The Pussy Pill

This is a good one folks. A friend of mine just told me about this research, and not only does it answer a lot of questions, but it is also mind-numbing in its implications. Are you ready? There is reason to believe, as a result of scientific research, that The Pill, that’s right, the birth control pill, causes women to be attracted to non-masculine men. Oh my. Is this true?

Well, it certainly seems like that is what we are seeing in the culture right now, but how long has this been going on? And in what specific culture are we seeing it? If true, this has been present for quite some time. The pill was approved for use in 1960, and that was 64 years ago. Have women taking the pill been attracted to “pussy-men” for that long? I do think the culture has generally encouraged this—with all the talk we hear about toxic masculinity these days, we certainly are seeing a general repulsion aimed at manly men. The sensitive man is what women claim to want—the man more in touch with his feelings.

Really?

And, of course, this doesn’t apply to all women, on the pill or not. And is it a bad thing that women on the pill (at least the ones in these studies) are attracted to pussy-men? Hell no! Considering that yours truly is a pussy-man! Right from the beginning I was less macho than most men. I was a mamma’s boy, and Dad was a star athlete when he attended the US Naval Academy, wasn’t around to teach me the ways of men, or just wasn’t interested in doing so. He certainly was a manly man.

I adored women, so my pussy-ness was not a sexual orientation thing, but I was sensitive, artistic, passive, and definitely a lover not a fighter. Were women attracted to me? No, not really, but I did end up with a wonderful first wife. We had the most beautiful relationship for 28 years before she died of cancer. Then I married another incredible woman, but I don’t think she was attracted to me because I was a pussy-man. But who knows.

It seems if left to their own natural devices, women, with normal estrogen levels, are more likely to be attracted to men with high testosterone levels, in a word, more “manly.” This applies to both looks, mannerisms and psychology. Needless to say, I doubt if this is across the board. As mentioned in previous paragraphs, I am not a manly man and managed to attract two (of the ones I married) exceptional women. (Not so successful, however, with general dating.) As they say, it takes all kinds to make an interesting world, and although manly men may be the desired type to mate with and to have around to fight off sabre-toothed beasts, all different types should be in the gene pool. What a boring world it would be if only the football quarterbacks and cheerleaders were matched up to procreate.

What makes this troublesome, however, is not the natural “bell curve” with its off-the-beaten-path outliers (pussy-men), but that this choice for the pussy-man is chemically induced. Add that to the agenda’s plans to wipe out all masculine face-men (manly in face, body, and spirit) from the culture’s progeny, and you really have some problems.

Was the invention of the pill a conscious choice of the agenda? I doubt it. But then again, messing around with the human body in an effort to stop one of its most important, and natural, processes (procreation), is a ticket to trouble in my opinion. I mean really, it is not nice to fool Mother Nature.

Check out this paragraph from an article I found on this topic (found here.) This is explaining the results of the studies (found here). Read the article for more information on how all of this research was conducted.

However, for the women who started the pill, they found that women’s ideal male faces became significantly less masculine after the fact. A follow-up study of pill-taking women’s actual partner choice echoed these results. Using a sample of 170 age-matched, partnered women, researchers found that the faces of men who were chosen as partners by women who were on the birth control pill had significantly less masculine faces than those of their non pill-taking contemporaries. 

So, as I mentioned before, is this really a problem? Well, the article goes on to say that when these women stop the pill for any reason (like to have a child) they are then stuck with a man whom they naturally are not attracted to (a pussy-man) and then marital trouble ensues. This does seem an odd consequence to me, as there is more to a relationship than looks (I’ll say). But the study also shows this:

After following two samples of married couples (one sample was comprised of 48 couples; the other 70 couples) for up to five years, they found that women who chose their partners when they were on the pill and then went off of it experienced changes in sexual and relationship satisfaction in response to their change in hormonal status. Specifically, they found that all of these women reported decreased sexual satisfaction after going off the pill. And for women who were paired to unattractive husbands? They found that this change was accompanied by a decrease in overall marital satisfaction. 

My oh my, this is a problem, isn’t it? Again, factor in the general societal pull away from the archetypal male by labelling the attributes that make him a “man” toxic, you’ve got a compounded problem. Gee, in a few short years, men will all be marrying other men, and women other women (NOT because they are gay, but because it will be easier considering no one will be interested in sex) with no procreation at all. Imagine that.

There is definitely something strange going on in the sex dynamic of the culture—at least in Canadian culture, and I would suspect this is going on elsewhere in the civilized world (yes, using the phrase “civilized world” is a joke). Anecdotally, I see this in my young clients, and even in the older ones.

I see a lot of couples, and I would say about half of them contain men who are still little boys (pussy-men) and half of them are macho-men, on the verge of losing it because their wives and the culture have labelled them as “toxic.” The manly men are chastised for raising their voices when upset about something, not being in touch with their feelings, and wanting far too much sex (“it isn’t only about sex” comes the complaint from their partners).

The pussy-men in these relationships were either formed to be pussy-men due to overly possessive mothers and passive fathers or had a proclivity for being pussy-men, only to then be hammered by wives who do not really see them as “men.”

I then see men and women in therapy who are not partnered, wondering what a relationship with the opposite sex (if heterosexual) is all about. Is love about sex? We are told it is not. Is being a manly man the best way to be with a woman? We are told it is not. Believe it or not, I have an inordinate number of men in relationships with bi-sexual women. What is that about? Because these young people are taught that sexual orientation really should have nothing to do with who or what you love, they get engaged in sexless relationships, or relationships with only casual sex as a method to relieve biological drives and nothing more. Neither works.

Goodness, gracious, that’s why we’re a mess. And it is getting worse.