165 Women in 365 Days

January 13, 2012 § 55 Comments

I read about a programme on a couple of nights ago about a sex addict in his twenties who has slept with 300 women.  The night before a friend had told me her son has a friend, aged 20, who has slept with 165 women this year alone (that’s a new one every few days).  I have recently heard of a thirteen year old boy at a party snogging no fewer than eighteen girls.  He caught the name of one or two of them, by chance, otherwise didn’t have a clue who any of them were.  The new film  Shame which sounds good although, as I write, I have yet to see, is about a sex addict in New York.  Russell Brand only married for about 42 seconds before feeling the need to succumb once more to turnover.  From where I am sitting today, the world seems to be full of Russell Brands.

Believe me – even though it’s a middle-aged plankton speaking – I am no prude.  Born in the sixties.  Totally liberal upbringing.  Unfazed.  Things are changing and evolving.  A lot of people are having sex with a LOT of people.  And it’s not just men, but it’s the men I have been hearing about recently (Fact: there are a whole lot more male sex addicts than female ones) and the men who are – probably – standing to get away more scot free than women.  These modern levels of promiscuity are not ideal for either sex on may fronts (STDs etc), but it is about choices and the way of the world and I’m over it.

What gets me more than the sheer numbers (I am sorry but I can only admire such a hit rate, no, admire is the wrong word; marvel at), is how come one man has the opportunity of so many women?  Could a woman who is not on the streets, fuck 165 men in one year?  I don’t mean, could she in the emotional sense.  If that’s her bag, I am sure she could and be emotionally fine with it, and that’s fine.  But I mean, in the practical sense?  I suppose if she didn’t need to know their names or exchange anything by way of conversation, well, sure.  But – and perhaps I am showing my age here – say she wanted to fuck 165 men in 365 days and move on from every single one without the sense that the experience was entirely zipless and both “partners” (though maybe that is too intimate a word for the anonymous gropings between two strangers) weren’t entirely speechless and nameless?  Say, Luddite notion, she wanted to get to know a few of them a little?  Yeah, I guess she could find that many who were willing to oblige, but it’d take an awful lot of legwork.  Full-time bloody job.

Well, it’s not going to be my New Year challenge, that’s for sure. 165 in 365?  Chance of 1 in 3065 would be a fine thing!  But I am staggered at the sheer numbers of women that one man can come into contact with and get into bed at such a rate.  The sheer turnover!  I know: parties, bars, the net, the street; easy, I guess.  Though the above stats would seem to suggest to me, with my skewed view of the world, that women outnumber men about 100 to one!  It’s worse than I thought.

I can’t do the maths, but whatever anyone says – and you can forget the morals of the whole thing because the rights and wrongs are no longer interesting or relevant, least of all to all those who are participating in multiple encounters, and anyway that’s another story and not part of my point – statistically it is alarming that an ordinary bloke, who is not paying for it, can fuck hundreds of women in so short a time.  And the more men who see that their mates are doing it, the more they are likely to think, hey, why settle down with one nag and put up with all the shit when so much variety is on tap, I just have to say the word – in fact, don’t even have to be arsed with that half the time and I’m still quids and quids and quids in!

It does not say much for the odds in favour of a woman – young or old – finding, should that be her particular bag, down to earth, long-term, respectful, communicative, sexually meaningful and loving companionship, any time soon.

We are all doomed.

Anyway, it was with this in mind that I thought, fuck it, took all your advice, and emailed Long Shot.


§ 55 Responses to 165 Women in 365 Days

  • Barry says:

    Did the mail read..” I’m up for a shag…along with the other 164″?

    Just asking .

    You have cornered the market of saying “NO” , if the other 164 say “YES” , where are their blogs then ?

    The mind boggles….

  • Lydia says:

    Most people don’t want this whether male or female. It is easier for women to achieve it than men as fewer women want to than men so yes a woman can more than easily do it. If you want it on internet dating you caould have a different man a night. Someone yesterday said he was in London tomorrow and might we meet. I could find 4 men a day like that but I’m not at all into casual sex.

  • Zambesigirl says:

    Good choice.

  • Elle says:

    Plankton, that was a very well written piece about how bleak the scene is. I feel sorry for young girls coming onto the dating scene and the pressures they face. I really believe it is just as bad for younger women as it is for older women.

    I had a relatively conservative upbringing even by Irish standards and I find it hard to deviate from that even in these bleak days. I was saying “no” well into my thirties apart from long term relationships when we would take our time before taking things further.

    When I was young and hot saying “no” was a good thing. I don’t mean I was rude or obnoxious, I just wasn’t going to roll over straight away. This made boys and men even more keen. I wasn’t a tease, I had standards and was determined to stick to them.

    These days I find that if I say “no” or show the remotest sign of hesitation a man is off like a shot to see if the next one will say “yes”, if not then he’s off again. Rather like the awkward discos of my youth where a boy would ask a girl to dance and if she said no he’d ask the next one and so on. However the request for a dance has been replaced with a request for sex, preferably as soon as possible. I bet some people across the Atlantic are cringing with horror as they read this.

    There is a teenage disco in Dublin called the Wezz which is attended by boys and girls from (ahem) better Dublin schools. The sort of schools Lydia would approve of if she lived in Dublin. The Wezz has been in the papers a number of times over the years because of the apparent debauchery of the attendees. They were doing things that would shock a porn director! If Plankton’s friend’s son were attending the Wezz on a regular basis he might get through his 165 girls in 6 months. Allegedly, a questionable practice called “snowballing” was very popular at the Wezz. However, a lot of what supposedly went on was sensationalism and invention because the Wezz is mostly attended by upper-middle class teenagers.

    Back to men my age and over. They rarely want a conversation or any sort of interaction apart from the obvious. If I won’t “roll over” then another woman will, and they can choose from women aged from 20 upwards.

    • Lydia says:

      Yes, I suspect you gett better sex the higher class and higher intelligence you are so if that matters in your relationships seek out those people.

      I don’t agree that men just want sex, not the men I like. They want good conversation with clever women but also of course sex too which is exactly what most women my age want so it’s win win.

      • fi says:

        Lydia for someone as well educated as you profess to be, your spelling (gett?) And mastery of the English language (higher intelligence? Surely ‘greater’) is pretty appalling. And as for someone who spends so much time reading and writing you surely should have some original thoughts instead of regurgitating the same few (earn more money, get your children privately educated, I’m better than you, my children are better than yours, I like sex) over and over again, day after day, week after week, month after month.

      • Lydia says:

        I think we probably know that I don’t spell get as gett. No one is obliged to read what I write and plankton has no obligation to put any of mine or anyone else’s posts up. If we all had the same views it would be a dull place and we might as well be stepford wife clones.

  • fi says:

    Nah. I don’t believe the 165 different women – bullshit boy bragging. I saw the programme about the sex addict and actually he’d only had 300 over a period of years, and he was a good looking bloke, on the comedy circuit, with available women hanging around the bar after every performance, some of whom only wanted to shag a comedian. Anyway this guy wasn’t proud of his record (although he may have been when younger) and the programme was about him trying to work out why he’s unable to settle with one woman which his friends seemed able to do, and that as he wanted to be a father at some point, he was keen to understand this and fix himself. He recognised that women didn’t seem to view him as anything other than the guy they got involved with between proper relationships, and he didn’t like being seen as someone who was unworthy of a proper relationship. He described himself as a Slag and worried that he was considered shallow and failing in someway, never able to get from relationships the fulfilment that other people seemed to, and never meeting someone who he wanted to have kids with that would want him to father them. If you’d watched the programme you might have had a slightly different perspective.

    • The Plankton says:

      You are right, Fi. I should have watched it before spouting off unknowledgeably – he sounds much nicer and more lost than his statistic would imply – but I thought a bit of provocation of a dreary Friday morning might shake us all about a bit! Px

    • Miss J says:

      I shagged a comedian once… I didn’t know he was a comedian of course, until he promised to love, honour and remain faithful throughout our marriage. Turns out he was only joking :/

      • fi says:

        😦 hopefully there’s someone better round the corner. 😀

        Now I’m off see Nazareth (hard rock band from the 70s) on Saturday night in a small Scottish town with my brother and his mate. If the place isn’t crawling with single middle aged men I don’t know where would be!

      • The Plankton says:

        Best of luck! Fingers crossed! Have a lovely evening. Px

      • ex-pond-slime says:


      • Miss J says:

        Thank you but I doubt it Fi, I’m done turning corners for the time being. I’m embracing Planktonhood with a vengeance right now in the absence of any fucker else to embrace! Oh and with Valentines Day just a few short weeks away I may well embrace hibernation until it’s all over! Another event in the singleton’s calendar designed to mock us and make us feel more like losers than we already do!

  • joules says:

    Good job on the email. Not very high cost for a big possible gain.

    In a former incarnation as someone interested in infectious disease, research into the spread of aids indicated that these high partner individuals were responsible for a large number of aids cases and also that there was assortative mating taking place, i.e. the 165 women with this casanova were likely to be the same 165 women with another casanova. From what I remember regarding the chances of infection (and you can bet that mr 165 in 365 days is trying to have as many as possible without using protection) was fairly high for the 165 women.

    In other words a behaviour that is literally selected against.

  • Penny says:

    Hello Plankton

    Just been reading your latest. Not all of it yet but saw the bit about Russell Brand. I have to defend him as I read newspapers and gossip stuff and it was Katie Perry that pulled the plug on that marriage. They hardly saw each other because of her work/tour, and she felt her career was more imporant and wasnt able to settle down yet. You would have thought she would have thought about all this before they got married. They hardly every saw each other, it was often in the newspapers they were always in different continents. Only once was he seen with someone else, and that was recently. All a shame but I suppose it was doomed really!! I also read he was a bit jealous of her career going so well and his has been flagging recently.

  • Brigitte says:

    As I have almost given up on finding love again, I wouldn’t mind a new boyfriend every couple of years after the excitement has worn off. I prefer sex with someone I have gotten to know, but don’t object to the “third date” rule as I was always eager for the physical part to start. But it is so much better when there is love involved. I fell in love for the first time in 2010 and discovered “making love” as opposed to just having sex. I wanted to please him as much as he was pleasing me. Without love, many aspects of sex became a chore after a few months – the novelty had worn off. Not so when I was in love. I just couldn’t get enough of him or close enough (I wanted to crawl inside him), but then his wife called him back after their separation and I was left hanging and wanting so much more.

    I wouldn’t be so despondent if I at least knew that men still wanted to at least have sex with me. I may never “make love” again, but could someone send me even ONE decent and attractive guy that would be excited to bed me AND be my boyfriend for a while, because I couldn’t bed several men, let alone hundreds. I am terrified of STD’s and, anyway, there aren’t that many men I’ve seen recently with whom I want to have sex. If anyone knows about the American Tucker Max (tuckermax.com), he is an above average looking guy who also has bedded hundreds of women. He is beyond wild and doesn’t seem to have too high standards (“as long as she’s cute”) and he constantly denegrates whores, which is what he is exactly. He has even bedded all kinds of women of all shapes and sizes just so he can say he has. He is an extreme case, but I suspect that men who sleep with many women (not just the sex addicts) are not too discriminating. I don’t think too many women could do this.

  • Brigitte says:

    Oh, and congrats on emailing LS! This is quite a step for you. I hope you won’t be disappointed. My toes are crossed.

  • rosie says:

    Had the comedian fellow been a woman, he’d be getting hate mail by the truckload by now. I think the ‘free love’ bit of feminism sold women down the river and, even though I don’t know any women under 35, I imagine it’s as bad, if not worse, than it ever was. At least in t’olden days they had to marry you before they got a shag.

    Re Russell Brand (ugh), I read that Katy Perry didn’t know anything about him wanting a divorce until she was served with the papers. There were also pics of him posing on a webcam for some naked dating site (he wasn’t naked, thankfully) while taking his wedding ring off. Charmer.

    Shame is great, I saw it a couple of months ago at a film festival. Just don’t go with anyone who’s easily shocked or – if you’re lucky enough to find one – a first date!

    • EmGee says:

      Rosie you are spot on about women being sold down the river, and I think women under 35 have it tougher. In order to dress ‘fashionably’ these days they have to dress like hookers and show as much skin as possible (while the guys flaunt drab baggy t shirts and droopy drawers that make them look like hobos). And yet still hold on to their personal morals. If a girls wants 165 guys in 365 days, that’s her prerogative, but I doubt many of them do, but they feel obligated to dress like they do.

      Anyway, I think the number of sex partners game has very little to do with relationships, and more to do with sating an unsatiable appetite (addiction), and/or attention seeking (a form of emotional addiction, nothing to do with sex).

  • Sophs says:

    Im just under 35 (33) and can confirm that yes it’s worse than it ever was. Whilst I’m younger there has never been anything on this blog that i haven’t been able to identify with, other than the fact I don’t have children and doubt I ever will.

  • Erin says:

    The Long Shot saga continues…. Am hoping for the best for you, P! I wish the Christmas thing would have worked out – then you would have had a good chance to really assess this man. But you have to start somewhere and kudos to you for jumping right in with the email and not stewing for a week over it (as we women are wont to do!) Fingers crossed : )

  • plumgrape says:

    I just don’t think you can believe what you hear, Plankton. Far too many people lie far too often! Lying is a very easy occupation for many, I fear. Just, I feel, as far too many women far too often ignore the friendly overtures of men and forego their chances to communicate, exchange dialogues, get to know men, build friendships and relationships, and give up the chance forever thereafter to remain plankton!
    I think it is the sheer unadulterated fear of being alone plus the quintessentially important need of a woman to seemingly retain high moral ground and be able to nag from strength that keeps a woman able to rant about her petty jealousies insisting on no man’s right to “spin”, as you so beautifully and succinctly put meeting new attractive, alluring and interesting people whilst she “the woman” is an angel.
    I think I might put my money on late night TV phone sex. Then perhaps 165 is possible, text by text, one after another!

    • fi says:

      Oh dear P. I assume you didn’t take your children to meet Plumgrape yesterday. You’ll never get a man that way you know!!

  • ex-pond-slime says:

    When you say “165 women this year alone”, are you talking about in this year of 2012? That’s a truly impressive 14 a night!!

    Not impossible for some though… this article from the Times of January 6 2012 came irresistibly to mind:

    “A ram that jumped over a fence into a field of ewes managed to father 33 lambs in just 24 hours before he was caught.

    Thirteen of his offspring have already been born at the farm in Desborough, Northamptonshire, and 20 ewes are expecting.

    The 11-month-old texel ram, who has been named Randy by staff at West Lodge Rural Centre, jumped the 5ft fence when the centre’s 109 ewes were all in the one field. “When they come into season the ewes produce a perfume that drives rams wild,” explained Ryan Thompson, one of the farmers. “We were stunned when we found out how many ewes were expecting. We don’t know how he managed it all.”

    Mr Thompson revealed that Randy had secretly jumped the fence before, and escaped slaughter. “He’s the luckiest ram I’ve ever met,” he said.”

  • rosie says:

    Fingers crossed here too!

    EmGee, yes you’re right, I’m glad I’m not a 20-something, primped and pruned and waxed and oiled to within an inch of my life. Whenever I go into a newsagents I just despair at the oceans of tits and arse (and that’s the women’s as well as the lads’ mags) on the shelves. How the hell was that allowed to happen?!

  • MissBates says:

    I can report from the trenches of New York divorce law that the easy availability of sexual partners that one can “hook up” with via the internet has had a profound effect on the type of adultery we’re seeing these days. It’s almost quaintly old-fashioned (soooo 20th century! so retro!) to learn of a guy having an affair with his secretary, or a fling with a flight attendant on a business trip, etc. Even the ever-popular “sex with the foreign au pair” is fading out of fashion in favor of a string of more-or-less anonymous one-night-stands for which one advertises online (sometimes an exchange of money is involved, sometimes not).

    And before anyone accuses me of man-bashing: YES, wives, too, are unfaithful, but the ones comprising my clientele, at least, seem to be sticking to the time-worn tradition of an affair with the tennis coach or kitchen contractor, or rekindling a romance with their high school prom date.

    Oh, and glad you emailed Long Shot.

    • The Plankton says:

      This is fascinating and I fear, unsurprising. In your profession, you are at the coal-face of what’s going on and it really is fascinating, at least it is to me. Thank you. As for LS: also thank you but no news as yet (I emailed at dawn this morning but doubt he’ll reply this dawn of Time!) Px

    • Brigitte says:

      The internet definitely has changed the romantic playing field for everyone: young, plankton, and those that are at risk of a partner straying in marriage. The abundance of potential dating partners is turning many of us into “children in a candy shop”. Whereas a decently attractive woman would have far less trouble attracting and keeping a man pre-internet, now she may very well be passed over or downright left for a more attractive one who is just a mouse click away. Women also do this and I am one that found only one attractive match on eHarmony (who never contacted me) and rejected dozens (many did not contact me, but a few did). I did not recognise my situation as a plankton and still operated under the notion that I still had the power of choice in the search for love – HAH! In my youth, I never ever dreamed that I would not be able to attract SOMEONE of my choice. Maybe not my first choice, but at least SOMEONE of my choice. It’s looking rather bleek on the horizon.

  • I suppose we’d better make that 166 by now, if you wrote today’s blog early this morning…

  • june says:

    Yes P think you are right,i agree it is as hard for younger women , you would have imagined years of womans lib has made it better for women all round, but sadly not.

    That man i met in summer who i had been chatting with online and felt comfortable with and really started to think god i think hes different, when we met and seemed to get on but he didnt contact again, i did and he sent me text saying we got on ok but i want a lover, life is lonely without one, well no life is lonely without a companion ,the sex comes a bit down the line, and yet thats what he was fixed on, not meeting and getting to know someone, but just sex. I felt totally let down, that i think was what put me off online dating, i really did start to trust him and think him a nice guy.

    • Brigitte says:


      Several women on this blog have complained about middle-aged men wanting only sex. This is discouraging. I wouldn’t be surprised were this coming from a guy under 40, or even a recently divorced guy in his 40’s, but from older men as well? (I’m assuming he’s over 50) If these are divorced, older men wanting something much lighter and easier after their failed marriages, then this is yet another aspect that hinders a plankton in her quest for middle-aged romance. Although I would be ready to forego deep love to have a steady relationship with a guy I really like, I do not want to have totally loveless sex.

      • zoe says:

        Sure, Brigitte, but do you want totally sexless love either? This guy didn’t say that he “only” wanted sex. Nor did he say he wanted “loveless sex”. It seems to me that he wanted what surely many of us want. If I met someone who I thought I would not want to have sex with or who I thought would not be willing to or who would have little interest in having sex with me, guess what? I wouldn’t call them back either. Why pillory him for wanting the same because he’s over 50?

    • Jo says:

      That sounds really disappointing and horrid for you June. I really sympathise. Honestly I do. But that was not the experience of the whole of ‘online dating’. Off putting though it was.
      That was the experience of one man. Very nearly a good one.
      It really can work online, as it has for enough people I have known over the years. All plankton. Really.
      I’m just so sorry it did not work out for you June. How ghastly it must have felt.
      But please don’t paint the whole of internet with the same brush.
      Best wishes. Jo

      • Brigitte says:

        Hi Zoe,

        But June did say: “…and yet thats what he was fixed on, not meeting and getting to know someone, but just sex.” Maybe June assumed that’s all he wanted, and what he really meant was that he would need the sex to start before she was ready, but according to posts on message boards and on this blog, many middle-aged men don’t want to dive right back into something serious. I’m not saying that all middle-aged men want this, but that it looks like a fair number or them do, maybe because they are recently divorced and want something simple. I really don’t blame them (I understand, actually – I myself had sex with my boyfriends mostly without commitment or love until 40), it’s just discouraging at this age and makes it that much harder to find a man that wants to get serious. And when they do eventually want that, you have to be there at the right time. It’s all in the timing, and we already know the frustrations of that.

        I have decided to adapt to this scenario, lest I not have male companionship for the next 40 years. I have stopped fixating on finding THE ONE before having sex; it’s hard enough finding an interested man, period. I will accept a relationship where there is mutual respect, affection and yes, definitely sex, and any love will be icing on the cake. I could not have a sexless relationship with a man, I have enough of this in my friendships with women.

      • tvmunson says:


        “I could not have a sexless relationship with a man”; no, and be extremely leery of any man that could have one with you.

  • Jo says:

    I meant of course ‘the whole of internet dating’..

  • tvmunson says:

    Has the calculus of the universe changed in the last 10 years? No, it has not. The universe, and I speak now of the moral one whose laws are as inflexible as the physical one, has this immutable, unchangeable rule: you get what you give. If this sexual hiccuping is what you’re sending out, surcease, not deep satisfaction, is what you’ll derive. I do not know if “Fizzies” made it “across the pond” (does a Yankie’s use of outmoded British expressions have the effect on you of nails dragged across a balckboard? I suspect it does). Fizzzies were tablets that one dropped in a glass of water and, if the advertising was to be believed, transformed it into soda pop, no different than bottled or fountain (late 50s; cans not in use much). What it actually produced was an ersatz insipid watered out played out lifeless listless near nothing of a drink; it only inspired a desire for “The Real Thing”( the cola one was particularly dreadful-there I go “A Fish Called Wanda Time”-no American man says dreadful-I could get my ass kicked letting it drop even once). Well, and I know my smart British ladies already know where I’m going but I must insist on boring in on the obvious lest you begin to suspect I am not an American: the catatonic robotic sexual encounters that must of necessity be implicated in a 165/365 scenario bears as much relationship to real heart throbbing erotic sex as those pathetic Fizzies did to real honest bite your throat soda. No, actually, it’s even worse: that type of sex, compared to falling in love passion, and the awakening in each subsequent encounter of the permissions lovers allow each other based on the trust achieved through real intimacy, an intimacy that must be earned, that must be aspired to because the universe demands it and will allow it no other way, that sneezing effluent expunging dreary mechanical “in out” ( a nod to your very own Anthony Burgess’ “A Clockwork Orange”) bears as much relationship to real sex as those Fizzies due to a fine 14 year old estate red meritage wine, a firm, balanced,subtle yet buoyant fruit forward ( I am not an oenophile) wine, completely rendered, the wine lovers linger over in the light of a late afternoon just as they luxuriate in the soft afterglow of affirming glorious true bonding sex, a release that leaves them feeling cleansed, not soiled, awakened, not deadened, not counting how many of these they can cram in before death because in the “little death” of their orgasms they have touched heaven, or as much of it as is possible for living, breathing humans to comprehend, to hold, as hold they do,each other, and cherish, and nurture, and provide to each other the one true solace of human existence, love, made corporeal through their physical act, love as God has ordained and allows us as our shield against this annihilating, unforgiving universe.

    I doubt our experienced fornicator achieves many of those in his 165.

    • Elle says:

      Good point tvmunson, but imagine you are in a situation where the only sort of soda pop available is Fizzies because there is none of the proper sort left. You may, if you’re lucky, find a glass or bottle of flat soda pop left behind by somebody else which is often bitter into the bargain. Imagine a lifetime of nothing but Fizzies or a parched eternity in an arid desert.

  • tvmunson says:

    I appear to have drifted off topic. I focused on the sexual leperchaun, and that is not what the article is about. Apologies. I don’t think I’ve posted on point once here. Sort of an Anglo/American “Lost in Translation”.

    • Elle says:

      Sexual leprechaun indeed! Ireland is full of those legendary creatures, all looking for Fizzies!

    • Joules says:

      As another American here (but lived in the UK for 20 + years) I am often lost in translation. It does not appear to get better with time – tho I now spell things a bit differently.

      Was thinking you wife is a lucky woman.

      • tvmunson says:

        Thank you Joules that’s sweet. Ms. P herself made the same remark over at theprivateman when I wrote a philippic to her under the nom d’ plume Capt. Ahab. My remarks was addressed to this 165 business-the serial notching of one’s sexual gun belt by this creep. Sex addict my ass he’s a creep. I seriously doubt Elle would want to be #166, but I’m a 59 1/2 year old man, monogamously attached 33 1/2 years, married 30 1/2, so it ma be idle of me to toss off (is that British slang for something I do not intend?) these breezy remarks about matters I know nothing about i e dating. I have not dated since Aug. 17, 1978, with my now wife.

        My wife lucky? No, I am the luckiest man alive. My wife is the living embodiment of the vows contained in the wedding ordinances found in the Book of Common prayer. We fell in love in 1978-we shall stay 25 years old forever.

  • MaMu1977 says:

    165/year is far from impossible. 12 Friday/Saturday/Sunday nights in a month plus the extra holiday off per month plus the facts that men tend to have lower standards than women (the most prolific guy I’ve ever known used to brag about his collection of pantys, with over 100 of them received in 1 year from willing partners) equals more than enough time to chat up a woman at a random pub. For those men who are less discriminating, there are plenty of websites/chatrooms/etc that can be used to meet willing women for a quick shag.

    That being said, as another denizen of New York City, I’ll say that there are *plenty* of women in the 5 boroughs who have no shame about monopolising a night club or bar bathroom if their target(s) are sexy enough (which becomes awkward if you really have to visit the facilities.) There’s nothing as annoying as watching a happy couple emerging from the sole toilet with rumpled clothes and glassy-eyes smiles on their faces as your bladder is screaming at you for relief. As mentioned below, water finds its level; for every man who gets his leg over with 100+ different women, there are dozens of those “easy” targets available to drive the price of sex down (and to drive the price of commitment upwards. After all, no one would willingly choose sexless monogamy over even infrequent non-monogamous sex.) If a man wants to marry, pledging eternal fidelity to a woman who restrains coitus to anniversaries and birthdays is a fool’s bargain (especially if that woman decides to marry you because your birthday lies on Valentine’s Day, heh.)

    P.S.- I have a divorce attorney as a drinking buddy. His favorite benefit of his job is the fact that 1/2 of all of his female clients “use” him as theur post-divorce fling. He earns $200,000+ a year and has a 5/1 female/male client ratio. Does anyone want to guess *his* yearly partner count?(And yes, he still manages to spend his weekends and holidays looking for new women.)

  • Jo says:

    You guys from across the pond have plenty of erudite points. Forgive me but – not an insult at all – you don’t half go on! Blimey. It takes ages to read your extremely long comments sometimes!

  • Margaux says:

    yes, less is more sometimes …definitely !

  • rosie says:

    I watched the programme about the sex-addicted comedian last night and found it hard to drum up any sympathy. Anyone who wears a low-cut vest with half a torso of chest hair hanging out and a medallion to boot is a self-obsessed wanker!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading 165 Women in 365 Days at The Plankton.


%d bloggers like this: