The new women are supposed to have a much more casual attitude toward sex compared to previous generations. I'm not sure. At face value maybe, and I welcome that. But that women might finally be freed from the shackles, that they might be able to enjoy sex for itself without it having to be tied up in status, partnership issues, procreation and family life, for me that would represent a departure from the norm. In my experience it is not what's happening yet. Women might pretend that is what's happening, even to themselves, but in doing so they merely add yet another dimension to the smoke and mirrors that are man/woman relations.

Even in cases where some kind of liberation is achieved and sex is embraced for its own sake, even then it is rarely the true preference. It is usually second best and interim until the real deal comes along - i.e. an exclusive, formal commitment. When such exclusivity is not the preference then something has invariably gone wrong.

Just as in the 60s liberation days with birth control and female independence on the horizon, when women were encouraged to approach sex the same way men did, very quickly they found this freedom did not suit their agenda. The modern women will find this too. They will continue as they have done for centuries to make the core of their lives an exclusive relationship with a man. (Lesbian partnerships conform to type in this respect other than being same sex preference.)

A woman without a man is like a man without a job. A man may not like his job but does it anyway as necessity. A woman may not like her man but sticks with him. It's not him that is crucial, it is what he represents. It is about what the status of having him entails. I used to question the attention I got from women. At times I thought I must be some great guy. But it had so little to do with actual me and all to do with what I represented. In a word: legitimacy. Men have through the ages provided women with their legitimate place. They still do despite appearances to the contrary. My contention is that this is a weakness and harnesses women. It keeps them in a shackled state, steeped in dependency. Like this they live as fragments of themselves.

I've met a few older women in recent years, their children up and out, their men quite successful and solvent. Some can bask in material bounty. Many have long since lost interest in their men but hang on in there partly from habit, partly from fear of change, partly from an abhorrence of being single and, more cynically, to exploit their investment. They take advantage of the strident pose of modern femininity and go out to find some other activity away from the matrimonial base. This is a good thing in itself. But that such activity is so tied to the dead-beat securities of family life, minimises its benefit. I would urge modern women to eschew family life completely and forget notions of procreation in favour of personal development and from such development make more worthy contributions to society, contributions based on more truer forms of independence and freedom.

When a woman has sex with a man for the joy of it and for its relationship value and its spiritual enrichment then that is a woman I could be interested in. Currently I believe that woman to be so rare as to be non-existent.