The term ‘womanizer’ always fascinates me whenever I hear it. It’s usually meant as a derogatory term for a man who’s a scoundrel heartbreaker, a two-timer, or a lecherous rapscallion. It’s supposed to mean, according to the Cambridge Dictionary of American English, ‘a man known for having many temporary, informal sexual relationships with women’. Having one or two mistresses on the side for long lengths of time doesn’t seem to qualify.
Feminists would point out, in stronger terms, that the English language, being the illogical thing that it is, doesn’t have the word ‘manizer’ for the female equivalent. I suppose, the term ‘womanizer’ isn’t very logical in itself. We know what it’s supposed to mean (in case you have already forgotten please see above), but essentially, the whole idea of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ and ‘adult’ tends towards this ridiculous notion that one converts into such a thing only through the sex act. One is not an adult until one has experienced sexual intercourse (with or without a ring on the correct finger). A ‘womanizer’, then, is a man who makes girls or ladies into women by having sex with them. It’s all so patronizingly stupid.