Hi, Mr. Kanazawa,

I want to reply to your statement that sexual activity always occurs when and with whom the female wants it to occur. Even notwithstanding rape, this is not a true statement. For example, under most circumstances, I will not sleep with a woman simply because she solicits it - or, for that matter, because she works hard to seduce me. I'm not interested in shagging with a woman simply because she makes herself available to me; I want better for myself than that. (I can imagine exceptions to this rule: perhaps, if I am drunk, despairing, and convinced that I am worthless, I will be willing to engage in casual sex with the first woman who consents.) The fact that I will not engage in sex with just any woman means that I am selective; hence, with regard to me, at least, mating is not merely the choice of my desired partner, but it is also my choice. Additionally, I personally know other men who have greater respect for themselves as well as women and who better avail themselves of their capacity for self-control than to submit to the sort of prurient and irresponsible behavior you describe. We cannot be the only men in the whole world who operate this way. Your article paints men and women in strokes that are too broad to represent them accurately.

I would also suggest, Mr. Kanazawa, that your article does our society a disservice by encouraging us to believe that men are really no more than helpless animals - that is, you omit from your analysis any consideration of the capacities for reason, responsibility, and self-control that men do, in fact, possess, and which enable them to decide not to have sex even when willing women are available. We men can be and are motivated by greater things than the selfish and base pursuit of sex. Mr. Kanazawa, we men do not need to hear any more groundless reasons to believe we are worthless, despicable, useless, hopeless, or disgusting. I would instead like to hear what science has to tell us about what we men do have to offer humanity when we are good fathers, good husbands, and good men generally.

David

Mr Kanazawa,

Where are the facts? The numbers? Sorry to say, but this sounds more as a personal opinion, then an academic research. And let me agree with Mr David. Walking in a bar and get any woman a man wants, sounds more like a personal statement then a truly definition of what is a great leader.
And just like Mr. David, I chose the woman I want, and I say no to women I don't want. Simple like that. This is called evolution Mr Kanazawa, and both men and women are struggling today to understand themselves in a rational way. Please, try to improve this self understanding, and not make more gender wars.

André

So wait: gay men tend to be involved in the creative arts and tend to be at least as productive members of society as their straight counterparts. But if they can get sex without needing these things to impress women why do they do it? I thought if men didn’t need to impress women society would collapse? Sorry I have to point out a flaw in your reasoning but I agree with what was said before it is a very narrow and limited view of men to think of them only as sex driven animals.

I also think it is highly offensive to say “There would be no civilization, no art, no literature, no music… if sex and mating were a male choice.” Believe it or not we women tend to play a part in the creation of these things as well.

It is an insult to men to assume that their only motivation to live is sex. Also, your article doesn't explain what motivates women to compose symphonies, author books, make scientific discoveries or whatever if they can already have sex whenever they want.

Kanazawa actually enjoys these posts rather than realizing how much full of BS he is in all his articles. I'd say let's ignore his posts from now on. It's a worthless waste of time and energy. I really regret of reading his post in the first place.

Come on guys...lighten up. I am a heterosexual woman who has seen both sides of this coin. I have dated jerks who will do anything for sex (and there are plenty out there) and I have known men who aspire to more than this and are faithful partners.

My sense is that Mr. Kanazawa's post is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, clearly exaggerated but ringing of some truth. Clearly we all know men like what he is describing. Many men are like this and it IS somewhat amusing. But as with anything in life, there are exceptions. No need to get defensive.

Well, yeah, if a sexy woman made herself available to me, I'd be sorely tempted to sleep with her. It's hardwired into my genes. However, being tempted and acting on the temptation are two different things. Mr. Kanazawa's point is well-taken.

...and that is why your blog is titled as "The Scientific Fundamentalist". It is true, Mr Kanazawa, you are a fundamentalist and most probably you are a naive realist too. This is the hard truth.

Having statistical data in hand is not sufficient for your conclusions.

To look at this through depth psychology, I think Kanazawa's point of view is basically true but needs some elaboration. Civilization is, in a sense, the result of the "sublimation" of psycho-sexual energy or libido. We know it for a fact that Beethoven created his greatest masterpieces after his emotional collapses. Three times after failure at love, he turned his suppressed emotions into something sublime. Why? Because he couldn't have sex with his beloved woman? Yes and no. Sex is only a part of the issue, not all of it. Even if he had had sex with his beloved, he could have still been emotionally suppressed for so many reasons.
This discourse has a "root" in sex but it can go far beyond sex. It's true that we men are strongly driven to impress women. We have to be creative, and we have been! However, during this process, man achieves something esle as well, and that is his own choice! When you gain that, so to speak, creativity, probably you can impress so many women not just the one that motivated you first! And that's when a man can choose as well! In fact, human alpha male has access to all females! For, female's natural drive is to pick and mate with the good "gene". But male's natural urge is to spread his gene.
It's true that women can get sex much easier. But, could a woman get any man to "love" her and establish a life with her as easily? We all know the answer... And that's why women become more selective. Even for sexual lust, women are more selective than men are, for women are unconsciously driven by the sense of picking the good gene. And, toward a good gene, women are dramatically "jealous" to each other. Maybe this jealousy in women is even stronger than sexual drive in men. If a woman wants his man to be better than other men, it's because she in fact wants to be above other women!
So, is it women that "make" men? Are men not the prime victim of women's jealousy toward women? ... And how could we evaluate this questions through an evolutionary state of human consciousness? ... I leave the end of the argument open...

Lets face it folks, this article was likely inspired by Mr. Kanazawa's latest "NO". He did state, and I quote, "In reality, however, women do often say no to men. (In my experience, they always do.)" "Always" ? Poor Satoshi. I must say though, I did get a huge laugh out of the thread of truth to be found and the huge exaggeration of male uselessness outside of sex. For you men out there who were insulted by poor Satoshi, give the guy a break, it is true for him, and so he was not entirely off. There are some men to which this article would appy. For the rest of you, we women see how wonderful, creative, inspired and useful you are when you choose to be.

"Women are the reason men do everything."

Ah-mazing. Great post

You guys that are getting offended, think of it this way: he's not talking about conscious mind, he's talking about instincts. Most psychologists agree that human minds don't just operate on one layer, but we have personalities/ consciousness, and the instinctive/ subconscious. Kanazawa focuses more on the "instinctive" part. So what he's saying is NOT that all men are sex-obsessed in reality, but that--in terms of evolution-- male *instincts* would work that way. Evolutionary psychology doesn't deal with individuals or personality, but the species as a whole.
Kanazawa's wording is clumsy, some of his logic is off, and he really does need numerical evidence to support the ideas in his posts... but *some* of the underlying ideas are valid.

Satoshi Kanazawa

I think what you've written is complete clap trap.

Do you honestly believe that some minging dunk fat chick (as you eloquently describe) that comes up to me in a club is going to get the yes from me? Well, it’s happened more than once and it’s NO each time.

While it might be the culture in Japan or elsewhere to get as many STD's as possible its not actually the case with most intelligent people.

And to think, I am actually considering a course with the LSE and I see you as some of the calibre of that university appoints, you do it an immense disservice.

Contrary to what you say, I've heard guys say, if you have sex with a fat bird she will thank you because they don't get laid often.

I would guess fat people have sex with each other, so what? It depends if you want quantity over quality.

This article is laughably absurd. I suggest that the author actually talk to several attractive women and ask their opinions, instead of inventing puerile pseudoscience. I am disgusted.

The most fundamental question:
Dear Mr. Kanazawa! Did you write this article to impress women? If yes, did it work or was it just another retarded attempt?
You seem to enjoy belittling and degrading men, and you hide it behind a questionable scientific objectivity. However, a highly subjective intent can be sensed throughout your words... It might be your evolutionary defensive mechanism to try to posit yourself above the entire "manhood" and its motives. This is in fact how you have chosen to "compete", probably because you have failed in any other competetion. Yet, are you courageous enough to admit it?