Friday, September 30, 2011


October is the month when the testosterone levels in your males is at its yearly high. Two o'clock in the afternoon is the daily peak - kinda like a high tide at the full moon. Basically, girls, we're talking free lunches in the fall. Just smile at a guy, and he'll be panting to pick up the tab. After all, accepting food from a male is the first step in Mother Nature's mating cha-cha for most of your Animal Kingdom. Why should your human males be treated any different?

Not that after the mousse au chocolat you have to join him in some afternoon delight. No. A simple thank you will suffice. You see, by allowing him to buy you a meal, you actually are performing an act of altruism, allowing him an outlet for his natural, testosterone-driven provider urges and giving him hope, however faint, that someday he may be Waltzing Matilda with the best of the birds and the bees.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011


My philosophy of shoes is not just an abstract theory about female sexual self-expression. It has very practical applications in life.

Say, for example, there is some sexual activity a guy wants to try and he's not sure his gal will go for it. He figures he'll just mention it in the middle of sex and maybe she'll agree. Mistake. Unlike your male when aroused, before she can agree, she will have to think about it. And thinking will take her out of the sexual moment. End of session.

Asking a woman out ot the blue to experiment sexually is kind of like a woman who wants to be closer to her mate asking him out of the blue to share his feelings. Suddenly he's wary, not a condition that encourages sharing. A woman would do better to suddenly sniff the air and say, "Honey, I smell gas."

Even if you have an electric stove, he will get up and investigate. When he returns he will be able to assure you that all is well. He will feel closer to you and his feelings will find expression.

Likewise, an indirect approach with a woman's shoe-ness as your point of reference will help you get what you want more easily than a frontal attack. Go to her closet. You will see amazing pairs of shoes in there that she has never worn. They are all aspects of her sexual person, just some are less confident and don't get to go out in public. Pick a pair of shoes that looks like what you want to try. Take them to Nordstroms or Saks and ask for the shopper lady. (Your upper-scale stores will have people whose job it is to help the shopping impaired.) Tell her you need a dress that goes with the shoes, price is no object.

Go home and slip the shoes back. Hand the dress in a wrapped box to your lady and say innocently, "I saw this and I thought of you."

When she opens the box, her first thought will be, "I wonder if I have the shoes for this dress." When she goes to her closet and finds the perfect match, she will feel understood to the depths of her soul.

Take her someplace that goes with the dress and shoes. When you come home, the dress will come off, but the shoes won't.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011


I was sitting in the doctor's office reading an old Psychology Today. It was that or the fishing magazine. The article talked about this guy, he's a Cambridge researcher named Simon Baron-Cohen. He studies autism and his theory says autism is just an extreme version of your basic male brain. Your male brain, he explains, is all about making systems, while your female brain is about using empathy.

Now a systemizing brain is making abstractions, and some of you might think this disproves my position that males are not abstract thinkers. And you might add that empathy is not even thinking, that it's naturally muddled because you can't really separate your feelings from the other person's. 'Separating,' you big lug, is not the point.

Empathy is purely abstract, being about something a person can never know. Your feelings as you feel them can never be felt or counted or seen by me. I must make a gestalt of compassion to even come close, but I will never ever have an objective measure to tell me if I succeeded. The fruits of empathy cannot be counted. Plotting love on a graph misses the point.

Systematizing is all about you reducing a thing or things to a size you are comfortable with and into pieces you can know. In other words, it is about making everything about you and giving you the sense that everything out there is known and possibly controlled by you. You spill a bag of M&Ms on the table and sort them into colors. Eventually, when the number of reds, yellows, and blues is predictable, you feel good because you know what to expect from your bag of candy. But even your Schroedinger figured out, with the help of his cat I might add, that you can't really know how many blues or reds you got, if any, until you open the bag.

One of the 20th Century's biggest brains, famous in the world of science and this is his Big Idea. See what I mean? I do not wish to dissuade men from trying to understand science even though they are constitutionally unfit for it. I know, I know. Men invented what they call the scientific method, but that was just to impress girls by showing that the universe is objectively knowable and therefore concrete like men are concrete and who wouldn't fall in love with a guy who was mentally, like, Mr. Universe? Aristotelian Logic to Newtonian Mechanics was the golden age, creating a basically male model of how things work.

Unfortunately, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle has revealed a definitely female bent to creation. You can't get your subatomic particles to tell you where they are and how fast they're moving at the same time, and why should they? Just asking could change the answer. At the core, creation is such a girl that no man who is stymied by such a simple question like, "What do women really want?" could possibly figure out what the universe is doing here.

Friday, September 09, 2011


So I bought a new pair of shoes. I took a man with me to buy them. It's a test . If he rolls his eyes and asks that question, I know he'll need a lot of training before he's an adequate sexual partner.

For what is a shoe, I ask you? You live a post-Freudian world. You know what Cinderella's slipper really was. Why should a girl at Starbucks be any different? Men have their outer-tool-ness. Girls have their inner-shoe-ness.

A girl tries out sexual ideas on her feet before she explores them more completely on her back. No one denies the tie-me-up appeal of four-inch spike heels. But every shoe on a girl is a form of sexual self-expression. If she only wears comfy shoes, she ain't going to be doing nothing kinky, though your Birkenstock crowd will engage in some earthy-squishy activities. But no costumes, please. Others, you can tell from their shoes, feel like Mae West did that "sure sex is natural, but not if you're doing it right." And it's all right there on her closet floor.