We need to teach our daughters to know the difference between:

[RainDog]

47. yeah, it's been around for a while

it's part of some socio-biology claims about women that have been criticized for cultural "blind spots" about women. Some anthropologists in good standing argued, basically, that men went out to hunt while women sat at home and ate bon-bons as a way to explain long-term partnerships (it's called "male provisioning&quot that is really fun in the way that it replicates 1950s middle-class assumptions about relationships and has no bearing on actual existing hunter-gatherer societies - in which both men and women "provision" their families - and have more egalitarian relationships apart from the modern sexism that exists in western culture's traditional marriage (traditional as in a few hundred years for certain classes and races, historically.)

It's been around for a while. The other version you may have heard is "why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free" - and, thus, women would have to "hold out" for marriage by controlling their sexual expressions while males were free to assume their sexual expression had no negative repercussion, socially.

It assumes that women only have sex because they want to use sex to force someone to be with them. It's kinda creepy, to me.

It also reinforces patriarchy as it existed since the advent of property - when women were the first slaves in any society - but they were called "wives." Tying it to the woman's feelings merely sanitizes it, but the sentiment, that women only want to have sex if they're in love, and then they only do it because they want something else - is really, really, really sexist.