Most of us don't want to discuss it or post match evaluate it. Just tell us it was great and we are brilliant. Yeah?

For non-dyslexics, the basic experience of reading is superficial, straight-forward and uncomplicated. For dyslexics, reading is wonderfully mysterious and complicated. Strangely enough, the non-dyslexics seem to enjoy an advantage when it comes to appreciating the finer points of literature.

''Why, when it comes to sex, are "simple, easily pleased" men always pitted against "complicated, wordy" women?''

Because in a world of sweeping generalisations and my own experience , when it comes to sex, men tend to be simple and easily pleased whereas women tend to be complicated and wordy.
I didn't make the rules. Blame your hormones.

It's my understanding that male sexuality according to feminism is a negative evil thing, that should be changed or corrected so it would be politically correct.

Any male discussion of sexuality for the most part would be considered sexist & misogynistic endeavor anyway & the recent past is a prove so way beat around the bush girls with words like "emotional sex, meaning full sex"!!!!

Sounds like a romance novel kind sex. :) :)

For the vast majority of men sex is pretty simple. If you like the look of it, you'd probably shag it, given half a chance. It is the girls that have the problems which is why they make such a big deal of it. Women do for sex what men do for football; take something very simple and enjoyable and turn it into something very complex and stressful.

In general, males in the media are not allowed to display signs of a heterosexual sexuality, or an opinion on the subject without being on the end of derision or vitriol from female commentators. The one exception is if the male commentator reflects feminist received opinion, that’s allowed.

I think distinctions need to be made between sex and sexuality for me. Sexuality as an intellectual topic and sex as, well, sex.

When it comes to sex it quite frankly seems odd to apply some deep philosophical meaning to something as simple as sex. I mean simple as eating is simple. There may be complex ethical/social questions that swirl around the acts (Fairtrade, organic, vegan etc.) but both essentially meet basic desires/needs.

As for the deeper issues that I'd say constitute sexuality - perhaps men just don't particularly find the whole personal context interesting? Perhaps they do, just in different ways.
In my anecdotal experience I have generally found women to be more empathetic and concerned with the individual, perhaps it's this that helps lead in to women's greater interest in both topics, both collapse in to the same topic. Perhaps for men the act is differentiated more starkly from the context? What some people call logic can likewise be described as coldness.
I think to some extent I fall under my own label. I don't particularly care about the personal contexts of most individuals, it's just not terribly interesting, but what I do care about is people being happy. Knowledge of the individual's personal only really serves as a good indicator of what might make people enjoy themselves. Some people seem to really enjoy the sharing of the personal experience in-itself, and in my experience that has generally been women. I can't remember the last time I saw a bloke coo over a baby, perhaps these will be labelled lazy stereotypes but they're just how I seem to encounter the world.

As a bloke sex is spoken about a bit like food, men find it really easy to describe the 'superficial bits' that constitute a discussion of in everyday conversation. 'She had cracking tits' isn't vastly different from 'I have an amazing meal at Carlos's' is it?

Is this objectification? I'd argue that it isn't most of the time because sexuality and the complexities are 'discussed' just not spoken of (in part because I believe many blokes don't particularly get great giggles from the shared experience). It can appear such superficiality treats women as meat/objects but I think there's a lot that goes without saying, and no one wants to say. If a bloke talks about a fantastic blowj*b from the wife it's taken for granted that all else is well, why explain the deep context of the feelings and emotions behind it all when you know all that. It reflects many things (correctly or incorrectly), a superficial brag, the wife as an object, the wife as a person, a wife who chooses to give, the husband as desired, the wife as something deserving of value, wife as a lover etc.
There are certainly superficial comments that almost purely objectify, as one may discuss a steak, and I think some men are more likely to have a propensity to do this due to their lack of ability to relate to the individual.

Blokes generally don't open up to each other but when something goes wrong those barriers come down, in tough periods all my male friends have been there for me and have understood the situation despite what probably on the face of it seems superficial chat. The fear of directly opening up is probably due to various reasons but the messages still get through for the most part. For me it once again feels an issue of utility, all the stuff we all knew but didn't speak of comes out when it's really needed.

Concerning the wider public debate there is also the 'fear' of being ignored or misrepresented by engaging in the debate. Even as I wrote the above (concerning women/empathy) I wondered if that was the 'wrong' type of personal experience feminism places such esteem on. Would certain readers just brush off what I'd said as part of the patriarchy's enforcement of gender roles or is it, as I believe, a rule-of-thumb difference between the genders I've noticed.
The only reason I actually responded to this was because, as a man, it was actually aimed at me. It seems a genuine attempt to understand and, in my mind, that makes it less likely what I'll say will be brushed off as the wrong type of fact/opinion or what ever the hell it is I'm offering.

the game is up Rhiannon and Holly, neither of you know any men, just boys.

i agree with the contributions from Joasoa, Dmyers, Eh, Jules, Simon.

and thanks Daniel for making me laugh out loud!

But what if this appearance of simplicity is created precisely by rejecting the ideas central to male sexuality? You want in-depth discussion of male sexuality? OK, I'll write you a really long essay about the finer points of visually appealing tits and arse (and face and hair and legs and tummy and...). Except, of course, I won't. Women have heard quite enough about their bodies from the mouths of men. But the fact that you're (I assume) utterly sick of it doesn't change my preferences. All it does is teach me to keep my views to myself. Which is fine, just don't ask why it's gone quiet.

Men under 19/20 talk about sex a lot but usually it just proves how little they know about sexuality and the Female body,but most men do not talk about sex in any depth,and never about any problems or ways to improve techniques for them or there partner,mostly because men are still judged by there sexual prowess, women seem to talk incessantly about sex and relationships and still have no idea about men and what they think about sex,sex is like driving nearly everybody can drive,but most are shit at driving because they dont put any thought into it.

I fear for younger men now (in the US). With the executive glass ceiling broken (not a bad thing), many (not all) women take to acting like men, rather than being a woman in a ground-breaking situation. They don't really know how to pull it off. Our media is pushing the beta male syndrome now (in music it's global) and add to it , the gay acceptance agenda, and there you go... a country of pansies. 15% + unemployment doesn't help things here. When the youngers find out their going to be supporting our Seniors medical & retirement & will have a very poor standard of living compared to Boomers, well, maybe then they will find a backbone. Oooga booga...

Your whole tone is hilarious.

"We need men to join the debate."

Imagine two men writing an article, starting out by ridiculing women with sweeping sexist generalisations, and then afterwards asking them to "join the debate, because we want to hear what you have to say".

That would only happen in something like Nuts.

Yet here we are, and that's the level of your "article".

Fuck off.

Men of the old and younger generation, in general, do not have any problems at all with that women will became the majority of the workforce, that most managers will be women, that the main breadwinners will be women and so on and so forth. We support fully this development.

The reasons are quite obvious. Finally, we men will be able to “leave” beyond the stress, the cancers, the cardio-vascular problems etc. We will be able to dedicate ourselves to the things that are and always have been at the centrum of our hearts (e.g. the arts, the sciences, the sports, the adventures). As to the “debate on sexuality” we leave it willingly to women. We are most satisfied with doing it.

To Rhiannon & Holly,
I've written an in-depth piece about male sexual communication and sent it to the editor and web editors. You never kn0w it may get published. If not, ask to take a look at it. I've tried to explain it as best I can.

I've always had many straight male friends - and I mean good friends, not just drinking pals - and we've often discussed our romantic endeavours and sex lives. This doesn't come from me interviewing them or anything, but simply that we can exchange experiences and both seek advice from the opposite sex. To me this is very valuable because women can't give me advice on men, they are as much in the dark as I am and vice versa. Men want to know why a girl reacts this or that way, or what she possibly means when he does or says something just as much as women do. It may not be in public debate, and most men may feel uncomfortable sharing this with other men (especially the type that only talk football - artsy and intellectual men are different), but men and women have similar questions they all want answered. So consider this an encouragement for friendship between straight men and women.

The truth of it is that men don't really talk about sex between themselves. I can't really remember any in-depth conversation with any of my mates about sex. Obviously we mention it sometimes in passing such as, "Got lucky last night" followed by a few raised eyebrows and mimes depicting what went on - but it's just not something we do. It's a bit personal to talk about I guess, and we just don't feel the need to discuss it. We certainly don't give graphic descriptions of the orgasmic euphoria written about in the columns I read by women on sex.

I will tell you what we talk about in the pub: 50% food, 30% football / sport, 20% miscellaneous prittle-prattle. That's it - it's no more complicated or covert than that I'm afraid ladies. So no matter how imaginative you are in the bedroom, your secrets are safe with us............you're welcome!