Less than a century ago, women in The United States hadn’t yet been granted the right to vote.  Though it was allowed in some states, it wasn’t until 1920, when the constitution was amended, that women were guaranteed this right.  Without the ability to voice their viewpoints via the voting booth, perhaps our country would be different today.  I shudder to think of the improbable possibilities for laws [bad] men might have tried to pass.  Would there be a Barefoot & Pregnant mandate?  A Mall Prohibition Act?  Failure to Chill Beer ordinance? Tax deductions for men who wished to claim both their wife and mistress as dependents?

Fortunately, women have made amazing strides and this  country is one of the better places in the world to be female.  Despite this, women still struggle, because there are some things even progress can’t change.  It is possible to update our wardrobes, refurbish our furniture, restore old cars, or remodel old homes, but men are always AS-IS.

Which is why, while most of us like having a man in our lives, finding one that doesn’t make us crazy or worse, can be near impossible.  Lest people mistake this for a diatribe from a man-hater, I wish to assure readers that I am a BIG fan of men.  Women are almost always more and better company, but I still find the company of men irresistible.  I especially like them, because they are different than women, but the more manly they are, the stronger the urge to change them.  It’s like this:

I want a man who works hard enough to sweat, but I’d prefer not smell the sweat.
I want a man who knows how to use a gun if he needs to, but dislike men who need to remind others they know how to use a gun.
I want a man who can and will fight, but not a man who wants to fight.
I want a man who shows skill in the bedroom, but I’d be really turned on, if he were as eager to show off his kitchen skills.
I would like it if my man looked like one of those attractive gay models, but if I were to find out he was gay, I doubt I’d still find him attractive.

Men think women are hard to please, but it’s actually quite simple.  We want manly men, who are sensitive, soft, gentle, and sweet, like women.

Women like me, have succeeded in confusing men.  Are they supposed to be he-men or metrosexuals?  Are they supposed to open doors for us, or just leave us a key?  It’s all about balance, as we struggle to eliminate the confusion over who wears the pants and who wears the panties.

Blame feminism, because as women gained more equality in the workplace, they sought more at home.  Women were changing, and in the process they were inadvertently changing men.   This made me wonder if more powerful women, meant less powerful men.  Was the Great American male becoming an endangered species, teetering on extinction after having been emasculated by well-meaning feminists?  Had The Great American man become as frail as the California Coastal Sand Gnat, struggling to survive in the face of environmental change?

Women would love it if men were more like girlfriends, sharing their enthusiasm for things like cashmere and Italian shoes.  If we had our way, men would learn to enjoy long meandering conversations and realize the joy of shopping, but while there have always been women who wanted men who were as easily controlled as children, the majority of us still want a man with a nicely defined backbone.  There are men who enjoy shopping or grooming as much as women, but most men are simply not interested, because despite everything, they are still men.

Nevertheless, the metrosexual is often exhibited as evidence that men are becoming feminized.   I’m not buying it.  It’s just the latest incarnation of “The Sharp Dressed Man.” It’s not like men don’t care about their image, but image is different things to different men.  For some image is grooming, for others it may be a car, a fat paycheck or a perfectly manicured lawn.  The term metrosexual may be new, but his type is not.  A hundred years ago, a man who embraced fashion and a refined lifestyle, would have been called a dandy.

Some argue that feminism has diminished our respect or the strength of American men.  Many point to the examples of television fathers–like the difference between Ozzie Nelson and Ozzie Osbourne as evidence, that our view of men has been diminished.  The  media often portrays men as bumbling incompetents, relying on women to guide them, but this is nothing new.  Literature is full of hapless henpecked husbands.  Even during The Golden Age of Radio and early television men were often the brunt of jokes.  It makes for good comedy, and men are surprisingly good sports about jokes made at their expense.  Make fun of a woman, and you’ll likely regret it, but men are easy targets.

Why?
Because in the war between the sexes, there is no cease-fire.  Women will fight for every hill, to make sure that their wisdom, competence and superior taste in almost everything is acknowledged, but men will easily surrender or  declare victory, if they get respect, appreciation and regular demonstrations of affection–AKA sex.

Feminism changed sex and the economy of sex, because it enabled women to move between supply side and demand side.  Women now had demands and were controlling the supply through a kind of rationing and price-fixing.  As the supply began to change, men sought new suppliers, and there were always more suppliers.  Promiscuity became common and porn became mainstream.  Wives no longer held the monopoly on sex, and men were suddenly contenting themselves with the kind of cheap, easy, readily available women they’d previously disdained.  The one woman one man ideal was outmoded, as men began sharing their pulp princesses with countless other men, and women found  themselves competing with mens’ make-believe mistresses.

It simplified things for men, as they no longer needed to please a woman emotionally or sexually just to get a little, but it was hardly the brave new world.  Pleasure-seeking and erotica have always existed, and it isn’t as if internet porn destroyed the sexual utopia that existed before feminism.  Marriage took some hits,  and intimate sex between people who loved each other fell victim to friendly fire, making some wonder if sex within marriage or would soon be obsolete.  Doubtful, as long is there is one person alive who remembers that the solo, is nothing compared to the duet.

Men still need women, and women still need men.  Feminism changed our world, but it has yet to change men into women or women into men.  The war between the sexes continues, because some things never change, even in the face of progress.

Less than a century ago, Halloween was little more than a  night of youthful pranks and mischief.  Ever-changing, and ever challenging our sensibilities, it seems Halloween is forever being redefined.  No other celebration poses more of a dichotomy, as the most morbid themes are mingled with whimsical innocence.   Fairies, princesses, ghouls, super heroes, and characters from TV or movies provide alternate identities, and a brief escape from reality.

Halloween is one of our calendar’s most-controversial celebrations.  From it’s earliest origins, it has been a holiday to love or hate.   The holiday we now know as Halloween, was first instituted by Catholics, as the intended replacement for its pagan forerunner, Samhain. In keeping with the Night of the Living Dead theme, it was a day to honor the memory of saints and martyrs.  Martin Luther’s Protestant reformation, hoped to eradicate the Catholic celebration of All Saint’s Day and All Hallow’s Eve, because his religious ideas did not embrace the  Catholic view of saints.   The New England Puritans banned the holiday in the New World, because of  its Catholic origins, but it wasn’t long before large numbers of Irish-Catholic immigrants succeeded in reestablishing the popularity of Halloween traditions.

By the early 1900′s, Halloween celebrations had become part of the American tradition, but the holiday was, and still is, one of our most controversial.   Just as the Catholic church once did, many churches and religious communities, have invented their own substitutes for Halloween.  Even the so-called “separation of church and state” hasn’t been able to keep schools from taking a stance.  Many schools have banned costumes or other Halloween celebrations out of respect to those with religious concerns–and one school district in Pulyallup, Washington, was compelled to enact bans, lest local witches (Wiccans) be offended.

People either love it or hate it.   I understand many dislike the way Halloween blurs the line between good and evil, but to me it’s not so different from the rest of life as we all seek to balance bad things and things that scare us, with the good and sweet things which make life worth the struggles.  In fact, I adore seeing children in costumes eager to receive a ration of candy, but for some even innocent trick-or-treaters pose a nuisance.

If only being grown-up, were as simple as being a kid.  As adults, we adopt a seriousness about ourselves and the things around us.  Fortunately or unfortunately, it is clear that Halloween is no longer just for kids, and it is one of few opportunities for us to shed the inhibitions and constraints of our own identities, to embrace another.  In the same way princesses, ghouls, super heroes, and cartoon characters give children a chance to make-believe, costumes offer grown-ups an invitation to play.

I like it when adults let down their guard a little.  Costumes seem to make it easier, but if costumes are a license to have fun, they can also be an excuse to behave (or misbehave) in a way one wouldn’t normally.  An article from Psychology Today suggests costume choices  may reveal hidden parts of our personalities. Whether it is repressed feelings, unspoken desires or innocent fantasies, Halloween provides an outlet.

This brings me to the subject of provocative female costumes. Once witches were ugly crones with green skin and twisted noses, but the newest generation of witch costumes usually feature a spell-casting amount of skin–which is  rarely, if ever green.)  Every perennially popular costume is now available in various degrees of slutty.  Not so long ago, the pregnant bride costume provided risque laughs, but now most of us would err on the safe side, by offering a pregnant bride our congratulations.   Beacons of virtue like Snow White and Red Riding Hood have lost their innocence, along with the school teachers, nurses and costumed nuns who have joined the naughtiness.  It seems the little girls who once collected candy, have become a mixed bag of sweet tarts.

Though most women enjoy the attention that comes with being attractive, those who swap their uniqueness to become just another girl in a skimpy costume are reduced to little more than eye candy.  Has our quest for equality made us like men hoping for a conquest, with no thoughts of the morning after?   As we advertise our tricks and display the treats, have we forgotten how to cultivate desire, without the use of T & A?  Could it be that we no longer know how to engage and delight men, so they, like children on Halloween, can hardly concentrate for the distraction of thoughts of finally being allowed to unwrap the candy?

The downside is that just as kids may revel in the excess of the evening, big boys are apt to do the same.  When Halloween is over, they will have to wait for next year’s candy extravaganza, and some women may realize they have become just another piece the morning after, the sexy costumes have no more appeal than leftover candy corn.

Thankfully, it’s only one night a year.

A duckling, newly emerged from the shell, immediately looks for something with which it will bond. In the absence of the mother duck, the hatchling forms an attachment to the closest moving thing, whether human, animal or even an inanimate object like a ball; in a process called imprinting. Our sexual response is often the result of our own imprinting.   We may not even know why certain things turn us on and others don’t, but they are often the result of earlier experiences and the feelings we associate with them.

We are complicated creatures, but we are also amazingly simple.  As researchers study human sexual response, there are new findings on why we like what we like, but some of it just seems obvious.  For instance, a recent study showed a tendency for us to gravitate toward partners who bear certain similarities to our opposite sex parent. Freud would say it’s Oedipal, but it’s  not that complex.  We adapt to what is familiar.  Americans eat fries with ketchup, but Europeans prefer them with mayonnaise. I don’t even like ketchup much, but because it’s what I’m used to, I like it better than mayo on my pomme frittes.

In the same way, our ideas of physical attractiveness are mostly the result of cultural conditioning.  Across the globe,  beauty ideals vary greatly.  We may prefer smooth skin, beautiful teeth, or hard bodies, but there are places where scars, gold teeth and soft bodies define desirability.  Our preferences may seem personal, but they are largely influenced by what we’ve become accustomed to.

Consider the colors you like.  It is likely you have a favorite.  Maybe you’ve assumed color trends are launched by hipsters or designers, or that your response to them is a matter or personal taste, but the reality is that they are largely shaped by teams of professionals in the color industry, who work to change your preferences, in an attempt to influence what you will buy.  They begin by choosing palettes (also called color forecasts).  These palettes are then used to to create the things you are likely to see in stores.  What we may think of as color “trends” are actually an orchestrated effort to make you like what they’re selling. Their effort relies on exposing you to colors repeatedly, until you first become accustomed to them, then fonder of them as they become more familiar.  (They are also counting on you to tire of those colors, in time for their next round of picks.)

Our brains are very malleable, quickly responding to things around us.  Neurons and synapses are constantly readjusting according to exterior stimuli.  Often called our largest sexual organ, it should come as no surprise that the chemical and electrical activity of the brain not only reacts to, but also alters our sexual response. The brain continually records and categorizes experiences, creating a mental database of positive and negative perceptions. Eventually, those associations trigger reactions ranging from arousal to repulsion.  It is still not completely understood why some develop odd triggers or fetishes, but just as the deformed and putrid flesh of bound feet were once considered the height of erotica in China, our sexual response is largely the result of conditioning.

Because of the way our brains recall previous experiences, things we have found pleasant or arousing before, can become  sexual triggers, but unpleasant experiences can also rework our sexual response.  This is particularly true in cases of coerced sex, violent sex, or shame-inducing sex.  An individual who has been raped or molested, may have trouble getting past the fear or anxiety associated with predatory sex.  In fact, those who have suffered sex in a traumatic context may develop a negative reaction to what  might be considered normal sex.  (I’m not about to attempt to define “normal”, but for this  example, let’s define “normal” as he kind of sex we can imagine Claire and Cliff Huxtable having.)  A gay man I know, recounts being encouraged as a child, to have sex with a female cousin for the pleasure of voyeuristic adults.  After which, the residual shame made it impossible to even think about sex with a female.

In theory, the chemicals (like oxytocin, vasopressin, and dopamine) released when we have physical contact with another, are supposed to help us bond to and enjoy a long relationship with a single person.  However, in a culture where casual sex has become increasingly common, those same chemicals can fuel a kind of anti-monogamy addiction.  Those who bounce from bed to bed, may not even realize they are reprogramming the brain to reject monogamy, as they become conditioned to the rush of new encounters, making longer relationships, less attractive and less sustainable.

Because healthy relationships require both an emotional and physical bond, relationships based primarily on sex tend to be short-lived. Casual sex may be satisfying in the short-term, but without the emotional validations we crave, sex isn’t enough to sustain a long-lasting relationship. It is an example of how what we want, may not be what we need.  Even in arrangements like “friends with benefits”, the ongoing effort for both parties to balance the differences between their sexual and emotional needs, usually makes the arrangement temporary, at best. Unfortunately, without a significant emotional connection, sex for the sake of sex, becomes little more than a series of thrill rides. Even Cosmopolitan magazine, which has long advocated free sexual expression, recently cautioned men that excessive masturbation can diminish their ability to respond to sex with a partner.

What we want, isn’t always what we need.  Sometimes getting what we want, prevents us from getting what we need.  The reasons may be complicated, or simple, but like Pavlov’s dogs salivating for a bell, rats conditioned to endure electrical shocks in exchange for a few grains of food, or a baby duck waiting for a dog to teach him to swim or fly; we are all subject to imprinting.