I accept your upgrade of Cassanova's image. But does it really matter exactly how Cassanova turned on women? Does it make it more "OK" because his methods seem more "socially redeeming"? It still invites the question about the reversed situation. I can't imagine any woman would allow her man's ED to be blamed on her for any reason.
It gets into this unfavorable comparison I sometimes encounter about what turns on the typical man vs. typical woman. The hidden presumption in some of the discussions is that a woman's needs are socially redeeming -- better communication, talk, caring, closeness, helpfulness, etc. By contrast, what the stereotypical man needs to be turned on is less worthy -- attractive figure, revealing clothes, a direct grab for sexual organs, dirty talk, explicit visuals, etc.
