Antoni Bolinches: "Men are afraid of sexual women"

"When women get older, they can't find men their own size." That's the subtitle of The Superwoman SyndromeFrom psychologist Antoni Bolinches, this book attempts to understand why women are disappointed with love and why men are disoriented. Originally published in January 2020, shortly before the pandemic, it's now back in a revised and updated edition.

Is love difficult?

— Falling in love is easy. Love is difficult. In the initial phase, two people like each other, interact, and if there's good sexual chemistry, some might say, "Shall we meet tomorrow?" And then we must see what happens to what we define as love, which is living together with a desire for permanence.

Is the idea of lifelong love broken?

— Yes, and I think for several reasons. One key reason is the contraceptive pill revolution. The moment women separated procreation from sexuality, a new era of female freedom began. And sexual freedom gave way to social freedom. The days of women at home and men at work are over. Women have entered the workforce, pursued studies... And they've done so well that, in 60 years, half of all men are disoriented and the other half are evolving.

Did men experience the sexual revolution badly?

— No, I gave them options for having different kinds of relationships. But now I see a phenomenon that I'd like to address in my next work if I have time: the "face the danger alone" phenomenon.

What does it mean?

— The fear of the man and the sexual woman.

Why are they afraid?

— It's very simple: women are the stronger sex, and men are the weaker sex. All five psychosexual indicators favor women. They have more erogenous zones, they are more sensitive, they have greater orgasmic potential, and on top of that, they are multiorgasmic—they don't have a refractory period. Men are monoorgasmic and have a refractory period. And that's why men today fear women who are very experienced and sexually liberated. To the point that some men avoid one-night stands if they see it as a challenge they're not sure they can handle.

Does a 50-year-old experience that the same way as a 20-year-old?

— Twenty-year-olds are the ones grappling with this existential dilemma: those who are evolving and those who are regressing. There are thirty-year-old men taking vasodilators to try to live up to their perceived sexual expectations.

But don't both sexes have the obligation to satisfy the other?

— It used to happen only to women; men's desires were solely focused on their own satisfaction. But when women started asking, "What about me?", men began asking, "How about me?" Now the paradigm has shifted, and men feel pressured by the desires of others and by the idea of ​​what it means to be a real man—to live up to expectations.

And why are they disoriented?

— The old model was unfair but clear. Dominant man, subordinate woman. Male intelligence already understands that this isn't fair, but changing something that benefits you is harder than changing something that harms you. And when women have led the revolution, some say, "She's right, we must create a new code." But others prefer the old model. And women won't go back, but now some see that all their efforts have led to them not finding suitable men. It's not fair, but it's true.

Superwoman, what is she?

— Beautiful, intelligent, educated women with good economic and professional standing who, as a consequence of so many virtues, can't find suitable men for them, because the superwoman continues to fall in love with admiration. And of course, if you're at a level of excellence, it's difficult to find men who are at the same level. Imagine the same situation with a man. He would have whatever he wanted.

But do they make us fall in love differently?

— Yes, it's a social construct, but we've already internalized it phylogenetically. Ancestrally, men were providers, bringing food, and women distributed it. The strong man became a manageable man. Since at 60 we can't change something we've internalized for half a million years, men prefer to be admired. And the superwoman doesn't admire him. Or if she does, he has to stress himself out to keep up with her. And men prefer comfortable relationships, while women seek vibrant ones. If we extrapolate from this—that there are many more superwomen than evolved men—we find that these women have a double limitation: the men they might like are fewer, and a portion of that percentage choose comfortable relationships.

But don't men also need to admire?

— No, they should look at them. That is, initially, a woman can interact with a man as long as her physical appearance doesn't work against her. But, on the other hand, a woman's physical appearance should work in a man's favor.

You establish five categories of castrating women: castrating, reactive, conforming, facilitating, and self-sufficient.

— The emasculating woman punishes the man for not being the way she wants him to be. She makes him feel inferior, for example, by showing off her knowledge or her status. And of course, if you feel punished… don't stay there. In other words, this way of operating is bad for the man, but it also harms her.

And what about reactive power?

— She doesn't like reality and gets angry. And she might get defensive and say, "They're all a disaster, cavemen." To put it simply, reactive people are the ones who say, "The market is in terrible shape."

And the conformed one accepts reality.

— Even if he doesn't like it. He's a pragmatist. That's where I came up with the metaphor of accepting 800 grams for a kilo. In other words, the man doesn't quite give me the weight, but there are things that are good, and those are the things that say: "Given the current market, I'll make a compromise."

We are left with the facilitator and the self-sufficient one.

— The facilitator doesn't want a 1.8-kilogram man, and says, "I see this man's potential to reach a kilo, and I want to help my partner reach the level I believe he can." The facilitator's problem is that this doesn't always happen. But people often approach her. And the one who handles it best and finds the most suitable partners is the self-sufficient one.

Because?

— She handles her reality well, is comfortable and relaxed, and fosters synergistic relationships. Many men will no longer approach her because she's a superwoman, but within the range of difficulties, she's the one who will find the highest percentage of men who want to be with her.

Is all this enough to talk about a syndrome?

— Yes, it's the first paradoxical syndrome in the history of psychology. Because a syndrome is a set of characteristics of an illness or disorder, but in this case, it's the set of virtues that makes it a problem.

How can we imagine couples of the future?

— If we do this right, we might solve it in two or three generations. If not, I fear we could be headed for a war of the sexes.

What are you talking about?

— That there are more men regressing and more women with the superwoman profile. And then society's problem would be an affective dichotomy and an impoverishment of mutual enrichment. We humanists work to prevent this from happening, and what I propose is that we be more mindful of the fact that we are all human beings and that we are enriched by difference.

Some speak of nostalgia for a traditional couple.

— This isn't coming back, in the sense that the previous model cannot be replicated. Women will not relinquish sexual freedom, nor will they abandon the programmed nature of motherhood. On the contrary, we now face a new challenge: bioethics. Women can choose to be mothers without a partner. All of this, curiously, gives women a level of responsibility they have never had in history and that men will never have. Men cannot decide to be fathers. Women can decide to be mothers or not. Women have a power that they must wield wisely. Men have mismanaged it.