So, concluding, we on the continent have more Erotic Capital than the souls across the Atlantic, while there’s this fundamental difference between radical Anglo-Saxon feminism and the continental feminism of France and southern European countries. This made these French ladies confidently stood up, basically saying: ‘Hey, you either play to the max with the facts of life and/or put them into use realistically, or you don’t and stay an anxious little bird forever.’.

‘Go big, go niche or go home’, when I would be a marketeer selling femininity to females.

The Cathérines from France cs. experience all absence of any romance as a tragic loss. They see the trend that leads to more and more abstract intimate human contact. And the Americans don’t.

Because of all the negative stories about men, women get a one-sided view of them. First sexual contacts are fraught. As a result, many already uncertain and demasculinized boys and young men of today, many already close to total bookworms, computer nerds or eunuchs, get even more nervous and will think: “Leave it.., if it always has to be like this… “. With for many porno and the sex robot as their only options. And, yes, then we really have a problem…

There is one theme that cuts across all the sections of Anglo-Saxon feminism, including post-feminism: sexphobia and antagonism to beauty, pleasure and seduction. Many puritan Anglo-Saxon feminists are profoundly uncomfortable with sexuality and frame it in a relentlessly negative perspective. The most radical among them adopt a victim feminism in which women are invariably the losers who need to cry out-loud for help. This is going on for decades already, actually.

“They are, in consequence, antipathetic to the concept of erotic capital…” (The Art of Seduction, or how to use your assets of being beautiful, sensual and seductive smartly), “…and unable to see how this can be an asset for women rather than a trap.” – I pick from another Catherine: Hakim, professor at Oxford.

Within their slipstream many female social scientists routinely dismissing the idea that physical attractiveness and sexuality are power assets for women apropos men. They all discuss sexuality exclusively in terms of ‘male control over women’, totally overlooking women’s use of sexuality to control men.

In their view, a display of erotic capital is ‘proof of women’s subordination to men’ and any concern to develop their erotic capital ‘proof that women are suffering from the Stockholm syndrome, when hostages start to relate to and collude with their captors’.

Incredible. Outrageous. How far can you have alienated yourself from reality? This kind of academic feminism is lost in a fog of social constructionism that believes we are totally the product of our environment.

My kind of feminism stresses independence and personal responsibility for women. When I go as far as organizing (dance) seminars on the Art of Seduction I do this because I know to these women it will appear as that I am harking back to old-fashioned views of femininity but I feel it’s necessary to show the contrary; that these ideas regarding erotic capital are actually the next stage and the future: it’s to show women how to reclaim these aspects of themselves rather than denying or subjugating them or adapting them to male-driven patterns.

As, in my view, women can be the dominant factor in sexuality whenever they want and need to become better aware of that. We have what men want. And, indeed, men have to do all sorts of stuff to prove that that they are worthy of women’s attention as has been the case for thousands of years… Modern women don’t seem to realize how much power they have to crush men! Strong women have always known how to control men.

But all of a sudden sexuality today is feared for the problems of political correctness it throws up. Too many put the primary emphasis on the dangers of sexuality: sexual violence, sexual abuse, abortion, child pornography, prostitution… The media just focuses on the misery with as a result biased debates, despite there’s so much more to say about the positive sides related to sexual attraction between the sexes…

Most French feminists confidently reject the idea that sex and sexuality are the foundation of men’s oppression of women. Moreover, they are relaxed about prostitution in all its forms (apart from forced), assert the importance of eroticism and fantasy in life, regard women as perfectly capable of defending themselves from men where necessary, and insist on the importance of feminine and masculine sexual identities and seduction skills.

Hakim: “With rare exceptions, French feminists reject Anglo-Saxon victim feminism. They also offer more constructive solutions to male dominance than celibacy or lesbianism. For example that men should develop their erotic capital as well, so as to be more attractive to women, creating gender parity.”

In my opinion it’s safe to say that that French sexual culture seems best adapted to the modern situation, given its long tradition of courtly love and celebration of eroticism and sexuality, within and outside marriage.

And given many American women don’t know what they want any longer. In general, French women seem to have a feminine composure, a distinct sense of themselves as women, which many women in puritan, protestant originating countries like America, Sweden (and yes, the Netherlands) have gradually lost as they have won – let’s name the reason – job equality in their high-pressure patriarchally oriented career system.

Consider this: French sex surveys report the highest rates of orgasm during sex and the highest rates of sexual satisfaction, well above levels in the United States, Sweden or Finland.

“French women are famous for beauty, grooming, and style. They take it for granted that everyone invests in their erotic capital as well as their formal education and that this pays off in a variety of ways, both personal and professional.

The French have something to teach all women about how erotic capital can be combined successfully with professional excellence, and can also be a worthwhile alternative option for those who lose out in the educational system.”

How come? It’s my theory that the French – and other Southern-Europeans – haven’t lost the talent to look at the world through the eyes of a seducer. They are people who are far more in the moment. They realize, there is never a moment to waste. They know, erotic desire and love lurk beneath the surface of almost every human encounter. They see the world, life, reality as a playfield. And sex as a turbulent power, with dark sides too that we are not always in control of. But at last they are honest about it.

Their aim can as well be to avoid immediate sexual intercourse in electrically loaded situations and to postpone it, and still stay enormous attractive for a next time… To first play with the target to get to know him/her inside out before she lets anything happen… Seduction is so much more than seducing to intimacy.

An attitude-in-life that creates much more great seductive momentum as male and female gain more experience and practice with each chapter of seduction. Every social or sexual seduction makes the next one easier, so, eventually, female confidence itself grows, making human kind more alluring.

Basically because seducers are never self-absorbed. Their gaze is directed outward, not inward. Their first move is to get inside your skin, to see the world through your eyes. To them self-absorption is a sign of insecurity (totally anti-seductive). And thus they ignore insecurities, finding therapy for moments of self-doubt by being absorbed in the world. Which gives them a buoyant spirit— for which reason we always prefer to be around them.

Masters of seduction/Seducers – as symbolic for the opposite of too many of those feminists who don’t even know what flirting is – are providers of pleasure. And yes, people always want pleasure and never get enough.

So, wouldn’t it be better to therefore stimulate women (and men too) to give free rein to their seductive skills? To let them use these not only in the bedroom after having signed a contract (as the Swedish and radical American feminists want) but always?

I think my bootcamps on the Art of Seduction come far from too soon.

This blog is a 3 part series,

If you haven’t read Part 1 you can find it here: Sexuality as new battlefield, the french love for disruption and Athena vs. Aphrodite

Or go ahead and read Part 3: Plead for more seduction (and less hatred and hysterical confusion about victimhood and feminism)

Sign up to my newsletter!

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *