He would have considered it to be his duty to other members of his gender, much as a scientist who makes a new discovery must publish his findings, and those other members would have considered it their duty to pass on the information to any other male who might have an interest.

About that, however, I ask: "So what?" If girls and women are now as horny as boys and men, that would have also been the case fifty years ago; biology doesn't change that rapidly. A high level of horniness in the female population would have meant that members of that gender would have enjoyed sex as freely as males wished they could have. Breaking a hymen would have been notable enough that it might have been worth a mention, but any other fornication after that would not have been. If a boy or young man were to report to one of his fellows that he had known, in the biblical sense, a certain girl or woman, the news would have been met with a relative lack of interest, because many of their mutual male acquaintances probably would have experienced that pleasure with the same partner.

To make a further comparison: Most girls at the time liked to dance; perhaps they still do. If some guy were to mention that he had danced with a girl, that information would not have been considered worth passing on. The fact that the girl liked to dance would have been common knowledge, and having done so with her would not be considered gossip-worthy. Likewise, if most girls wanted to fuck as much as their male counterparts, they would have done so, because there were a multitude of partners available, and having a reputation for enjoying sex would have had as little consequence as having a reputation for liking to dance.

There was also the fear of pregnancy, of course, but this problem was easily preventable. "The Pill" was not available back then, but condoms were. Most boys carried condoms tucked inside their wallets, just in case and, if some guy didn't happen to have one, they were not hard to get. True, many boys and men expressed disdain toward using them because of the reduced tactile pleasure but, if it meant the difference between getting laid and remaining unlaid, that reluctance would have quickly evaporated.

Furthermore, this "saving oneself for marriage" and "wanting to avoid a reputation" really only applied to high school girls and, to a lesser degree, women in college, of which there were very few back then. A widowed or divorced woman would have no longer been saving herself for marriage, and could have given in to her supposed high degree of horniness, since she would have had plenty of available partners. As for a supposedly unsavory reputation, this would also not have been a problem, nor would it be one now. Male adults, or men, almost always have enough sense and decency that they rarely "kiss and tell" the way they might have as boys. For one thing, they respect the woman's privacy enough not to violate it and, for another, they recognize they have a good thing going and don't want to jeopardize it. Maybe even more important, most men are mature enough that they want their private business to remain private.

No, regardless of what some women and the "Playboy" shill say, men are, generally speaking, hornier than women. There is no way to scientifically prove this, but the anecdotal evidence is so one-sided that no more proof should be needed.

*

Thank you for reading this essay, which strictly expresses my personal opinion. You may not agree with it, and that is your right. If you feel that women are hornier than men, or that the genders are about equal in that regard, let me know why, and perhaps we can discuss it further.