# Does No always mean No?



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Does NO mean NO?

Is it ever okay to disregard a woman saying No to sex because you know she really wants it?


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Never is it ok. No means no always.


----------



## Olly (Aug 17, 2015)

That is never ok. No always means no. No matter what. Always. If you think she's teasing you - then go somewhere where you will only be with someone who speaks directly. For both your and her benefit.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Are you fvcking kidding? If she says NO, respect it!

It is NEVER ok to disregard a woman saying NO. Disregarding her NO is rape.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

The ONLY time is it okay to disregard a woman saying NO is when you have previously discussed and agreed to the rules of the role play and have also agreed on a safe word that acts as the unimpeachable no.

Curious about why you ask this question....


----------



## dubsey (Feb 21, 2013)

yes, it's ok.






only if you have a previously agreed upon word that means more than "no".


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Does NO mean NO?
> 
> Is it ever okay to disregard a woman saying No to sex because you know she really wants it?


If you know she really wants it wouldn't it be better for you both if she owned her sexuality and learned to enthusiastically say "Yes Baby! Yes Baby! Yes Baby!"


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

I'm confused by the question. If she says "No", how would I *know* she really wants it? To be safe and smart would be one that "no" means, walk away, so legally this can't be a serious question.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

I have argued that "No means no" is a better system than affirmative consent. In order for this to be true, "no" has to mean exactly that for all time and space unless you have a prearranged agreement to the contrary. 

If you cannot find a way to comfortably tell your partner exactly what you DO want in the bedroom, you'd damn well better figure out a way to tell them what you do not want, mean it, and have it stick.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Bad situation. Can you elaborate?

If a woman feels empowered with you and confident, she will probably rip your damn clothes off and treat your tool like she owns it.

What situation are you talking about?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Cletus said:


> If you cannot find a way to comfortably tell your partner exactly what you DO want in the bedroom, you'd damn well better figure out a way to tell them what you do not want, mean it, *and have it stick*.


Or more accurately, we should just be able to say no, and have the man (or woman) who is wanting it say "oh ok" and then retreat to non-sexual behavior for the night. 

But the men who feel it is ok to try to turn a no into a yes don't do that. They will resort to bullying, harassment, drugging, and sometimes rape.

So it is fine to say no, and no means no....but it is NOT fine for a man to feel that it is HER job to "make it stick". If a man doesn't respect a no the very first time she says it and if he doesn't back off, he is a creep and possibly worse. Any man who keeps trying to have sex with a woman who has said no already, is a dangerous person. Most guys like this feel they are entitled to sex and that "she wants it she is just a good girl" so they feel it is ok to try to push past the no.

Again, total creeper and potential rapist.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Cletus said:


> I have argued that "No means no" is a better system than affirmative consent. In order for this to be true, "no" has to mean exactly that for all time and space unless you have a prearranged agreement to the contrary.
> 
> If you cannot find a way to comfortably tell your partner exactly what you DO want in the bedroom, you'd damn well better figure out a way to tell them what you do not want, mean it, and have it stick.


Why should anyone need a stick?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Why should anyone need a stick?


It's a necessary accessory to speaking softly.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Does NO mean NO?
> 
> Is it ever okay to disregard a woman saying No to sex because you know she really wants it?


No always means no.

If she really wants it but said no rolleyes, then she can run after you to invite you to have sex after you've walked away when she said no.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

Um. Yeah, no means no. It's not your job to decide whether she is playing hard to get or not. If she is, then that is her own fault that she is missing out. Do not ever (unless you're role playing and both parties agree) engage in anything sexual with someone who has said no. Period. It's for both yours and her protection.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

I'm gonna say this, and I think (and hope) that most of the ladies will understand...

It all depends on the "no" that you're getting. I posted this in another thread a while back...



GusPolinski said:


> Usually a gentle massage works pretty well. I start w/ her back, and then slowly move to her hips, then her butt, then... well, you know.
> 
> Her mild protests about being tired, needing sleep, or whatever usually melt into soft whimpers within about 30-60 seconds of getting to her butt.
> 
> :smthumbup:


What I've described in the above quote is typically the type of "no" that I get. I don't get "No" very often at all, and I can think of only a couple of times (many, Many years ago) that I let "No" become "NO!" before pulling back. But here's the thing... I know my wife pretty well; at that point (or, rather, those points) in time, I didn't know her as well. Still, I should've stopped at "No", and regret that I didn't.

Learn the difference between a "no", a "No", and a "NO!".

If you're getting a "no", it's probably safe to gently push a little bit. Honestly, though, I wouldn't advise doing this w/o already being at least somewhat familiar w/ your partner.

If you're getting a "No", immediately stop.

If you're getting a "NO!", and you'd previously gotten both "no" and "No", immediately stop, apologize, and put some distance between yourself and your partner. Then apologize again.

Now... what I don't like about this perspective (or, rather, communicating it) is that, if read incorrectly or taken in the wrong context, it can be seen as reckless and misogynistic.


----------



## thread the needle (May 4, 2015)

Gus. You got balls brother. I agree with you but you got balls to say so. Hats off. Been there done that.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Gus, it is a lot different scenario between a husband and wife, and a new couple who have never had sex before.

For example, some people who are married and have established their specific consent rules, can run screaming through the house "no, no, help, someone help me!" while the pretend attacker catches up, drags them to the ground, and has rough sex with them.

Similarly, in a marriage, most husbands and wives know that "I'm not in the mood" can be discussed and sometimes can change into "hells yes, let's do this". I would say this is much more specific than "being at least somewhat familiar with your partner".


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Faithful Wife said:


> *Gus, it is a lot different scenario between a husband and wife, and a new couple who have never had sex before.*
> 
> For example, some people who are married and have established their specific consent rules, can run screaming through the house "no, no, help, someone help me!" while the pretend attacker catches up, drags them to the ground, and has rough sex with them.
> 
> Similarly, in a marriage, most husbands and wives know that "I'm not in the mood" can be discussed and sometimes can change into "hells yes, let's do this". I would say this is much more specific than "being at least somewhat familiar with your partner".


I absolutely 100% agree, hence my "familiarity" clause above.

And yeah... perhaps that was a bit too vague.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> I absolutely 100% agree, hence my "familiarity" clause above.
> 
> And yeah... perhaps that was a bit too vague.


So....would you say that no always means no, when a man hears no the first time he attempts to get sexual with a woman? (Meaning when they first meet and the first time they are intimate at all).

Should he feel entitled to try to push past her no and get her to yes? Or should he respect the no and stop any further attempts at sex?


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

Anon Pink said:


> The ONLY time is it okay to disregard a woman saying NO is when you have previously discussed and agreed to the rules of the role play and have also agreed on a safe word that acts as the unimpeachable no.
> 
> Curious about why you ask this question....


Exactly. 

I can be shy about sex and when I say no with a giggle, my husband knows that I am actually asking him to take me. If I say no with a serious expression and firm tone of voice, my husband knows that he needs to back off.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Mrs.Submission said:


> I can be shy about sex and when I say no with a giggle, my husband knows that I am actually asking him to take me. If I say no with a serious expression and firm tone of voice, my husband knows that he needs to back off.


So let's say a couple have just met, and are getting intimate for the first time.

Man tries to initiate sex and the woman says no with a giggle.

Does the responsibility fall on the woman to say "NO" with a serious expression, or is the no with a giggle ok to push past?

This is what some men seem to not understand. They seem to think women are being coy all the time, in all circumstances, and therefore, they think a soft giggly "no" means "push my boundaries, I want it".

Again, not talking about a married couple here. Talking about a brand new couple.

IMO, even if a woman in a new couple does mean "push my boundaries" with her soft giggle "no", if a man is adept at that type of sexual dynamic at all, he would refuse to continue until she explicitly said "yes".


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Faithful Wife said:


> So....would you say that no always means no, when a man hears no the first time he attempts to get sexual with a woman? (Meaning when they first meet and the first time they are intimate at all).
> 
> Should he feel entitled to try to push past her no and get her to yes? Or should he respect the no and stop any further attempts at sex?


Damnit... typed out my reply and lost it. Grrr...

Anyway, to answer your questions -- yes, no, and yes.

Personally, I don't want _any_ part of _any_ sex in which my partner is anything less than a willing, receptive, _and_ *ENTHUSIASTIC* participant, and I'd think (and hope) that most guys feel the same way.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Ignoring me when I say no would very likely result in a quick but effective kick in the bo!!ocks. So, no, it isn't a terribly good idea to ignore a woman when she says no.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Hey Buddy. You out there? Care to expand on what you're talking about?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Unless it's been discussed and agreed upon beforehand (i.e. rape fantasy), No means No regardless of the number of times two people have had sex. 

I'll go one step further and say that No means No with specific sex acts during intercourse. Most couples in long term relationships have a good understanding of their partner's nuances but this one seems to be a sticking point with some. It has as much chance of causing resentment and anger as pushing the No for sex.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> Damnit... typed out my reply and lost it. Grrr...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't know how you answer no and yes from FW scenario. I look at this from a legal standpoint 

_An alleged victim's withdrawal of consent effectively nullifies any earlier consent and subjects the male to forcible rape charges under Penal Code section 261(a)(2), if he persists in what has become nonconsensual intercourse._

One may want to see gray area in every situation, but I think one teaches their son to just back away to steer clear of trouble (as spelled out by FW, not the LTR partner). There will always be willing participants later on, "these situations are not worth it".




Faithful Wife said:


> *So let's say a couple have just met, and are getting intimate for the first time.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Cosmos said:


> Ignoring me when I say no would very likely result in a quick but effective kick in the bo!!ocks. So, no, it isn't a terribly good idea to ignore a woman when she says no.


LOL!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> I absolutely 100% agree, hence my "familiarity" clause above.
> 
> And yeah... perhaps that was a bit too vague.


That familiarity clause can be the difference between having a nice evening or eating a bullet.

Be sure.


----------



## Forest (Mar 29, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Does NO mean NO?
> 
> Is it ever okay to disregard a woman saying No to sex because you know she really wants it?


You may have to follow this up with another zinger, the cauldron hasn't come to a rolling boil yet.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

It was stated on another thread that there were several men on TAM that believe it's okay to "push past the NO".

I was pretty sure that this was wrong and that the overwhelming majority of men know that it was wrong.

I'm glad to see that my assumption was correct.

I think they have us confused with MRA a$$hats.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

If you have to push past a no, it's not worth having.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> If you have to push past a no, it's not worth having.



There are enough willing participants, that one does not need to push past any form of no, at least in my limited experience.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Ikaika said:


> There are enough willing participants, that one does not need to push past any form of no, at least in my limited experience.


Certainly true. Even in the context of a monogamous relationship, in my opinion. If the choice is between, "push past the no", or do without....well, I have plenty of experience doing without. 

Who wants to have sex with someone that doesn't want to have it with you? It's gross, poisonous to the relationship, and soul-crushing for both participants.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> It was stated on another thread that there were several men on TAM that believe it's okay to "push past the NO".
> 
> I was pretty sure that this was wrong and that the overwhelming majority of men know that it was wrong.
> 
> ...


I totally agree. I think the message got a bit warped somehow. The 'anti-red pill' women were stating that AC is always given, some of the guys tried to talk about responsive desire, in which 'verbal' AC is really never given. The responsive desire does not negate a "NO", somehow that was missed. 

I need a few more negatives in the last sentence....


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> Certainly true. Even in the context of a monogamous relationship, in my opinion. If the choice is between, "push past the no", or do without....*well, I have plenty of experience doing without. *
> 
> 
> 
> Who wants to have sex with someone that doesn't want to have it with you? It's gross, poisonous to the relationship, and soul-crushing for both participants.



I agree although I'm not familiar with the bold part


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Ikaika said:


> There are enough willing participants, that one does not need to push past any form of no, at least in my limited experience.


I suppose it depends what you want, and what your maturity level is. The landscape that I live in, at well over 40, is different than the landscape that young people live in. I know one young lady who is from a very troubled home. She told me the other day that she "gave in" to a guy who pushed hard past her no. 

I would not be the slightest bit surprised if her own older brother would not do the same thing. When they were over my house, I actually had to ask him not to play music with b!tches and ho's in the lyrics. They were not nice lyrics. I said something like that is your SISTER they are talking about, he looked at me like He Had Never Even Thought Of That. It Had Never Occurred to him that HIS b!tches were somebody else' sister.

It makes me scratch my head when these topics come up like this on a marriage forum. Are we talking about attitudes we hope not to teach our young, immature children. 

But then as a young lady myself, I had grown men of authority say hells bells and try to take me by pure and none to fun force. So who even knows how people think. I can kind of almost understand the whacked out kids I mention above. They have no home life to learn from. So they learn from gangs and the troubled kids at school who will give some attention. But I cannot fathom a middle aged man trying to beat a little girl in a parking lot. And alas, that may be not be common, I know it exists. I also know that he stood up before the community and denied it with his last breath. Did *he* think it was wrong?


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Ikaika said:


> I don't know how you answer no and yes from FW scenario. I look at this from a legal standpoint
> 
> _An alleged victim's withdrawal of consent effectively nullifies any earlier consent and subjects the male to forcible rape charges under Penal Code section 261(a)(2), if he persists in what has become nonconsensual intercourse._
> 
> One may want to see gray area in every situation, but I think one teaches their son to just back away to steer clear of trouble (as spelled out by FW, not the LTR partner). There will always be willing participants later on, "these situations are not worth it".



I was answering each of the three questions that she asked, and in the order that she asked them.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> I was answering each of the three questions that she asked, and in the order that she asked them.



I was confused as to assume yes and no, but I got it now. A' ole plikia.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I suppose it depends what you want, and what your maturity level is. The landscape that I live in, at well over 40, is different than the landscape that young people live in. I know one young lady who is from a very troubled home. She told me the other day that she "gave in" to a guy who pushed hard past her no.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I will be 55 this year and married to sexy 53 year old. However, I have two sons and try as best I can to teach them ways to stay out of trouble. My youngest has young girls always calling and wanting to come over to hang out with him. Fortunately, they are often more interested in him than he is in them (btw, he is not gay if that is what you are thinking). Plus, he is busy with school and sports, no time for that nonsense.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> It was stated on another thread that there were several men on TAM that believe it's okay to "push past the NO".
> 
> I was pretty sure that this was wrong and that the overwhelming majority of men know that it was wrong.
> 
> ...


I agree the majority of men here are not MRA asshats.

But there are some who are, and those are the ones who quote the MRA asshat literature. Pretty simple to know who is who.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Faithful Wife said:


> I agree the majority of men here are not MRA asshats.
> 
> But there are some who are, and those are the ones who quote the MRA asshat literature. Pretty simple to know who is who.


I can agree with some things that Mike Huckabee say and still not support him for president.

Heck, I agree with some things that Bill Maher says!


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I can agree with some things that Mike Huckabee say and still not support him for president.
> 
> Heck, I agree with some things that Bill Maher says!


And I can decide for myself that a person who spews such nonsense and claims it is a universal truth for all men and women is someone I should ignore.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think men are morally bound to be sure that they never have sex with a woman without her consent. This means always stopping if she says no. To continue beyond a "no" is rape - a felony and abhorrent act. 

I think women are morally bound to not give mixed signals on sexual consent. Providing mixed signals endangers their partners (with the potential of a rape charge) and endangers themselves and other women by teaching their partners that sometimes "no means yes". 


Prior arrangements of course change all that. "If I say "petunia" stop, but otherwise do whatever you want with me". You can even agree that in you relationship "no" never means "no" - as long as you have some way out - basically give standing permission for him to "force" you.


I know that some people of both genders enjoy being ravished. Its a great fantasy, but its just too dangerous without some sort of prior arrangement. People are not perfect mind readers and as single mistake can destroy a life.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Even if you have been married a long time and your wife is not fulfilling her marital obligations AND you have the consent of your priest to encourage her verbally to comply to sex, no still means no!

However, "no" can be perceived as yes if you have an unhealthy fetish for sexual tease and denial. In that case you should inform your wife not to abuse you and that any further rejection is rather problematic. 

Sincerely,
Badsanta


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

*The entire schematic of this yes = no = maybe = "let me think about it," is little more than a game playing ploy that does nobody any service other than keeping them richly in bewilderment!

Where I come from, no means no without any equivocation whatsoever. And no matter how you may not exactly relish hearing that verdict, you just roll with the punches and offer respect to it! It stands to reason that mature adults shouldn't ever have to engage in game playing and mind-control with their significant others, much less anyone else!

No means no! Simply translated: "You ain't getting any!"

Well, not here anyway!*
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

Brand new couples need to communicate about sexual boundaries and how to make them known. 

Since my husband and I have been together for nearly ten years, we are both complicit in the little consent games that we play when we're being sexual. I've never been with a man who is so in tune with my mental state during sex. My husband knows exactly when to push past my no and when not to.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

No


----------



## Bobby5000 (Oct 19, 2011)

Many women say no doesn't always mean no. You don't want to talk, we're talking, don't want to buy what I want, figure on discussing it another 147 times. No means no only with regard to sex, it means maybe and I have not came around yet with everything else.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Mrs.Submission said:


> Since my husband and I have been together for nearly ten years, we are both complicit in the little consent games that we play when we're being sexual. I've never been with a man who is so in tune with my mental state during sex. My husband knows exactly when to push past my no and when not to.


My H has my blanket consent to just go for it anytime he wants. 

I never say no.

Unless we are playing some game that includes "oh no, you dirty big old man, don't you DARE rip my shirt off!" 

But seriously, if I say no he knows it means I am sick.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
That can work. Just please be careful if you play consent games without an agreed safeword. A mistake / misunderstanding can be really awful.

Now if you are sure he would stop if you said "I really mean it - stop", then that is fine as a safeword. 




Mrs.Submission said:


> Brand new couples need to communicate about sexual boundaries and how to make them known.
> 
> Since my husband and I have been together for nearly ten years, we are both complicit in the little consent games that we play when we're being sexual. I've never been with a man who is so in tune with my mental state during sex. My husband knows exactly when to push past my no and when not to.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good eveing
I think a lot of couples have a "you can start any time you like" arrangement - which is great. 

Its more unusual for "no" to not mean stop. 




Faithful Wife said:


> My H has my blanket consent to just go for it anytime he wants.
> 
> I never say no.
> 
> ...


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> It was stated on another thread that there were several men on TAM that believe it's okay to "push past the NO".
> 
> I was pretty sure that this was wrong and that the overwhelming majority of men know that it was wrong.
> 
> ...


There is one guy here on TAM who posted a very detailed explanation of how he pushes a woman past no, slowly until he get the sex he's pushing for. If I recall correctly, he got a lot of likes from men on TAM for that post. 

On the same thread, another male poster stated that if men take no to really mean no, men would never get any sex.

There are some MRA/PUA a$$hats who post on TAM.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

EleGirl said:


> There is one guy here on TAM who posted a very detailed explanation of how he pushes a woman past no, slowly until he get the sex he's pushing for. If I recall correctly, he got a lot of likes from men on TAM for that post.
> 
> On the same thread, another male poster stated that if men take no to really mean no, men would never get any sex.
> 
> There are some MRA/PUA a$$hats who post on TAM.


Show me! I wanna read and decide for myself


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> There is one guy here on TAM who posted a very detailed explanation of how he pushes a woman past no, slowly until he get the sex he's pushing for. If I recall correctly, he got a lot of likes from men on TAM for that post.
> 
> On the same thread, another male poster stated that if men take no to really mean no, men would never get any sex.
> 
> There are some MRA/PUA a$$hats who post on TAM.


Then there's one (and a half?) asshats on TAM. Not bad actually.

Is it that really such a threat that so much energy has to be expended to counter him?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Bobby5000 said:


> Many women say no doesn't always mean no. You don't want to talk, we're talking, don't want to buy what I want, figure on discussing it another 147 times. No means no only with regard to sex, it means maybe and I have not came around yet with everything else.


As long as you take it as a No regarding sex and stop; no problem.

Louis CK Rapey vibe - Bing Videos


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> That can work. Just please be careful if you play consent games without an agreed safeword. A mistake / misunderstanding can be really awful.
> 
> Now if you are sure he would stop if you said "I really mean it - stop", then that is fine as a safeword.


That's true. My husband and I believe in being sexually available to each other as much as possible, so consent is more or less assumed unless there are firm refusals.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

RandomDude said:


> Show me! I wanna read and decide for myself


I don't know if it's voyeurism or just morbid curiosity, but I wouldn't mind reading it for myself.

Not that I disbelieve Ele at all, though.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

RandomDude said:


> Show me! I wanna read and decide for myself


I will try to dig up the thread and posts. Since I'm working to a deadline at work... it might be a day or two before I have the time. But I'll do it.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> I don't know if it's voyeurism or just morbid curiosity, but I wouldn't mind reading it for myself.
> 
> Not that I disbelieve Ele at all, though.


I believe it might have been a thread started by Anon Pink with something like teaching our sons not to rape. I'm pretty sure that is the thread. I also believe that intheory correctly identified the poster in question.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest (Mar 29, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> It was stated on another thread that there were several men on TAM that believe it's okay to "push past the NO".
> 
> I was pretty sure that this was wrong and that the overwhelming majority of men know that it was wrong.
> 
> ...


Not more of that again.

Someone who uses the term "a$$hat" to describe any type of familiar association would likely be either an adolescent or fraud.


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

meson said:


> Never is it ok. No means no always.


I wish there was a double like..


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
teasing makes things very tricky. It seems a dangerous game to me. I understand the appeal, but without some clear agreement it can lead to disaster



intheory said:


> snipo
> Unless he likes being teased. In which case, I don't know what to say.
> 
> Being straightforward makes everything so much easier.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> teasing makes things very tricky. It seems a dangerous game to me. I understand the appeal, but without some clear agreement it can lead to disaster


"Teasing" is a matter of perspective. As a young lady, if I was kissing someone, and that was as far as I wanted to go, I was accused of teasing. Who is right? 

Expectation management.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

That's a safe bet. No always means no. So does yes, often, also maybe, silence, I'm not sure, stop, go, and pretty much anything else you can imagine.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Runs like Dog said:


> That's a safe bet. No always means no. So does yes, often, also maybe, silence, I'm not sure, stop, go, and pretty much anything else you can imagine.



Silence could be passed out, unable to say no. Hmmmm. This was the primary impetus to the recent changes in the law for the affirmative consent.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

Ikaika said:


> Silence could be passed out, unable to say no. Hmmmm. This was the primary impetus to the recent changes in the law for the affirmative consent.


It could be or it could be trigger warnings and microaggressions from cisheteropatriarchy.


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

I had a moment in which I misunderstood an OH, for a NO... I jumped back right off the GF... She freaked out because she had no clue WTF was going on.. 

I immediately went to off mode.. She was surprised that I just flew off the couch that fast.. I explained and we laughed about it..


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Limits are fine - that wasn't meant by teasing, maybe I'm misusing the word (or there are regional variations in its meaning).

I was talking about the game were someone feigns lack of interest with the expectation and desire that their partner continue - though at a slow rate. It is someone who wants to be pursued and wants to extend that pursuit with a series of mild rejections - but no actualy "no's". 






NobodySpecial said:


> "Teasing" is a matter of perspective. As a young lady, if I was kissing someone, and that was as far as I wanted to go, I was accused of teasing. Who is right?
> 
> Expectation management.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

What did the sadist do to the masochist?



Nothing.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> Damnit... typed out my reply and lost it. Grrr...
> 
> Anyway, to answer your questions -- yes, no, and yes.
> 
> Personally, I don't want _any_ part of _any_ sex in which my partner is anything less than a willing, receptive, _and_ *ENTHUSIASTIC* participant, and I'd think (and hope) that most guys feel the same way.


I agree with the "willing and receptive" part, although I must also note that there are women posting *on this thread* who say that they act coy with their husbands and say "no" when they really do want it. If "Yes Means Yes" is enacted into law, that makes their husbands rapists if they persist. Is that really what anyone wants?

As for *ENTHUSIASTIC* part, I do a lot of things for my wife that I'm not *ENTHUSIASTIC* about, so I think that is too strict a standard.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

technovelist said:


> I agree with the "willing and receptive" part, although I must also note that there are women posting *on this thread* who say that they act coy with their husbands and say "no" when they really do want it. If "Yes Means Yes" is enacted into law, that makes their husbands rapists if they persist. Is that really what anyone wants?
> 
> As for *ENTHUSIASTIC* part, I do a lot of things for my wife that I'm not *ENTHUSIASTIC* about, so I think that is too strict a standard.


To be fair, I didn't say that she's always enthusiastic from the very start. Once she's gotten a bit of "attention", though, she's there. 

That said, it's probably worth mentioning that she initiates anywhere from about 30% to 50% of the time.

Also (and this is important), sex isn't really something that she does _for_ me -- it's something she does WITH me.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> To be fair, I didn't say that she's always enthusiastic from the very start. Once she's gotten a bit of "attention", though, she's there.
> 
> That said, it's probably worth mentioning that she initiates anywhere from about 30% to 50% of the time.
> 
> Also (and this is important), sex isn't really something that she does _for_ me -- it's something she does WITH me.


I'm happy for you, of course, but I hope you realize that your experience is not universal.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

technovelist said:


> I'm happy for you, of course, but I hope you realize that your experience is not universal.


I do.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

technovelist said:


> I'm happy for you, of course, but I hope you realize that your experience is not universal.


This comment makes me sad 

Everyone should be so lucky as Gus!


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

intheory said:


> It means when a girl (usually a girl), clearly leads a guy to think that sex will happen, enjoys getting him aroused; then says no for her kicks.


Like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsneH0mOq-0

(I love that song).

But I think NS's point was that some men will declare a woman a tease based on whatever parameters they felt like laying on it, not just the type of deliberate intention you described.


----------



## NWKindaguy (Sep 2, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> Does NO mean NO?
> 
> Is it ever okay to disregard a woman saying No to sex because you know she really wants it?


Agreed, I see this completely different from rape or non consent. I have been with a couple of women who initially played coy, but physical stimulation, clothes on, changed their minds. Who am I to say no? Although I said no once, and she begged me, wow it was great!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

ConanHub said:


> I believe it might have been a thread started by Anon Pink with something like teaching our sons not to rape. I'm pretty sure that is the thread. I also believe that intheory correctly identified the poster in question.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Hmmm. I thought that DvlsAdvc8 made a lot of good points while being too certain that he was right and being overly combative.

If I'd seen him say anything about "Pushing past the No" I would have instantly disregarded him. I read most of that thread. I wonder I my rose colored glasses caused me to miss it or there might be different interpretations. I'll be interested in re-reading the post if someone digs it up.


----------

