# Owning It?



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?

I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.

And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Whether it is odd or not, is rather subjective. That said as a male I have no expectation of that at all.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?
> 
> I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.
> 
> And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


There’s an old thread on tam called “You did it for other men, but not me”. If you type that into the tam search bar you’ll find it. 
It has almost four thousand posts so knock yourself out.


----------



## TJW (Mar 20, 2012)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?


Well, I don't know if it's "odd" - but I am desperately trying to get my wife to go back to work so I can grow reefer in the attic and sit in front of the TV smoking it - and, inherently in the bargain, she should develop sexual desire for me


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?
> 
> I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.
> 
> And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


Female here.

Not odd, but unreasonable.

People, especially when young, tend to experiment. I did some things from sexual to culinary to interior decorating that I realized at the time or shortly after were not something I ever wanted to do again. Should I have to do those things with my husband because I tried them when I was with an ex?

People, as they grow, change over time. This includes their tastes. There are things I liked when I was 25 that I wouldn't bother with now and things I like now I didn't think much on back then. Should I be expected to do things I don't like because I did like them once upon a time?




TJW said:


> Well, I don't know if it's "odd" - but I am desperately trying to get my wife to go back to work so I can grow reefer in the attic and sit in front of the TV smoking it - and, inherently in the bargain, she should develop sexual desire for me


Where I live weed is legal, I know some people who make a decent chunk of change monthly selling their product to either dispensaries or individuals, and a lot of women feel horny when high, so this is not exactly unrealistic.


----------



## TJW (Mar 20, 2012)

MJJEAN said:


> this is not exactly unrealistic


...a drunkard's dream......if I ever did see one.....


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Andy1001 said:


> There’s an old thread on tam called “You did it for other men, but not me”. If you type that into the tam search bar you’ll find it.
> It has almost four thousand posts so knock yourself out.


Great reference, I made it through a few pages.

I can say I knew my wife had done anal before and all she would say about it is, “I really have to be in the mood for it.” Anyway, yeah it bothered me that given she said that, she hadn’t done it with me. 

Eventually I got dat booty and it didn’t really do much for me. 

For a few days I had my mind movie of it, but nothing about it was so great to attempt it again. Maybe I’ll ask her about it today, not trying it, but what the deal was.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> I did some things from sexual to culinary to interior decorating that I realized at the time or shortly after were not something I ever wanted to do again.
> 
> Should I be expected to do things I don't like because I did like them once upon a time?
> 
> Where I live weed is legal, I know some people who make a decent chunk of change monthly selling their product to either dispensaries or individuals, and a lot of women feel horny when high, so this is not exactly unrealistic.


@MJJEAN 
1. I would love to see some interior decorating photos from when you were 25! Do you have any? Cinder blocks never go out of style!

2. I'm sure this is going to be a bone of contention between the boys & the girls, with the boys being the ones who want what the other guy got. What if he _really _wants to try that thing the other guy got (probably always going to be anal?) Should he be expected to NOT get it?

3. Weed is pretty legal here, too. My son & I were ready to start setting up green houses until we found out that because we live in the county, we _can't _grow it to sell. County Commissioners can kiss my azz.

4. I'm going to go buy some edibles today. They might be the new, er, Edible Panty Remover.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Noman said:


> What if he _really _wants to try that thing the other guy got (probably always going to be anal?) Should he be expected to NOT get it


For me it was not a deal breaker because I’m happy with normal PIV sex but I did want to try it, was happy when she did it, and then never returned to it.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Andy1001 said:


> There’s an old thread on tam called “You did it for other men, but not me”. If you type that into the tam search bar you’ll find it.
> It has almost four thousand posts so knock yourself out.


The thread you mention is the 3rd or 4th iteration of this subject since I came to TAM in 2014. 

About every two years, the old one slowly fades away, and someone starts a new one. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> For me it was not a deal breaker because I’m happy with normal PIV sex but I did want to try it, was happy when she did it, and then never returned to it.


I am going to predict that:
1. 90% of men will say it's a reasonable expectation, while 90% of women will say it's an unreasonable expectation.
2. If stated, it will be 90% anal & 10% blowjobs.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> The thread you mention is the 3rd or 4th iteration of this subject since I came to TAM in 2014.
> 
> About every two years, the old one slowly fades away, and someone starts a new one.


Uck, we need a Cliff Notes sticky on this subject.

Although, I'll bet my prediction above is spot on.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

And the title probably describes the problem. Men don’t own you. You are free to be who you are. If you are with a loving safe partner they don’t ‘expect’ things they respect you.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anastasia6 said:


> And the title probably describes the problem. Men don’t own you. You are free to be who you are. If you are with a loving safe partner they don’t ‘expect’ things they respect you.


I agree with this in principle.

The problem I have with this is the hypocrisy. 

It seems that sex is what always comes up when discussing not allowing expectations in a relationship. 

Then, when the script gets flipped, and a wife is told 'no thank you' when wanting to vent about her day, squish a spider, or open a jar, suddenly expectations are not only encouraged in a relationship, but necessary.

So, if expectations are not okay, let's apply it to all areas of a relationship, not just sex.





Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

farsidejunky said:


> I agree with this in principle.
> 
> The problem I have with this is the hypocrisy.
> 
> ...


So you equate discussing a persons day with having a penis shoved up your ass?


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Further you are implying that normal human interaction with your partner like having a conversation is something you’ve tried before and have decided you don’t want to do anymore? What kind of partner would that make you? 

normal people talk with people all people not just spouses. But if a woman isn’t willing to do sexual things they would rather not just because they did them in the pastin your mind that’s the equivalent of withholding a conversation?

so you can meet a woman have varied enthusiastic sex but they shouldn’t have conversation if they don’t do sexual acts with you that they never agreed to? And you view conversation as somethingyou just do for them? Not because it’s what a healthy relationship is built on?
WTF


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anastasia6 said:


> So you equate discussing a persons day with having a penis shoved up your ass?


In that either of them can be wants or expectations from a partner, yes.

Also, I was thinking more along the lines of oral, and the frequency with which we read threads on this site where that has been taken off the menu, as opposed to anal.

I know you have spoken/posted about having a very loving relationship, which is awesome.

That said, you were deliberately vulgar and crass over the sexual expectation, while glossing over the non-sexual expectation. That is a bit disingenuous.

Perhaps you never run into these issues. I don't any more, but there was a time I did. 

In other words, I was expected to continue providing stellar marital services to someone who was providing minimal marital services herself. My refusal to accept the frame you posted above is exactly what stopped the madness.

So the simple answer to your loaded question is 'yes'. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

TJW said:


> Well, I don't know if it's "odd" - but I am desperately trying to get my wife to go back to work so I can grow reefer in the attic and sit in front of the TV smoking it - and, inherently in the bargain, she should develop sexual desire for me


This was pretty damn funny.😂


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anastasia6 said:


> Further you are implying that normal human interaction with your partner like having a conversation is something you’ve tried before and have decided you don’t want to do anymore? What kind of partner would that make you?
> 
> normal people talk with people all people not just spouses. But if a woman isn’t willing to do sexual things they would rather not just because they did them in the pastin your mind that’s the equivalent of withholding a conversation?
> 
> ...


Are you asking me what I think, or telling me what I think?

You did both in this post.

The former is genuine. The latter is underhanded. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anastasia, let me ask you this:

Is your husband entitled to your body?

Conversely, are you entitled to his body?

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?
> 
> I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.
> 
> And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


To be honest, I'd _hope_ they'd try everything with me that they weren't willing to try with previous partners in addition to the stuff they used to do.  

Male seeking female for the record.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Anastasia6 said:


> So you equate discussing a persons day with having a penis shoved up your ass?


It appears you might have misconstrued what he was inferring.

I'm not interested in anal personally. I seriously love the V.

I am very interested in oral though. If I found out by some strange happenstance that Mrs. C had swallowed with a previous partner but wouldn't even consider trying with me? Well there would be a bit of a problem.

I don't believe she has though so I am very satisfied with what we do and I can live without it.

I do require a certain level of frequency and quality, however, and that isn't any different than any other relationship requirement which @farsidejunky was referring to.

It's not evil to require sexual needs to be met as well as any other relationship need.

Anal is a very gray area and shouldn't really be included unless your partner has had no problems doing it with others but just won't with you.

If I found out Mrs. C deepthroated previously, had no real problems and swallowed often??? Our marriage would be on the line.

To be fairly representing myself though, I am very generous in most respects and usually give better than I get.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

farsidejunky said:


> Are you asking me what I think, or telling me what I think?
> 
> You did both in this post.
> 
> ...


I am simply stating what you implied.
Sex is part of a healthy relationship, talking is part of a healthy relationship. But you can have a healthy relationship without having specific kinds of sex. 

To withhold normal conversation due to wanting something that was never part of the relationship you established with that person is breaking the relationship.

my point is you are only entitled to the relationship you made. I am assuming a person having sex with has a relationship based on conversation and mutual attraction. It is unfair to try to say something that was never part of said relationship now has to be because of the past. But you are implying that you’d take away talking which would have been part of the relationship.
Whose actually being disingenuous? Me when I talk anal which was literally brought as the most likely act being discussed or you trying to bring in reduced frequency which is a different problem and not what OP asked about?

but if you establish a relationship that has sex 3 x a week and you are fine with ituntil you find out that the person used to have sex 5x a week with some psat relationship and because of that you’ll withhold talking cause you see that as something that benefits her well .. that explainswhy so many people on TAM have so many damn problems.

but in the end you are right. I’m in a very loving and active relationship. I’ve had sex three times today and it would be more but 52 year old men have limitations. I’ve received oral, given oral used a butt plug a vibrator and a prostate massager today. We lovingly share each other’s bodies. But no we are not entitled to each other’s bodies and no we don’t expect things based on the past not even our own past.

I knew not to wade into this thread it’s always a sad commentary.


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

If a woman has simply never done some sexual act before then no worries, it's probably just something she simply is not interested in doing. If it is something that she did for other guys and won't do for me, that's pretty much a dealbreaker IMO. Men ain't dumb. We know what this stuff usually means. She liked/wanted/valued that other guy enough to do anything he wanted but now she's suddenly become a prude. She's just not into you so much.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?
> 
> I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.
> 
> And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


No, because realize she did not stay with those previous ones. And that could be why.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> It appears you might have misconstrued what he was inferring.
> 
> I'm not interested in anal personally. I seriously love the V.
> 
> ...


I misconstrued nothing. The topic is things they may have done in their past. There was a post shortly above that which referred to anal and BJs.

it was quite plainly stated that women weren’t entitled to conversation about their day if they weren’t willing to do sexual favors previously granted.

that very plainly shows the relationship sought.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Noman said:


> I am going to predict that:
> 1. 90% of men will say it's a reasonable expectation, while 90% of women will say it's an unreasonable expectation.
> 2. If stated, it will be 90% anal & 10% blowjobs.


The post by OP


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Enigma32 said:


> If a woman has simply never done some sexual act before then no worries, it's probably just something she simply is not interested in doing. If it is something that she did for other guys and won't do for me, that's pretty much a dealbreaker IMO. Men ain't dumb. We know what this stuff usually means. She liked/wanted/valued that other guy enough to do anything he wanted but now she's suddenly become a prude. She's just not into you so much.


So wrong.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Anastasia6 said:


> I misconstrued nothing. The topic is things they may have done in their past. There was a post shortly above that which referred to anal and BJs.
> 
> it was quite plainly stated that women weren’t entitled to conversation about their day if they weren’t willing to do sexual favors previously granted.
> 
> that very plainly shows the relationship sought.


Hahahaha! I'm actually going to apologize for intruding on your conversation with @farsidejunky but it would be really fun to pursue this.😁


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

Anastasia6 said:


> So wrong.


I've been on the other side of this enough to see it for myself. I bet many guys with some experience will likely say the same. Ladies break up with these guys and then get with someone they really like and that's who they do these things with.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> Hahahaha! I'm actually going to apologize for intruding on your conversation with @farsidejunky but it would be really fun to pursue this.😁


Well Conan you disappointed me the most. You have described you adoration for your wife and your active sex life and how happy you are. But you’d throw it all away for something in the past. So you aren’t actually happy then?

also this thread wasn’t started about if a person should expect sex in a relationship. It was specific about a past act. I never said you shouldn’t have sex in a healthy relationship.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Enigma32 said:


> I've been on the other side of this enough to see it for myself. I bet many guys with some experience will likely say the same. Ladies break up with these guys and then get with someone they really like and that's who they do these things with.


Yes guys WOULD say that. Doesn’t make it true.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

I don’t know about not talking or anything but the booty hole is an area of mystery and wonder.

To have shared it with “some guy” but not your husband? If you have a good story about it like I tried it once and it didn’t fit and it was painful and never again well then ok. 

If instead like my wife she says, “I have to be in the mood.” Well then ok, you were in the mood with Joe Slick but not with the guy who got down on one knee? No.

Swiggidy swooty I’m tappin’ dat booty!


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?
> 
> I guess I'm thinking primarily of sex, but it could be other things too.
> 
> And I'm wondering how this might differ between the genders, so please specify, if you don't mind.


I'm a woman and I'm going to say no. 

My ex husband and I got together while we were young and experimented quite a bit sexually, and otherwise. There were things we enjoyed together that I would never consider doing with my boyfriend. It's things we did while young and frankly naive. 

My boyfriend and I are developing our own unique sexual menu based on the things/sexual acts he and I are willing to perform now at late 40s/ early 50s. When we speak to each other of what we like or want to try, it's never in relation to what he or I did in the past. It's always in relation to what we want to do now. Eg. "I'd like to do this with you". 

An example of something non sexual - I went to raves as a young person. I tried ecstasy and loved my experiences. That is something that I did when I was young and I have no desire to repeat in middle age. 

Last example. My ex husband and I combined our incomes into one joint account. He was responsible for managing the money and paying the bills. I loved not having to worry about money - never had any issues. Assuming I meet Mr. Right, he and I will never have a joint account, and he will not have control over my money.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Lila 
Many men here in the past put up with sexless or low sex marriages for years. Should all their future female partners expect that they would be kept around if they decide to become sexless cause in the past the man waited 10 years or twenty to divorce or get rid of the low sex partner?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Anastasia6 said:


> Lila
> Many men here in the past put up with sexless or low sex marriages for years. Should all their future female partners expect that they would be kept around if they decide to become sexless cause in the past the man waited 10 years or twenty to divorce or get rid of the low sex partner?


I would hope not. Live and learn. 

I have said this before but I truly believe that if something is important to you (general you) then don't settle until you find it. And if you do settle, do so with the understanding that what that person is offering or not offering is the only thing you're entitled to.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Anastasia6 said:


> Well Conan you disappointed me the most. You have described you adoration for your wife and your active sex life and how happy you are. But you’d throw it all away for something in the past. So you aren’t actually happy then?
> 
> also this thread wasn’t started about if a person should expect sex in a relationship. It was specific about a past act. I never said you shouldn’t have sex in a healthy relationship.


Don't be disappointed. Mrs. C and I are very solid with no sign of slowing down.

You are pasting your preconceptions onto us and they just don't fit.

Mrs. Conan has never denied me anything she has to offer and I'm certain I've gotten far more from her than anyone else and that just happens to include the bedroom. She can make that claim of me as well.

I was posting a hypothetical concept that doesn't apply to us.

My sticking point, with any partner, would be denying me something they didn't have a problem providing for someone else with the caveat that it would have to be something I desired.

My dynamic with Mrs. C doesn't really allow room for anything less than the best from both of us.

It isn't even comparable how much more in every area, that she has received from me compared with any previous partner I had and I require the same effort from my mate.

I'm convinced that Mrs. Conan has given me her best and I am satisfied with that.

I set up the hypothetical to try and comprehend what is happening with other men.

My wife wouldn't have become Mrs. C in the first place if she had been less willing to be fully committed to me.

I'm somewhat perceptive though and avoided a bunch of entangled nonsense until I met my wife.

She didn't hold back then and she still isn't.😊


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Anastasia6 said:


> Lila
> Many men here in the past put up with sexless or low sex marriages for years. Should all their future female partners expect that they would be kept around if they decide to become sexless cause in the past the man waited 10 years or twenty to divorce or get rid of the low sex partner?


This example doesn’t quite match what is being asked.

The OP:

You did X sexual act with someone you weren’t married to, but you won’t do it with your husband. Why?

Your example:

Wife stops having sex with husband
Marriage dissolves
New partner says, I am entitled to not have sex with you like your ex wife.

Doesn’t sound the same to me…


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> Don't be disappointed. Mrs. C and I are very solid with no sign of slowing down.
> 
> You are pasting your preconceptions onto us and they just don't fit.
> 
> ...


Yes but in your hypothetical. Your wife doesn’t swallow but did at sometime in the past. You literally said this would enter deal breaker territory. I didn’t make that up you did.

so no matter how you feel right now all happy you would feel different because of something in the past.

also the OP never said the past act was something they enjoyed just something they did.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

BTW deep throat is a great example.
The actress did it but didn’t want to.

but all future partners should expect it right?


Although the film was an enormous success at the time, Boreman later said that her abusive husband, Chuck Traynor, had threatened and coerced her into the performance.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Enigma32 said:


> We know what this stuff usually means. She liked/wanted/valued that other guy enough to do anything he wanted but now she's suddenly become a prude. She's just not into you so much.


That may be the case in plenty of instances, yet it may also not be the case in plenty of other instances.

For example my third longest lasting sexual relationship partner, didn't want to share anal sex with me. Despite having some experience of it in the past, and felt she didn't want to do it with me going forward. Yet I was completely fine with that, even after having been married to a woman who enjoyed sharing anal sex with me amongst many other things. Although that partner certainly wasn't a prude at all, in fact our shared sexual repertoire was very enjoyable, substantially varied and very far from vanilla in practice.

Also In comparing notes on one occasion (in the last couple of years) with my wife at one point, we both found it amusing that in our past. We had both enjoyed the fun of sharing sex with someone, in the public space of a filled nightclub/pub. Yet despite having done that, neither of us have sought to recreate such escapades with each other or expect to do so either.

Likewise there are plenty of things that I have enjoyed sharing sexually with other sexual partners in my past, that I haven't shared as activities with my wife. Just as there are sexual things I have done with my wife, which I haven't done with others. Since I consider my sexual relationship with my wife, to be a sexual relationship that is shared with her looking forward rather than looking behind.

Also by way of comparison, I've never cared about what any of my sexual partners have done sexually in the past with others. Since my sexual partners are not my property, it is up to them as autonomous individuals, to decide what they do and who they do it with. That said whatever they have done, I hope they have at least enjoyed it more often than not as much as they could.



farsidejunky said:


> Anastasia, let me ask you this:
> 
> Is your husband entitled to your body?
> 
> Conversely, are you entitled to his body?


I'm not @Anastasia6, yet I would like to answer that one from my perspective.

So here goes.

My wife is absolutely not entitled to my body or to sex from me, just as I am absolutely not entitled to her body or sex from her.

That said if my wife decides that she no longer wants to share a rich sex life with me, in the way that I enjoy it. Then I will feel free to seek another sexual partner or others, to try to satiate any of my unmet desires.

Likewise if I decide to stop sharing a rich sex life with my wife, in the way that she enjoys. My wife should feel free to seek another sexual partner or others, to try to satiate any of her unmet desires.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anastasia6 said:


> I am simply stating what you implied.
> Sex is part of a healthy relationship, talking is part of a healthy relationship. But you can have a healthy relationship without having specific kinds of sex.
> 
> To withhold normal conversation due to wanting something that was never part of the relationship you established with that person is breaking the relationship.
> ...


The problem here is that you are ascribing something to me that I never said. I simply stated that expectations in a relationship needed to be viewed equally. 

That is all. 

No more, no less.

Everything else you posted was both assuming what I meant (with quite a bit of liberty taken) then judging me based upon that.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Enigma32 said:


> If a woman has simply never done some sexual act before then no worries, it's probably just something she simply is not interested in doing. If it is something that she did for other guys and won't do for me, that's pretty much a dealbreaker IMO. Men ain't dumb. We know what this stuff usually means. She liked/wanted/valued that other guy enough to do anything he wanted but now she's suddenly become a prude. She's just not into you so much.


I would use anal sex and oral as examples here to illustrate why this is wrong. To begin with, she didn't stay with them so she may not have liked their sexual habits and not wish to repeat them with a future partner.

Assuming she did like doing anal with a past partner, maybe he was small enough for it not to be uncomfortable and also knew how to be careful and not contaminate and give her infections. It takes a lot of concentrated effort and presence of mind to keep from giving someone an e coli infection if you're going to be doing anal.

Maybe her past partner didn't have an unpleasant smell or taste or try to come in her mouth or on her face or body during oral and so she didn't mind doing it sometimes.

Maybe a future partner demands oral too often and smells and tastes bad and thinks life isn't complete unless she swallows or he sprays sperm all over her.


And I would also suggest that setting everything else aside, an entitled attitude about a woman owing you a certain sex act is going to be a huge turn off to most women.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

Hiner112 said:


> To be honest, I'd _hope_ they'd try everything with me that they weren't willing to try with previous partners in addition to the stuff they used to do.
> 
> Male seeking female for the record.


@Hiner112 Amen, brother!



DownByTheRiver said:


> No, because realize she did not stay with those previous ones. And that could be why.


@DownByTheRiver would that imply that she was forced?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

DownByTheRiver said:


> And I would also suggest that setting everything else aside, an entitled attitude about a woman owing you a certain sex act is going to be a huge turn off to most women.


I completely agree with you. I don't think I could be vulnerable with someone who felt like I owed him sexual acts that were never on the menu for him to begin with. I can't imagine what being with someone with that level of resentment would feel like but it can't be good.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

Lila said:


> I completely agree with you. I don't think I could be vulnerable with someone who felt like I owed him sexual acts that were never on the menu for him to begin with. I can't imagine what being with someone with that level of resentment would feel like but it can't be good.


My original phrase was: "expect a spouse to be willing"

I think "owed" is much harsher than "expect," which should perhaps be changed to "appreciated."

Menu? That sounds more like a business transaction than a loving relationship.

As for "resentment," I think that's a pretty large leap to take from "expect."


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Noman said:


> My original phrase was: "expect a spouse to be willing"
> 
> I think "owed" is much harsher than "expect," which should perhaps be changed to "appreciated."
> 
> ...



It's all semantics which is why I always say communication is key. 

Whether it is expectations or feelings of being owed, I stand by what I said. It's a turnoff. If you don't like the word "menu" then substitute it for offering. It's all the same thing. Don't expect more from a partner than what they are offering. And if that doesn't seem to be enough, then let them go so that both you and they can find more compatible partners. 

As far as resentment being a result of unmet expectations, let me do a quick thread search to show you what that looks like. It's not far fetched and happens all of the time with all kinds of expectations in marriage, not just sex.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Maybe her past partner didn't have an unpleasant smell or taste or try to come in her mouth or on her face or body during oral and so she didn't mind doing it sometimes.
> 
> Maybe a future partner demands oral too often and smells and tastes bad and thinks life isn't complete unless she swallows or he sprays sperm all over her.
> 
> And I would also suggest that setting everything else aside, an entitled attitude about a woman owing you a certain sex act is going to be a huge turn off to most women.


No one should feel any compulsion to share any sexual acts, with any of their sexual partners if they don't want to do them. Regardless of whether they have done such things, and that includes even when they enjoyed such things as well.

People should be free to change their mind as they like. And just because someone is in a sexual relationship with someone, they are not entitled to their past, and own nothing except for the experiences they have shared.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?


Back to the OP’s actual question re-posted above. If you want to add a bunch of fine print to it:

1. When previous partner(s) did not: force, coerce, etc… and all acts were executed willingly by both partners.

2. Acts did not involve unwanted physical pain or injury.

3. Acts did not involve a third party.

4. Acts did not require physical strength or flexibility that make them painful or impossible with spouse.

5. Acts are not illegal with any chance of getting caught.

6. Acts do not leave evidence of themselves for example online pornography that can cause issues in the future.

7. Acts do not involve external substances ex MDMA, cocaine, etc… other than typical OTC products limited to sexual activity such as condoms and lube.

I probably forgot some but let’s say something along those lines.

Then I would say NO it is not ODD to wonder why given the above previous partner(s) were able to have this experience but the spouse is not. If not, why not?

Sure, “I don’t want to.” is fine but the natural follow up question of, “Why not?” should have an answer. 

For example my wife says my sperm tastes like **** and she’s not doing that. Well, hey at least she tried it. So that’s it, one and done and no issues. To be honest I don’t know if she ever did it with other partners.

It’s worth saying that even if you struck out all the fine print I wrote up there I am 100% willing to try anything my wife wants to do in bed with no third party. If she wants to do me in the ass with a 12” Hentai dildo while my head is buried in granola and she spanks me with a riding crop I would at least try to make it happen FOR HER.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Noman said:


> @Hiner112 Amen, brother!
> 
> 
> @DownByTheRiver would that imply that she was forced?


No.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

I'll give a non-sexual example that occurred with my youngest sister. She loves traveling and has visited many countries. If she won the lottery tomorrow I'm sure I wouldn't see her for years as she'd be at one exotic location or another. She was engaged to a guy of means who in his earlier days had been quite the jet-setter and by all accounts he enjoyed every second of it. When she dated him, he would not entertain traveling with her. He was over his jet-setting ways. Should she have expected him to travel with her because it was something she loved doing? My answer was No. That's not who he is now. That was the guy from 5 years ago.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> Should she have expected him to travel with her because it was something she loved doing? My answer was No. That's not who he is now.


It’s not a perfect example as you say during the dating phase he made it clear he’s not traveling with her despite having done so in the past. They’re not married at this point, they’re dating.

If he did travel it was with other women presumably, if not then it’s not a great example because it’s not something he did with other women that he won’t do with his fiancé.

So let’s say his Facebook is full of him traveling all over the world with other women, and his fiancé says let’s go on a trip I want to be one of those women too and he’s like nope. Sorry that isn’t on the menu.

If I am that lady, I am wondering why not? What’s wrong with me?

If he has a reason like:

No money
No time
Been there before (find a new place)

Then you can have a discussion about it, but if it’s just not on the menu and there is no explanation then that’s a problem.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> It’s not a perfect example as you say during the dating phase he made it clear he’s not traveling with her despite having done so in the past. They’re not married at this point, they’re dating.
> 
> If he did travel it was with other women presumably, if not then it’s not a great example because it’s not something he did with other women that he won’t do with his fiancé.
> 
> ...


To your first point, dating is the time to figure out whether or not the person you are dating had the qualities you desire in a long term partner. What they present or offer is the only thing any of us are entitled to. Expecting more just because they may have done it in the past is IMHO unreasonable. The product is purchased as is. 

To your second point, whether his travels are shared on Facebook or not is moot. Again, the question is about expectations. 

I only expect what is proposed and is presented as available to me. If I don't like what's being offered then that is not the right person for me. Simple. No expectations beyond that.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> Expecting more just because they may have done it in the past is IMHO unreasonable.


I guess I don’t disagree. But that person would be someone I wouldn’t be interested in if they couldn’t explain the reason.

The woman in my example would be right in feeling not special and wondering what is wrong with her.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

IMO, every relationship is new, and you figure out what activities and behaviors work for this relationship. It's a good idea to explore the limits fairly early, and not hold back discussing something you want that hasn't been brought up previously. What works can also change over time - things can be added or removed for many reasons. Of course, it can be very disappointing to find out that something you'd _really_ like to do/have is not on offer (even if was with others in the past). People can and do change what they like or are willing to do, for themselves or others! That's normal. If you can't _negotiate_ a solution, you always have the option to leave (or you can let it go without reservations; or you can harbor an unhealthy resentment, of course).

I get the impression that it is mostly men that feel deprived of something their partner did in the past. However, I think it's often cherry-picking; e.g., you did anal with so-and-so, why not with me? And not, you did a MFM threesome, but that turns me off even if _you_ would want to repeat it so that's off the table. No doubt there is some hypocrisy here, and it also seems that there may be some self-esteem issues, e.g., what's wrong with me that you won't do that with me?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> I guess I don’t disagree. But that person would be someone I wouldn’t be interested in if they couldn’t explain the reason.
> 
> The woman in my example would be right in feeling not special and wondering what is wrong with her.


I guess I have a more cut throat way of looking at it. I don't ask for reasons (i assume they have theirs). If it's something I need, and they aren't offering it, it's a no from me. I only hope that I am treated the same because I don't want to get involved with someone whose needs I think I'm meeting only to have all of this other stuff come out afterwards.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> I guess I have a more cut throat way of looking at it. I don't ask for reasons (i assume they have theirs). If it's something I need, and they aren't offering it, it's a no from me.


Well ultimately yes, but the OP is taking about spouse. So you already committed to this person. So while yeah it’s easy to conceptually say sure just cut ties, for me it wasn’t that easy but I got there in the end.

When the person is your spouse you (hopefully) give them the benefit of the doubt that there is a reason behind the way they’re interacting with you. When you’re just dating or whatever there isn’t the same investment.

If my wife wanted to stop doing something we had been doing, and I still wanted to do it, my first concern that there would be that there is something wrong with one or both of us. So I’d try and troubleshoot it and fix what is wrong. If it’s simply, “I’m never doing that again and I’m not explaining it.” That’s messed up in my book.

My wife has taken stuff off the menu. There are acts we both used to do earlier in our marriage multiple times, many times, and we don’t do them because she doesn’t want to anymore and she told me why and there are physical reasons and I understand those reasons and that’s the end of it,


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> Well ultimately yes, but the OP is taking about spouse. So you already committed to this person. So while yeah it’s easy to conceptually say sure just cut ties, for me it wasn’t that easy but I got there in the end.
> 
> When the person is your spouse you (hopefully) give them the benefit of the doubt that there is a reason behind the way they’re interacting with you. When you’re just dating or whatever there isn’t the same investment.
> 
> ...


You're moving the goal posts. The OP was about expecting things/acts from a partner that may have been done in the past with someone else but are not offered up to you (general you). What you describe is called changing relationship dynamics and yes that happens. When it does it makes sense to communicate those needs.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse


The first few words say spouse.



Lila said:


> You're moving the goal posts. The OP was about expecting things/acts from a partner that may have been done in the past with someone else but are not offered up to you (general you). What you describe is called changing relationship dynamics and yes that happens. When it does it makes sense to communicate those needs.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> The first few words say spouse.


Okay. 

You're moving the goal posts. The OP was about expecting things/acts from a _ spouse_ that may have been done in the past with someone else but are not offered up to you (general you). What you describe is called changing relationship dynamics and yes that happens. When it does it makes sense to communicate those needs.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Anastasia6 said:


> BTW deep throat is a great example.
> The actress did it but didn’t want to.
> 
> but all future partners should expect it right?
> ...


You need to pay attention to what my post actually says. I'm not into coercion at all. It's about as big a turn off for me as watching two obese mobsters screw each other.

There is a strange situation which I have never encountered that I was talking about.

It's where a woman thoroughly enjoyed sex with many varieties with different men but deny their husbands even a try at it.

I understand perfectly well that someone might try something once or twice and decide "nope!"

I'm not referring to anything that someone tried and didn't like, or even something they might have enjoyed earlier in life but current health levels prevent doing it safely.

I'm referring to the ladies that just won't (as in choose not to) with their husbands. No medical limitations and it isn't something they don't enjoy. They just won't even give their husbands a try at it and it was something these ladies had no problems doing with other men.

I can't even comprehend it personally and I haven't experienced it. Mrs. C hasn't done anything for anyone else she wouldn't do for me and a hell of a lot more in my case.

I can certainly understand the consternation of someone that this weird situation happens to though.

Mrs. C has never deep throated or swallowed for anyone, for any reason, just to be clear.

She has given me just as much and more than anyone before though and I can say the same.

It really isn't about coercion and anyone that can even be turned on in a situation like that is deranged in my humble opinion.

To me, it is about love, desire and acceptance.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> Okay.
> 
> You're moving the goal posts. The OP was about expecting things/acts from a _ spouse_ that may have been done in the past with someone else but are not offered up to you (general you). What you describe is called changing relationship dynamics and yes that happens. When it does it makes sense to communicate those needs.


I see.

To me the not offered to husband but offered to Joe Random is worse than changing relationship dynamics but the remedy is the same.

If I suddenly found out my wife was milking the prostate of her ex boyfriend and I had asked her to do mine and she said no I’d want an explanation of why not. If she says yeah I did him but I’m not doing you and that’s it, and no reason why, then we’d have a problem.

Maybe she has great reasons why she doesn’t want to. For me the reason matters. A blanket no with no explanation isn’t sufficient.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

ccpowerslave said:


> I see.
> 
> To me the not offered to husband but offered to Joe Random is worse than changing relationship dynamics but the remedy is the same.
> 
> ...


This one comment sums up my entire problem with these discussions.

It's none of your business. 😌 

My past is mine. 

How many men. What I've done. What I've liked. What I've hated. 

I don't owe you explanations. About anything.

All of this politically correct nonsense about how women are so liberated. 🙄

Sure, you can do whatever you want, but you'd better be prepared to defend it and do it for me. Nope.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

minimalME said:


> It's none of your business.


In that case why ever say you did anything in the first place. If you husband asks, “Did you ever do X?” “It’s none of your business.” is kind of the end of the conversation.

If instead, the answer I get is, “Yes sure I did that plenty of times.” “Will you do it now, with me?” “Nope.” “Why not?” “That’s none of your business.” You don’t think that’s at least a little bit odd or messed up when you’re talking to the man who made a lifetime commitment to you? If you’re going to do that why mention it in the first place?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> I see.
> 
> To me the not offered to husband but offered to Joe Random is worse than changing relationship dynamics but the remedy is the same.
> 
> ...



Your feelings on the matter are personal and justified for you. On the other hand, I also understand why people refuse to discuss or worse, flat out lie about their pasts with their partners.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

ccpowerslave said:


> In that case why ever say you did anything in the first place.


I wouldn't. 😀

And that's been my advice to others on this site for years.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

minimalME said:


> I wouldn't. 😀
> 
> And that's been my advice to others on this site for years.


Haha well I guess I agree with both you and @Lila then. If you’re not going to explain any no’s it’s better to not say anything.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

minimalME said:


> I wouldn't. 😀
> 
> And that's been my advice to others on this site for years.


I find the whole situation weird anyway. It apparently does happen but I can't imagine it personally.

On the strange occasions it does though, it's nuclear.

I don't see any problems with your position.

Mrs. C and I didn't do much talking about sex when we got together anyway because we were too busy doing it.😋

She did give me some training about her body and what she likes and vice versa.

She also told me early that anal was off the table and I didn't care or ask but she had someone try and push it on her in her past and she wanted that understood quickly.

I honestly didn't give a rat's booty about what she did with who in the past. Once she was mine, that was it.

I really have to stretch the imagination to even come up with a scenario where this possibly could affect me.

I try and put myself in situations that are posted here or I probably wouldn't have much empathy at all because most of it has never applied to me.


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

If I had talked to a current significant other about these awesome foot and body massages I used to give my ex or how I used to go down on them every time we did anything sexual and I didn't do those things for them I would expect them to be disappointed.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Noman said:


> Uck, we need a Cliff Notes sticky on this subject.
> 
> Although, I'll bet my prediction above is spot on.


Some people might get the wrong idea about a "sticky" in this situation.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ccpowerslave said:


> I see.
> 
> To me the not offered to husband but offered to Joe Random is worse than changing relationship dynamics but the remedy is the same.
> 
> ...


You know, my biggest incredularity in this thread is why any woman would go into detail about what they did with a past man sexually to begin with. It's one thing to say you tried something and yay or nay, but quite another to go into some big conversation about exactly what and with whom.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> You know, my biggest incredularity in this thread is why any woman would go into detail about what they did with a past man sexually to begin with. It's one thing to say you tried something and yay or nay, but quite another to go into some big conversation about exactly what and with whom.


Yup.

In some of the threads this came up in, I believe it was found out during a situation with a combination of old friends getting together and too much alcohol leading to the proverbial cat getting out of the bag.

It is hard to believe a woman would talk at all about previous lovers with her current man (though that has happened rarely) much less wax poetic about previous experiences with her husband or even boyfriend unless he has a weird kink.

I really don't think this happens that often at all.

I believe some women are pushed and encouraged to divulge only to have a negative result when they do because the man has insecurities and/or retroactive jealousy.

I know it happens with women being the instigators but it appears to happen less often.

I've observed lots of insecurity in women but almost never retroactive jealousy.

I've also not seen as many insecure women push or encourage their men to discuss previous lovers but that could be anecdotal.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ccpowerslave said:


> In that case why ever say you did anything in the first place. If you husband asks, “Did you ever do X?” “It’s none of your business.” is kind of the end of the conversation.
> 
> If instead, the answer I get is, “Yes sure I did that plenty of times.” “Will you do it now, with me?” “Nope.” “Why not?” “That’s none of your business.” You don’t think that’s at least a little bit odd or messed up when you’re talking to the man who made a lifetime commitment to you? If you’re going to do that why mention it in the first place?


See, I wouldn't get too attached to a man who had such an issue that he had to pry into the details of my past private business, so I'd never end up with him for long. That to me is a red flag of his insecurity, jealousy and possession, and I don't want that in my life, much less a lifetime of it. I have instincts that protect me from that. It sets off alarms.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> Yup.
> 
> In some of the threads this came up in, I believe it was found out during a situation with a combination of old friends getting together and too much alcohol leading to the proverbial cat getting out of the bag.
> 
> ...


You were writing that just as I was writing something similar below. Yeah, and the so-called friend who feels free to divulge your private stuff to your date or spouse isn't a friend but is after your date or spouse!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

My take on topics related to this one reflects directly on men who need to take their own agency.

I didn't ever care about a partner's past because when I was with them, I expected to be sated.

I can't say I understand any other position.

I'm generous and I like giving in bed but I'm not simply there for them.

I desire and require my own pleasure from sex and, as long as she is hitting my mark, why the hell would I even be thinking about some guy who obviously didn't last with her?

It has to be some kind of illness? I just don't get it.

If a woman isn't coming close to sating me sexually, she is going to work at improving (and she better have a lot of other traits I desire) or we aren't going to make it.

Either way, who cares about her past?????


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Hiner112 said:


> If I had talked to a current significant other about these awesome foot and body massages I used to give my ex or how I used to go down on them every time we did anything sexual and I didn't do those things for them I would expect them to be disappointed.


Well, so you'd have to be a moron to bring it up to begin with.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

So in my case I asked my wife, “What do you think about trying anal?” I didn’t ask her if she did it before or did it with anyone else. She says, “I have to be in the mood for it.” Well ok, so she just said she has done it before and she didn’t say no. So ok I am going to figure out what “have to really be in the mood for it” means because I wanted to do it.

If she never did it with me then I’d be like ok well what the f? But she did, and it’s not anything either of us felt compelled to return to.

So I don’t see what’s wrong about that interaction.


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Well, so you'd have to be a moron to bring it up to begin with.


I'm not going to be dishonest in any relationship. Period.

If I'm concealing it then I know its wrong.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Hiner112 said:


> I'm not going to be dishonest in any relationship. Period.
> 
> If I'm concealing it then I know its wrong.


I get that but how would that even come up in conversation that you would be telling a new woman or new spouse or whatever that you used to give great massages to an ex? That seems like you're just asking for trouble.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I get that but how would that even come up in conversation that you would be telling a new woman or new spouse or whatever that you used to give great massages to an ex? That seems like you're just asking for trouble.


Yes. What is the motive behind telling a potentially new partner how great xyz was with someone else?


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

minimalME said:


> Yes. What is the motive behind telling a potentially new partner how great xyz was with someone else?


If he's (stupid enough to be) telling me how he gave his ex great massages all of the time, then I better be getting them, too. So yes, if you did it for her, and were dumb enough to tell me all about it, then I should be getting the same golden treatment. If not, why???


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

minimalME said:


> Yes. What is the motive behind telling a potentially new partner how great xyz was with someone else?


Honey you won’t believe how awesome my hot rock massages are, they’re the best. All my girlfriends loved them!

Wow! That sounds great, would you please give one to me sometime?

Sorry babe, no.

Why not? Are your hands hurt or something? Did you get a hot rock burn injury?

It’s none of your business. But… they were amazing. The sounds they made!!!

😡


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I would use anal sex and oral as examples here to illustrate why this is wrong. To begin with, she didn't stay with them so she may not have liked their sexual habits and not wish to repeat them with a future partner.
> 
> Assuming she did like doing anal with a past partner, maybe he was small enough for it not to be uncomfortable and also knew how to be careful and not contaminate and give her infections. It takes a lot of concentrated effort and presence of mind to keep from giving someone an e coli infection if you're going to be doing anal.
> 
> ...


And if there was a reasonable explanation like you gave above, I would probably take it. My guess though, is that she just liked the other guy more and was willing to do more for him. From my personal experience, that is what's usually the case. When I was in my early 20's I was fooling around with an older married woman and she told me all the time how she wouldn't do this or that for her husband but she was doing those things with me without me having to ask for them. Ladies get with these guys they aren't even really attracted to so they barely do anything with them. This forum alone is filled with guys talking about how they never get laid at home. When their wife inevitably gets with someone new, she is gonna do everything under the sun with the new guy, even if she again ends up with someone else she's not attracted to. Bet on it.

As to whether or not an entitled attitude is attractive or not, I really don't care. I'm the type that prefers to lay all my cards on the table and she can take it or leave it. Besides, I no longer have any skin in that game. I won't be dating anymore. 

Heck, this kind of thing makes dating even less appealing to me. I can't think of any guy that wants to get with a woman after she has gone through and left her fun, uninhibited phase just to settle down with him and have a bunch of new rules in the bedroom filled with things she was happy to do for other guys. Men want to be with a woman who does things for him she never did with other men, not the other way around.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

It’s a relief to be a singleton. 😬


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Enigma32 said:


> And if there was a reasonable explanation like you gave above, I would probably take it. My guess though, is that she just liked the other guy more and was willing to do more for him. From my personal experience, that is what's usually the case. When I was in my early 20's I was fooling around with an older married woman and she told me all the time how she wouldn't do this or that for her husband but she was doing those things with me without me having to ask for them. Ladies get with these guys they aren't even really attracted to so they barely do anything with them. This forum alone is filled with guys talking about how they never get laid at home. When their wife inevitably gets with someone new, she is gonna do everything under the sun with the new guy, even if she again ends up with someone else she's not attracted to. Bet on it.
> 
> As to whether or not an entitled attitude is attractive or not, I really don't care. I'm the type that prefers to lay all my cards on the table and she can take it or leave it. Besides, I no longer have any skin in that game. I won't be dating anymore.
> 
> Heck, this kind of thing makes dating even less appealing to me. I can't think of any guy that wants to get with a woman after she has gone through and left her fun, uninhibited phase just to settle down with him and have a bunch of new rules in the bedroom filled with things she was happy to do for other guys. Men want to be with a woman who does things for him she never did with other men, not the other way around.


So you'd rather she just told you you tasted and smelled bad?

Women don't owe you any explanation for why they don't want to do something with you.


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> So you'd rather she just told you you tasted and smelled bad?
> 
> Women don't owe you any explanation for why they don't want to do something with you.


Yes! I would rather she told me that. Then we could possibly solve that problem and start having some fun. That's a much better scenario than missing out on something for a long period of time because my partner is conflict avoidant or can't tell the truth. 

No one owes anyone anything. She doesn't have to give me an explanation on why she doesn't like something and I don't need to explain why I pass on her. 

It's just a silly game of hiding things from your partner because you feel you don't owe them anything. How is that even reasonable? If my GF wants me to go down on her but she smells like raw sewage down there, what should I do? Just tell her I don't like going down on women all of a sudden and peasants like her are not deserving of any explanations? Or should I tell her nicely about her problem so she can fix it and then we can actually enjoy ourselves more?


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Enigma32 said:


> Yes! I would rather she told me that. Then we could possibly solve that problem and start having some fun. That's a much better scenario than missing out on something for a long period of time because my partner is conflict avoidant or can't tell the truth.
> 
> No one owes anyone anything. She doesn't have to give me an explanation on why she doesn't like something and I don't need to explain why I pass on her.
> 
> It's just a silly game of hiding things from your partner because you feel you don't owe them anything. How is that even reasonable? If my GF wants me to go down on her but she smells like raw sewage down there, what should I do? Just tell her I don't like going down on women all of a sudden and peasants like her are not deserving of any explanations? Or should I tell her nicely about her problem so she can fix it and then we can actually enjoy ourselves more?


But no one is going to tell you that and nor should she have to. You don't get to decide what she tells you. There is no entitlement to that.

And yes, if you don't want to go down you just tell her you don't like it. But you find out about this stuff before you marry someone. Then if you're not compatible you don't get married. Just because someone marries you doesn't make them your sex slave. 

It's all very bullyish.


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> But no one is going to tell you that and nor should she have to. You don't get to decide what she tells you. There is no entitlement to that.


They should tell me, that's the point. I'm a big boy, I can handle it. What you have described is a horrible deal for the guy. He can spend his time with a woman and not get a BJ or something because she thinks he smells like a trash can. What guy in his right mind would want to be in that situation? I know I wouldn't. All because she thinks I am not worthy of her explanation. Just think about what you are saying here. You are supposed to be life partners with this person but they think they are above you to such a degree that you don't deserve explanations? Yeah, I'll pass. You keep talking like this buddy and you might as well start recruiting for the MGTOW guys.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

Enigma32 said:


> They should tell me, that's the point. I'm a big boy, I can handle it. What you have described is a horrible deal for the guy. He can spend his time with a woman and not get a BJ or something because she thinks he smells like a trash can. What guy in his right mind would want to be in that situation? I know I wouldn't. All because she thinks I am not worthy of her explanation. Just think about what you are saying here. You are supposed to be life partners with this person but they think they are above you to such a degree that you don't deserve explanations? Yeah, I'll pass. You keep talking like this buddy and you might as well start recruiting for the MGTOW guys.


My point is you find this out before you get married and if it's a deal breaker you don't marry them. You can't expect a woman to just do whatever you want sexually just because you marry her. And everyone knows that they'll try more when the relationship is newer and then over the years they're going to decide they don't like to do certain things or whatever. 

A woman just doesn't owe you that explanation. She could have very personal reasons for not wanting to do something that she doesn't feel like telling you. No should be enough but you need to explore all this stuff before you marry someone and not expect them to just go along or be willing to argue with you about it from then on so that you get your way. That's just abusive.


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> My point is you find this out before you get married and if it's a deal breaker you don't marry them. You can't expect a woman to just do whatever you want sexually just because you marry her. And everyone knows that they'll try more when the relationship is newer and then over the years they're going to decide they don't like to do certain things or whatever.
> 
> A woman just doesn't owe you that explanation. She could have very personal reasons for not wanting to do something that she doesn't feel like telling you. No should be enough but you need to explore all this stuff before you marry someone and not expect them to just go along or be willing to argue with you about it from then on so that you get your way. That's just abusive.


I don't really consider explanations for things to be a form of abuse.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> ...but I got there in the end.


@ccpowerslave pun intended?


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

I'm likely naive.

Until recently I'd had only one partner so the thought that you'd want to conceal what you had done was irrelevant.

Now with a new partner there's nothing that I did in the past that I wouldn't be willing to do with my new partner so there's no motivation to conceal what I did in the past. All of this "I did in the past but won't do for you" is all theoretical for me. Further, the list of things that I wouldn't be willing to try is very, very short. Currently, it is 0 but that doesn't mean that something couldn't show up on the "I'd rather not" list at some point.

I haven't pried deeply into whatever my new partner has done in the past but it's mostly irrelevant, too. Right now if I'm asking about past activities, it is mostly just to determine what the have enjoyed and it is phrased more like "so what would you like to do?" rather than "what have you done?". 

I'd like to do all the things regardless. Mostly, I want to make them _want_ to do all the things. As we encounter new activities there might be a "have you tried X, yet?" question but I don't think the answer matters _that much_ because at that point we're probably getting ready to do whatever it is anyway.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> My point is you find this out before you get married and if it's a deal breaker you don't marry them. You can't expect a woman to just do whatever you want sexually just because you marry her. And everyone knows that they'll try more when the relationship is newer and then over the years they're going to decide they don't like to do certain things or whatever.
> 
> A woman just doesn't owe you that explanation. She could have very personal reasons for not wanting to do something that she doesn't feel like telling you. No should be enough but you need to explore all this stuff before you marry someone and not expect them to just go along or be willing to argue with you about it from then on so that you get your way. That's just abusive.


So are you saying that it's ok to make NOT explaining her reasons a deal-breaker...? Because you are saying it's bullying to not accept it...but then if it's a deal-breaker, couldn't that also be considered coercion - I will leave if you don't give me what I want.

For ME, I don't like when things are hidden and I don't get to have a choice of what I will accept in my life and sex life. So someone that wants to hide reasons or feelings about certain things (especially sex) is NOT a good partner for ME. 
I need someone who is going to be as open and honest about themselves as I am going to be, especially with sex, the good and the bad. 
And I don't believe having that boundary is me being a bully. Although, like you said, people very often LIE so they don't lose the relationship...so stating your boundaries and being clear and direct about your expectations in a marriage often doesn't do anything to protect you from a lying, selfish partner.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

I also want to point out to any of the Christians posting on here that the Bible VERY CLEARLY states that our bodies do not belong to us when we are married - they belong to our spouse...Lol!!

Paul is referring specifically to having sex and not denying one's spouse.


----------



## TAMAT (Jun 20, 2015)

CCPowerSlave wrote, *Maybe she has great reasons why she doesn’t want to. For me the reason matters. A blanket no with no explanation isn’t sufficient. *

It's a matter of basic honesty and if your spouse is the most important person in your life then honesty should be a given.

Many times there is no explanation given or inconsistent or contradictory explanations given at different times.

This does not feel acceptable and leaves the spouse in an unsettled state of trying to find evidence or coming up with multiple theories.

Asking a spouse not to want what their spouse gave to someone else is like asking a poor person not to want what they see wealthy people have. 

It makes the current spouse less in their own mind to prior spouses or SOs.

Most don't want to be a convenient or utilitarian or settled for spouse.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

LisaDiane said:


> For ME, I don't like when things are hidden and I don't get to have a choice of what I will accept in my life and sex life. So someone that wants to hide reasons or feelings about certain things (especially sex) is NOT a good partner for ME.
> I need someone who is going to be as open and honest about themselves as I am going to be, especially with sex, the good and the bad.


The problem that I have with statements like these is that, as human beings, we are _never _100% honest/open/transparent.

Sometimes we explain ourselves, sometimes we don't. 

You will _never _have full knowledge/disclosure about anything.

And I don't think that over-analyzing ever single move a person makes is helpful. It's one reason why were told to overlook and forgive.

This falls in line with having unreasonable expectation of others. No one is going to give you a flawless relationship. Of any kind. Ever. People are going to disappoint you. They're going to do ****ty things. 

Throwing people away everytime they choose poorly (which is what every other meme on facebook encourages people to do) is dehumanizing. We are not machines. 

Part of acceptance is moving on even when you don't know all you want to know about something. 

We now live in this age of information where we think we can learn everything about everything. We can't. Not even close.

At some point, it's best to let go and be content with the reality that some things are a mystery.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> So are you saying that it's ok to make NOT explaining her reasons a deal-breaker...? Because you are saying it's bullying to not accept it...but then if it's a deal-breaker, couldn't that also be considered coercion - I will leave if you don't give me what I want.
> 
> For ME, I don't like when things are hidden and I don't get to have a choice of what I will accept in my life and sex life. So someone that wants to hide reasons or feelings about certain things (especially sex) is NOT a good partner for ME.
> I need someone who is going to be as open and honest about themselves as I am going to be, especially with sex, the good and the bad.
> And I don't believe having that boundary is me being a bully. Although, like you said, people very often LIE so they don't lose the relationship...so stating your boundaries and being clear and direct about your expectations in a marriage often doesn't do anything to protect you from a lying, selfish partner.


I think if someone tells you they don't want to do it, that ought to be sufficient. If you keep going beyond that it's emotional coercion. Most people will offer an explanation, but if they have some reason they don't want to, no should be enough.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> *But no one is going to tell you that and nor should she have to. You don't get to decide what she tells you. There is no entitlement to that.*
> 
> And yes, if you don't want to go down you just tell her you don't like it. But you find out about this stuff before you marry someone. Then if you're not compatible you don't get married. Just because someone marries you doesn't make them your sex slave.
> 
> It's all very bullyish.


I couldn't possibly imagine being in a marriage that wasn't open enough in communication. Isn't your spouse the one person you should be able to count on to tell you the cold hard truth? My wife isn't my parent, no is always an acceptable answer but because I said so isn't an acceptable reason as to why. If you haven't moved beyond that then you are not truly partners, just one kid asking mother may I and a tyrant saying **** off.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

To those people who need to have the reasons for why their partner won't participate in certain activities with them.....would a simple answer like "I'm not interested in doing that" suffice?


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

And when someone is bullying someone else for sex over and over again by never letting the subject drop, no one should have to keep reiterating why they don't want to do it.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Lila said:


> To those people who need to have the reasons for why their partner won't participate in certain activities with them.....would a simple answer like "I'm not interested in doing that" suffice?


Yes, but with a caveat.

When that becomes the answer for everything, it's insufficient. When "certain activities" bleeds into "most activities", what do you do? At some point, "I'm not interested in that" can only be seen as "I'm not really all that interested in sex", at least as we define sex in western culture. 

Someone with a very limited sexual repertoire who will never push their comfort level in bed is no less selfish than a partner who is always pressing for more.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

Lila said:


> To those people who need to have the reasons for why their partner won't participate in certain activities with them.....would a simple answer like "I'm not interested in doing that" suffice?


No.
But honestly I wouldn't ask why for the most part. Now if I did and my wife had previously done it and not liked it I wouldn't expect detail. Something along the lines of I tried it and it was a bad experience would be more than enough explanation. 
If it was something with me I would expect that she would tell me (hey you smell)(you are too big)(you just ate onions). If it is something I am doing wrong it's ridiculous not to communicate it.* If there is a problem and you don't tell your partner than the one holding back is the problem*.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> To those people who need to have the reasons for why their partner won't participate in certain activities with them.....would a simple answer like "I'm not interested in doing that" suffice?


Maybe. 

If you know they did it in the past and it doesn’t involve a third party I’d want a bit more of an explanation from my wife.

“…because I tried it once and it hurt.”
“…because I tried it and I threw up.”
“…because it’s too big!” (I wish)
“…because the last time I did it I didn’t like it, and that’s it.”

If it’s just I’m not interested; well you were interested before so what changed? I want to know what changed. Maybe the answer is I don’t know but I know I don’t want to do it ever again. Also fine.

If instead it’s out of nowhere and I say hey honey how about you out on a plastic horse head and tail and I ride you around the living room and she says, “I’m not interested in doing that.” then great.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> There is no entitlement to that.


Ok. What in your opinion what IS a spouse entitled too in a marriage?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Cletus said:


> When that becomes the answer for everything, it's insufficient. When "certain activities" bleeds into "most activities", what do you do? At some point, "I'm not interested in that" can only be seen as "*I'm not really all that interested in sex*", at least as we define sex in western culture.


This is true with most anything, not just sex. Saying they are not interested in anything you may be interested in is a good indication that you're not compatible....at all. And I know your story enough to know that what I'm saying is a day late and a dollar short.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> Maybe.
> 
> If you know they did it in the past and it doesn’t involve a third party I’d want a bit more of an explanation from my wife.
> 
> ...


So you'll only accept reasons that are acceptable to you?

Do you also try to to "fix" the problem to get your wife to do what you want? For example.


“…because I tried it once and it hurt.”

You:. Well I promise I won't hurt you. As soon as it starts hurting I'll stop.

“…because I tried it and I threw up.”

You:. There's this stuff you can use to prevent your gag reflex from activating.

“…because it’s too big!” (I wish)

You:. But what if we try stretching you some.

“…because the last time I did it I didn’t like it, and that’s it.”

You:. But you've never tried it with me so how do you know you won't like it


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

uphillbattle said:


> Ok. What in your opinion what IS a spouse entitled too in a marriage?


Really just what's in the vows. Which is mainly that you'll try to stick it out together. And then any financial protections offered because you have a marriage certificate. And if you're married you get to visit your spouse in the hospital.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

uphillbattle said:


> Ok. What in your opinion what IS a spouse entitled too in a marriage?


the right to file taxes together. But even that entitlement may be challengeable in certain circumstances


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Really just what's in the vows. Which is mainly that you'll try to stick it out together. And then any financial protections offered because you have a marriage certificate. And if you're married you get to visit your spouse in the hospital.


Most marriage vows include the phrase "to have and to hold". What does that phrase mean in your opinion?


----------



## 346745 (Oct 7, 2020)

TJW said:


> ...a drunkard's dream......if I ever did see one.....


up on Cripple Creek


----------



## leftfield (Mar 29, 2016)

Lila said:


> So you'll only accept reasons that are acceptable to you?
> 
> Do you also try to to "fix" the problem to get your wife to do what you want? For example.
> 
> ...


Looking back at my relationship, I can tell you that my trying to "fix" things as was me actually trying to be heard. I wanted the opportunity to express my wants to a partner who cared about me.

I am still working on speaking my wants clearly and in more healthy ways. My partner needs to keep working on showing that she cares.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

uphillbattle said:


> Most marriage vows include the phrase "to have and to hold". What does that phrase mean in your opinion?


I don't believe it means sex. And I certainly don't believe it means oral or anal sex. I believe it means stay together. They took the obey part out decades ago, and it was never in the original biblical vow anyway.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

leftfield said:


> Looking back at my relationship, I can tell you that my trying to "fix" things as was me actually trying to be heard. I wanted the opportunity to express my wants to a partner who cared about me.
> 
> I am still working on speaking my wants clearly and in more healthy ways. My partner needs to keep working on showing that she cares.


I understand what you mean about wanting to be heard but there is "wanting to be heard" and "convincing your partner to do what you want". I have been on both sides of this argument. I remember trying to convince my ex spouse to do things I wanted to do when he had absolutely zero interest in doing so. I would complain that I wasn't being heard and he would say "Lila, I've heard what you said and respect your desires but I do not want to participate". It took us divorcing to really understand what he was telling me. He wanted me to _respect_ his decisions. I get that now.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Lila said:


> This is true with most anything, not just sex. Saying they are not interested in anything you may be interested in is a good indication that you're not compatible....at all. And I know your story enough to know that what I'm saying is a day late and a dollar short.


It is true with most anything, but it's really only a matter of degree regarding the question you are asking here. 

1. Everyone agrees that no one is entitled to every sexual indulgence.
2. (Most) Everyone agrees that a partner is entitled to sex.

What is the line between 1 and 2? What is the minimum acceptable definition of sex to which a partner should be entitled to in a marriage?


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

uphillbattle said:


> Most marriage vows include the phrase "to have and to hold". What does that phrase mean in your opinion?


religious vows may include that. it certainly is not legally enforceable. Just as your clergyman can not talk the duty nurse into admitting some person as a visitor. The government has to authorize the clergy to perform the marriage. without the license it does not matter what the priest says. In fact, even with the stats authorization and license, it doesn't matter what the priest says.

But to answer your question. The word Have can not connote ownership because neither the state nor the priesthood recognize slavery. The best definition you could hope for is a partnership. Hold can not be defined as sexual intercourse because the sex organs are not prehensile. If you are indicating that "to have, and to hold" is some accepted code for sex, then you will need to prove that it is universally accepted as such. there is ample evidence here that it is not so accepted.

Personally, I foolishly thought 30ish years ago, that the marriage contract was to exchange the right to date anyone, for the security of regular physical affection. Time has shown that I was wrong. the right was not surrendered, the security was not delivered. 

Returning to the question of the topic:


Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?


I should have had some of those expectations. I should have expected my spouse to leave me. She had left every other partner in her life. I should have expected violence. I should have expected coldness. I should have expected fear of intimacy. 
My only consolation is that I outlasted the majority of her partners.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Cletus said:


> It is true with most anything, but it's really only a matter of degree regarding the question you are asking here.
> 
> 1. Everyone agrees that no one is entitled to every sexual indulgence.
> 2. (Most) Everyone agrees that a partner is entitled to sex.
> ...


Historically an heir and a spare is about it.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Cletus said:


> It is true with most anything, but it's really only a matter of degree regarding the question you are asking here.
> 
> 1. Everyone agrees that no one is entitled to every sexual indulgence.
> 2. (Most) Everyone agrees that a partner is entitled to sex.
> ...


The answer will be different for each of us but for me, the answer comes down to the person I'm with. I am a sexual person (and have always been this way)..... _With the right partner._ To me, the right partner is the one that shares sexual compatibility with me. He's the one that shares similar sexual styles and enjoys similar kinks. At the very least, he is on the same page with experimenting and respecting each other's boundaries. 

I am not everyone's cup of tea but with few exceptions, my sexual experiences have left me wanting more, and it wasn't because of my partners' particular skill levels either. We were just......compatible. 

So to respond to your question, I think you're only entitled to the type of sex your partner is offering. That's it. Does that mean you can't ask for more? No, but you're certainly not entitled to it with _this_ partner.


----------



## TAMAT (Jun 20, 2015)

For some people it means the difference between divorce and staying.

Lying about the reason / reasons is similar to lying about an affair, in that it denies the spouse their choice in the matter.

Perhaps most women know this and chose their words sparingly, before the stronewall is built.

I suspect most women who would not tell their Hs will gladly spill to their therapists with no omissions or minimizations.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Lila said:


> So to respond to your question, I think you're only entitled to the type of sex your partner is offering. That's it. Does that mean you can't ask for more? No, but you're certainly not entitled to it with _this_ partner.


This is the only correct answer, I think.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I don't believe it means sex. And I certainly don't believe it means oral or anal sex. I believe it means stay together. They took the obey part out decades ago, and it was never in the original biblical vow anyway.


I take it as being a single unit in everything. One has a need both have a need. One has a problem both have a problem.

I don't think it means hey do as I say I'm your boss. It's not the 1950s. It's working as one to meet needs as best as possible, if not then what is the point? Taxes?
I think the only things marriage entitles the spouse to are their love, trust, effort, and understanding. What that entails needs to be worked out within the unit.

P.S. I think most people believe the phrase means sex when they make the vow but their mind changes so they ignore it latter.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

uphillbattle said:


> I take it as being a single unit in everything. One has a need both have a need. One has a problem both have a problem.
> 
> I don't think it means hey do as I say I'm your boss. It's not the 1950s. It's working as one to meet needs as best as possible, if not then what is the point? Taxes?
> I think the only things marriage entitles the spouse to are their love, trust, effort, and understanding. What that entails needs to be worked out within the unit.
> ...


Well it is biblical in origin, so one thing I know for sure is it doesn't mean oral and anal because sodomy is prohibited biblically. Bear in mind that I am not subscribed to any religion but I was raised Christian so I at least know that much. So it certainly does not mean you can do whatever you want with your spouse. That would have been the obey clause that was never in there that got put in their layer and now no one uses it in this part of the world.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

TAMAT said:


> Lying about the reason / reasons is similar to lying about an affair, in that it denies the spouse their choice in the matter.


Like men who come up with all sorts of lies during dating? Offering reasons xyz, when actually, they just want to get laid with the minimum amount of effort, responsibility, commitment, or obligation?

Spinning tall tales because they know if they were completely truthful, few would go out/continue to stay with them?

You’d be super hard pressed to find men who give a care in the world about full disclosure before having sex with a woman for the first time.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> it was never in the original biblical vow anyway.


There is no such "biblical" wedding vow. 
There are plenty of "traditional" wedding vows.
There are many biblical verses about marriage, and even more about love.
Almost no Christian religions (sects) require marriage. Catholicism especially has no requirement. 
There are rules for how you behave in a marriage. Some vows list those, some do not.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Well it is biblical in origin, so one thing I know for sure is it doesn't mean oral and anal because sodomy is prohibited biblically. Bear in mind that I am not subscribed to any religion but I was raised Christian so I at least know that much. So it certainly does not mean you can do whatever you want with your spouse. That would have been the Old Bay clause that was never in there that got put in their layer and now no one uses it in this part of the world.


It absolutely is biblical in origin. I do agree most don't see it as oral or anal. But it is a vow most make none the less.

I do apologize for the thread jack. I just like insight from someone who I may not fully agree with.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

minimalME said:


> Like men who come up with all sorts of lies during dating? Offering reasons xyz, when actually, they just want to get laid with the minimum amount of effort, responsibility, commitment, or obligation?
> 
> Spinning tall tales because they know if they were completely truthful, few would go out/continue to stay with them?
> 
> You’d be super hard pressed to find men who give a care in the world about full disclosure before having sex with a woman for the first time.


perpetuating the idea that lying is necessary for the formation or maintenance of relationships (even by saying that "Hey they did it first") is in no way helpful in the promotion of marriage as a preferred lifestyle. In fact quite the opposite.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

minimalME said:


> Like men who come up with all sorts of lies during dating? Offering reasons xyz, when actually, they just want to get laid with the minimum amount of effort, responsibility, commitment, or obligation?
> 
> Spinning tall tales because they know if they were completely truthful, few would go out/continue to stay with them?
> 
> You’d be super hard pressed to find men who give a care in the world about full disclosure before having sex with a woman for the first time.


I would hope one would choose the latter for a spouse. Yes men like the former are wrong. That doesn't change the point that tamat was making. It just makes excuses and attempts to deflect.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> You:. But you've never tried it with me so how do you know you won't like it


Speaking hypothetically based on her shutting stuff off we used to do other than pure frequency no I haven’t tried to fix the issue.

So no, I just want to know the reason.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Mr. Nail said:


> perpetuating the idea that lying is necessary for the formation or maintenance of relationships (even by saying that "Hey they did it first") is in no way helpful in the promotion of marriage as a preferred lifestyle. In fact quite the opposite.





uphillbattle said:


> I would hope one would choose the latter for a spouse. Yes men like the former are wrong. That doesn't change the point that tamat was making. It just makes excuses and attempts to deflect.


😂

My point is that on this site, there's a standard for 'honesty' that simply doesn't exist. 

Feel free to continue in denial, but none of you are as truthful as you require others to be.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

minimalME said:


> 😂
> 
> My point is that on this site, there's a standard for 'honesty' that simply doesn't exist.
> 
> Feel free to continue in denial, but none of you are as truthful as you require others to be.


In what way am I not truthful?


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

don't expect honesty because no one does it? 
the statistics back up the idea that no one does it.
I've reached a different conclusion. 
Don't make a promise to someone who doesn't know what one is.


----------



## DudeInProgress (Jun 10, 2019)

Lila said:


> I'll give a non-sexual example that occurred with my youngest sister. She loves traveling and has visited many countries. If she won the lottery tomorrow I'm sure I wouldn't see her for years as she'd be at one exotic location or another. She was engaged to a guy of means who in his earlier days had been quite the jet-setter and by all accounts he enjoyed every second of it. When she dated him, he would not entertain traveling with her. He was over his jet-setting ways. Should she have expected him to travel with her because it was something she loved doing? My answer was No. That's not who he is now. That was the guy from 5 years ago.


And it would be perfectly reasonable for her to tell him that what he was willing to offer her wasn’t compatible with her expectations / needs, and that things wouldn’t work out.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

DudeInProgress said:


> And it would be perfectly reasonable for her to tell him that what he was willing to offer her wasn’t compatible with her expectations / needs, and that things wouldn’t work out.


Yep and that's exactly what happened.... eventually. She had to break up twice for it to stick permanently.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

Lila said:


> I would hope not. Live and learn.
> 
> I have said this before but I truly believe that if something is important to you (general you) then don't settle until you find it. And if you do settle, do so with the understanding that what that person is offering or not offering is the only thing you're entitled to.


What?

That leaves no wiggle room!

As we age we have more things that wiggle.

The injustice served up here.

Intimacy preferences must never be _set in stone_.
We can change.

Leave that for your end of life, the remaining in stone, Mausoleum period.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

SunCMars said:


> What?
> 
> That leaves no wiggle room!
> 
> ...


I get it @SunCMars. People change but I prefer to hedge my bets and start off with someone with whom I share lots of compatibility, especially when it comes to sex. That way at least I can say we enjoyed a few good years before the troubles and differences drew us apart.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Lila said:


> To those people who need to have the reasons for why their partner won't participate in certain activities with them.....would a simple answer like "I'm not interested in doing that" suffice?


It would work for me as long as it wasn't "I'm not interested in doing that with you." when I was somehow aware she had done it with others and especially if she had enjoyed it with others.

I'm also good with "I don't want to do that anymore."

I still can't honestly see this situation even happening to me however.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

When with someone for years, you have to face that there is also always the possibility that something a spouse once enjoyed with you, as time passed, they got tired of it and don't want to do it anymore. With anyone.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> It would work for me as long as it wasn't "I'm not interested in doing that with you." when I was somehow aware she had done it with others and especially if she had enjoyed it with others.
> 
> I'm also good with "I don't want to do that anymore."
> 
> I still can't honestly see this situation even happening to me however.


Ah, you wait!

One day you will see those _sexual hormones_ heading south, never to return.
If not yours, hers....

Not _mine_ Amigo, I followed them when they snuck out the window, heading South toward that wide open border of ours.
I still have them, though they lost a little bit of weight on that wild journey through the sagebrush!


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> I still can't honestly see this situation even happening to me however.


It really never happened to me either as she never said no to anything I asked her to try whether she had done it before or not.

But if it did in particular the case the OP is talking about I would want a reason other than “none of your business” or barring that I’d prefer to live in ignorance. I can’t even think of a fantasy I wanted to do with her I haven’t already attempted with her. Some of the things I attempted she was like no way, which is fine and no reason needed.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

ccpowerslave said:


> It really never happened to me either as she never said no to anything I asked her to try whether she had done it before or not.
> 
> But if it did in particular the case the OP is talking about I would want a reason other than “none of your business” or barring that I’d prefer to live in ignorance. I can’t even think of a fantasy I wanted to do with her I haven’t already attempted with her. Some of the things I attempted she was like no way, which is fine and no reason needed.


I think the "none of your business" response is pretty absurd and not very conducive to a healthy marriage.

So I agree with what you have posted so far. It seems reasonable.

@Lila had a far more acceptable response that wasn't abrasive.

I think a lot of the blow back from the denied partner (usually the man?) would be mitigated by a more compassionate and considerate response than "none of your business."


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> When with someone for years, you have to face that there is also always the possibility that something a spouse once enjoyed with you, as time passed, they got tired of it and don't want to do it anymore. With anyone.


This happened with my wife. Something we used to do she really liked or was NRE or something anyway now it’s a no go, however I know why and the reason isn’t, “It’s none of my business.” So everything is cool and I stopped attempting it.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

ccpowerslave said:


> This happened with my wife. Something we used to do she really liked or was NRE or something anyway now it’s a no go, however I know why and the reason isn’t, “It’s none of my business.” So everything is cool and I stopped attempting it.


Yup. There are a couple of things Mrs. Conan and I have a hard time doing anymore without getting injured.😋


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> I think the "none of your business" response is pretty absurd and not very conducive to a healthy marriage.


I agree, not just about sexual acts but about anything. With that said I do think @minimalME suggesting it’s better for the current to not know about the former, it’s probably not a bad policy.

I haven’t been here long and have already seen several threads where dudes are wrecking themselves over retroactive jealousy. Why do they intentionally seek that out? No clue. I found out my wife had done stuff before only because I asked about us trying it, not because I wanted to know if she had done it before.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

I have trouble even getting out of bed without getting injured!!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I have trouble even getting out of bed without getting injured!!


😆😂😉


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I have trouble even getting out of bed without getting injured!!


I feel like I’m on the path. I stupidly decided to run up the trail I normally mountain bike because I had a few too many calories last weekend. It is hot AF. I think I might have been getting heat stroke. There is a drinking fountain for dogs at the top and I was like ok well it’s CCP puppy time because I don’t need a trip to the hospital.

TL;DR getting older sucks.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ccpowerslave said:


> I feel like I’m on the path. I stupidly decided to run up the trail I normally mountain bike because I had a few too many calories last weekend. It is hot AF. I think I might have been getting heat stroke. There is a drinking fountain for dogs at the top and I was like ok well it’s CCP puppy time because I don’t need a trip to the hospital.
> 
> TL;DR getting older sucks.


Yeah, heat absolutely kills me now that I'm elderly. When young I used to ride horses out in it all day. Now I'd stroke out if I was in an 85-degree place longer than 15 minutes, I'm sure.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Can I just say?

This is always a really odd conversation.

I say a lot of the same crap ... often. I'm about to do that right now.

"Context is everything."

The discussion almost always, as here, gets mired in the subjective, the hypothetical, and the hyperbolic.

The entire tenet of the initial post from the OP or any predecessors that have posted the same in the past has to be viewed based upon the originating event that precipitated the post. And it is almost ALWAYS on the heels of a discussion whereby a dude feels that rightly or wrongly, he is being 'deprived' of something from the sexual menu that his partner had previously sampled. Maybe she dug it, maybe she didn't. But for whatever reason, she is no longer interested. 

The dude, then posts here, looking for validation. And given that many men posting here, have sexual gate-keeper wives or partners ... shockingly, there is general discontent, and malaise that follows.

I have been asked, by numerous female partners, what my 'number' is. And I immediately follow up with more crap that I say all of the time. My standard response is; 

"Don't ask scary questions unless you are prepared for scary answers."

I personally think that sexual score-keeping, is a bad idea. With a few caveats. 

I've stated in the past, when I have found myself facing down the 'number' question, it's an opener for discussing sex and sexual preferences and proclivities. A standard follow on question is, "So, what do you like? What do you not like?"
Once the floor has been opened for that discussion, I will always ask, "Do you enjoy oral sex? Both giving and receiving?" And I've gotten a few, "Oh no, I don't do that." I never question or probe, or criticize. In my experience, the nature of the answer tells me what I need to know. This woman for whatever reason, bad experience, TMJ, who knows ... does not do fellatio. And that being the case, in short order afterward, I end the relationship. Why? Cuz' for me, no BJ's is a dealbreaker. End of story.

Decide and as the thread title indicates, own, what is important to you. What you want, what you do not want. And there is no need to apologize for any of it. Regardless of your gender.

I think what is consistently bad form on the part of men, is what I call 'hoping for a cookie'. You've been married for 15 years with a couple of a kids, your life is settled in, the dynamic, socially and sexually is established, and odds are, anal and 3-somes are probably not a regular part of that repertoire, but suddenly you decide you want them to be, because your near 40 year old wife indicated that she got really drunk one time when she was 19 ... and had an experience, that you now decide is the hill you are willing to die on, that she did it for him/her 20 years ago, but won't do it for you now?

Good luck with that, and Godspeed.

I see it as a fools errand.

The other toxic element to the equation above is the story of the 'reformed virgin' the former party girl who has done and seen it all, but then meets a nice guy that she want's to settle down with and lies about her sexual history ... yeah, that's usually a really bad outcome too. Retroactive jealousy for the win in that case.


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

TAMAT said:


> CCPowerSlave wrote, *Maybe she has great reasons why she doesn’t want to. For me the reason matters. A blanket no with no explanation isn’t sufficient. *
> 
> It's a matter of basic honesty and if your spouse is the most important person in your life then honesty should be a given.
> 
> ...


@TAMAT You have provided a considered, eloquent argument. For the men's side, anyway.

5 points to Gryffindor.

Sadly I had to specify "For the men's side" because this appears to be a highly-polarized issue with most of the men on one side & most of the women on the other side.

Of course we have a very small group of participants with very strong opinions so the results may be skewed.

Perhaps we can look to the animal kingdom for the answer: What do male (and some female) dogs do, when they encounter another's pee spot? They piss on it, thus acquiring...ownership.

That's probably one reason firefighters wear gloves!


----------



## 346745 (Oct 7, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> When with someone for years, you have to face that there is also always the possibility that something a spouse once enjoyed with you, as time passed, they got tired of it and don't want to do it anymore. With anyone.


That's true, but I'll never ever get tired of pizza, steak or beer, LOL


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Noman said:


> Perhaps we can look to the animal kingdom for the answer: What do male (and some female) dogs do, when they encounter another's pee spot? They piss on it, thus acquiring...ownership.


Just as I thought this was dying down. 🍿


----------



## Noman (Oct 17, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> Just as I thought this was dying down. 🍿


Nah, I think it's done, although if you PM me your street address, I'd like to come over and piss on your shrubs.

On a side note, when I'm out walking the beagle and _I _take a leak, I _never _let him piss on the same spot.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Noman said:


> @TAMAT You have provided a considered, eloquent argument. For the men's side, anyway.
> 
> 5 points to Gryffindor.
> 
> ...


I do think you'll find very skewed results here on TAM for several reasons. 

1. The demographic is mostly "older" and conservative minded, and

2. It seems to me like most of the men, with a handful of exceptions, were either virgins at marriage or had very limited sexual experiences prior to marriage.

I think if you posted this question on r/relationship or r/sexover30 or some similar forum where the demographics skew younger and/or more liberal (about sex and relationship dynamics), you would find more men agreeing with the women on this thread - No, none of us are entitled to our partner's sexual history or owed sexual activities performed with prior partners. But if it's important enough to you then ask, and do so early so that you don't get stuck in a relationship with someone who doesn't share your expectations.


----------



## D0nnivain (Mar 13, 2021)

Noman said:


> Is it odd to expect a spouse to be willing to perform the same acts with you that they performed with previous partners?


You shouldn't know what acts your partner performed in the past with other people. 

The only details that should ever be revealed are person is or is not a virgin; person has or has not done things that could effect your health (no condoms, sex with person who had STD). Beyond the health questions everything else is oversharing.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> I think if you posted this question on r/relationship or r/sexover30 or some similar forum where the demographics skew younger and/or more liberal (about sex and relationship dynamics), you would find more men agreeing with the women on this thread…


No doubt!

Even the narrow topic the OP originally brought up if I wrote what I did here on Reddit there would be few takers and any of those would be lambasted as well. File it under “Mess with one bee and get the hive.”

Then again, that’s why I am here. This site isn’t overrun with woke crap and socialism oozing out of every pore.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> No doubt!
> 
> Even the narrow topic the OP originally brought up if I wrote what I did here on Reddit there would be few takers and any of those would be lambasted as well. File it under mess with one bee and get the hive.”
> 
> Then again, that’s why I am here. This site isn’t overrun with woke crap and socialism oozing out of every pore.


Im sure that those "woke" folks over at reddit have their opinions of the people who participate here. It's tribal behavior after all going back eons. Feelings of belonging and all of that jazz. Regardless, I do enjoy reading the other side of the argument only because the truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

With regards to your OP, there are more men who think like most of the women who have posted here but it's most likely less than Reddit would have you believe.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> With regards to your OP, there are more men who think like most of the women who have posted here but it's most likely less than Reddit would have you believe.


I dunno I think most of them are posturing for the group. When presented with the situation IRL:

Husband wants to try activity with wife
Wife says, “I’m not doing that again.”

The number of men who would just say, “Oh, ok honey.” and drop it completely with no further discussion I would expect would be very low. I’m trying to think of any guy I know who is married who would do that and I’m struggling.


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

minimalME said:


> Like men who come up with all sorts of lies during dating? Offering reasons xyz, when actually, they just want to get laid with the minimum amount of effort, responsibility, commitment, or obligation?
> 
> Spinning tall tales because they know if they were completely truthful, few would go out/continue to stay with them?
> 
> You’d be super hard pressed to find men who give a care in the world about full disclosure before having sex with a woman for the first time.


Depends on what you mean by "full disclosure". I've never misled anyone I've been with. The person that I started dating in my 40s didn't know my complete history before we had sex for the first time but that's a lot of time to cover. We probably will get around to everything eventually. I don't have the mental space to keep more than one version of my story (and barely that).

I'm sorry you've had that experience with men.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Hiner112 said:


> Depends on what you mean by "full disclosure". I've never misled anyone I've been with. The person that I started dating in my 40s didn't know my complete history before we had sex for the first time but that's a lot of time to cover. We probably will get around to everything eventually. I don't have the mental space to keep more than one version of my story (and barely that).
> 
> I'm sorry you've had that experience with men.


You're so sweet, and from your posts, you're the last person I'd think of when it comes to this type of behavior. 🙂


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

minimalME said:


> 😂
> 
> My point is that on this site, there's a standard for 'honesty' that simply doesn't exist.
> 
> Feel free to continue in denial, but none of you are as truthful as you require others to be.


I'm still wondering in what manner I am not truthful or is this just something you do when you have no reasonable reply to what I said?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

TJ....

Reddit has some serious woman haters and bitter men posting along with other edgy groups.

End TJ.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

ConanHub said:


> TJ....
> 
> Reddit has some serious woman haters and bitter men posting along with other edgy groups.
> 
> End TJ.


Fortunately it's not as bad as it seems. The loudest people are usually the most bitter.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

DownByTheRiver said:


> When with someone for years, you have to face that there is also always the possibility that something a spouse once enjoyed with you, as time passed, they got tired of it and don't want to do it anymore. With anyone.


Yep that can certainly happen and it isn't always about not liking ones partner. That said by the same token people can also change or expand what they want to do as well. Neither type of occurrence is always relationship threatening or needs to be, yet in some instance both can be. Of which if all involved are fine with such changes they can press on, or if they're not dissolution of the relationship also works.



D0nnivain said:


> You shouldn't know what acts your partner performed in the past with other people.
> 
> The only details that should ever be revealed are person is or is not a virgin; person has or has not done things that could effect your health (no condoms, sex with person who had STD). Beyond the health questions everything else is oversharing.


That is too prescriptive for me, and falls into the same type of approach that those who feel one must tell feel about it.

As far as I am concerned and this conforms with reality better, one can tell or not tell as they choose, since that is what people actually do.

The prescriptive idea that one *must* not tell, or *must* tell denies agency for all involved. In some instances it is good advice to encourage someone to consider not telling, however in other instances it is good advice to encourage someone to tell. Whether it is right or wrong, is highly subjective dependent upon the who that you're telling, what you're telling and when you're telling.

I don't think that anyone has any right or entitlement to information about someones sexual past, unless they were a part of it at the time (and all they own is what was shared). Except for health issues that may harm physically harm the person in order to afford them appropriate disclosure for consent. Yet that doesn't negate disclosure of more if that is what the person asked wants to share.

Not all sexual relationships are the same, not all sexual partners are the same, each of us makes judgement calls as to what we will disclose or not disclose. So some people will get more and some others won't, such is life.

I have been with women who I haven't shared much if any sexual history, and in other instances I have shared plenty. Just as I have been with some women who have disclosed nothing, little or shared a great deal. None of us were wrong for sharing or not sharing, since they were our decisions to make as we felt best applicable to who we were with at the time.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

ccpowerslave said:


> I dunno I think most of them are posturing for the group. When presented with the situation IRL:
> 
> Husband wants to try activity with wife
> Wife says, “I’m not doing that again.”
> ...



Is your example a situation where it's a new activity for the couple or something that was part of the repertoire and then suddenly stops? 

In the former, I would caution the woman or man to keep their response to "I'm not doing that" (get rid of again) or state "I'm not interested in doing that". Keep it to the present or future. And going back to @Noman 's comment regarding tribe behavior, people who think alike tend to congregate. You probably don't know anyone who would accept a simple reason like "I'm not interested in that" because your social circle is probably made up of people who think like you. Perception is reality. 

In the latter, i think most people would question why something that was previously acceptable within the confines of their relationship is no longer acceptable. That would have me scratching my head as well.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ccpowerslave said:


> I dunno I think most of them are posturing for the group. When presented with the situation IRL:
> 
> Husband wants to try activity with wife
> Wife says, “I’m not doing that again.”
> ...


Just reminded me of something from a documentary on the Bunny Ranch, the famous whitehouse in Nevada.

One of the prostitutes said that if she ever got married, for sure she was never going to do another BJ.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Just reminded me of something from a documentary on the Bunny Ranch, the famous whitehouse in Nevada.
> 
> One of the prostitutes said that if she ever got married, for sure she was never going to do another BJ.


Oh that speaks to the damage. Most women in some form of prostitution grow to hate sex and men. It doesn't take long. 

Hopefully, that prostitute wouldn't try and hide that very important information from a prospective husband.


----------



## leftfield (Mar 29, 2016)

I find this discussion very interesting. Luckily for me it has not been an issue and I hope it never is.

One of the things I find most interesting is this attitude that someone should not ask or reveal what is in their past. I for one would want to know if a potential partner used to be big into orgies, gang-bangs and/or used drugs as part of her sexual experience (For example). I would also like to know how she got from there to wanting to be in a monogamous sexual relationship. Of course any woman would be free to give me a non-answer to anything I would ask.

For myself, I know that having an open and honest relationship is more important than the what/where/who of yesteryear.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> Oh that speaks to the damage. Most women in some form of prostitution grow to hate sex and men. It doesn't take long.
> 
> Hopefully, that prostitute wouldn't try and hide that very important information from a prospective husband.


They may very well end up hating men although if so I don't know why they'd be getting married. I really think it's more about not liking BJ's and not having to do them anymore.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> They may very well end up hating men although if so I don't know why they'd be getting married. I really think it's more about not liking BJ's and not having to do them anymore.


It's more about selling themselves as objects which damages them of course.

Having to service women who disgust me wouldn't take long to damage me and I can spend all day giving oral attention.

It isn't that she just doesn't want to. She is damaged.


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

Somewhat relevant:

My current GF has said that she would understand if I was less comfortable discussing my sexual past than her because in my case there's no anonymity. If I say that I did something, she knows who I did it with and there's a good chance that she'll meet my ex occasionally, especially if we get serious because the ex and I are still co-parenting minor children for the next few years.

In her case she's had several partners over the years, most of whom were during college hundreds of miles from where she lives or in the military which was often in another country. I'm probably not going to meet someone she'd been with ever. Even if I do meet someone she'd been with, if she doesn't put a name to an act, I wouldn't know what she'd done with any person I did meet.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> It's more about selling themselves as objects which damages them of course.
> 
> Having to service women who disgust me wouldn't take long to damage me and I can spend all day giving oral attention.
> 
> It isn't that she just doesn't want to. She is damaged.


It's just that I've known a lot of women who were never prostitutes who stopped doing that because they never really liked it anyway. Some women think it's worth the trade and others don't. And a lot of women don't mind it if it's their idea but get tired of guys who think that should be a regular event.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> It's just that I've known a lot of women who were never prostitutes who stopped doing that because they never really liked it anyway. Some women think it's worth the trade and others don't. And a lot of women don't mind it if it's their idea but get tired of guys who think that should be a regular event.


Prostitution damages women. I can't speak to individuals who decided to stop but they better not expect any if they are not giving any.😉


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> Prostitution damages women. I can't speak to individuals who decided to stop but they better not expect any if they are not giving any.😉


I get that, but only some of them care that much. I mean there's a couple on here who care about getting it that much, but there are a lot who would gladly sacrifice that to not have to do a BJ on any regular basis. And it's not like all men are offering it as a trade anyway. And even if they are, the woman has to decide if she likes it well enough to trade for it. There are just a lot of variables. 

And yes I totally agree that being a prostitute is damaging. So many of them were groomed for it or forced into it and then got stuck in the lifestyle. I've seen the details of whole investigations into sex trafficking operations.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

Lila said:


> You probably don't know anyone who would accept a simple reason like "I'm not interested in that" because your social circle is probably made up of people who think like you.


Almost certainly. I’d say most of my friends I hang out with are very similar.


----------



## ccpowerslave (Nov 21, 2020)

DownByTheRiver said:


> …to not have to do a BJ on any regular basis.


It does have “job” in the title. I don’t think of it as a job for her, more of a calling! (joking)

The last few months I have just been telling her exactly what I want her to try to do and she generally attempts it, God bless her!


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ccpowerslave said:


> It does have “job” in the title. I don’t think of it as a job for her, more of a calling! (joking)
> 
> The last few months I have just been telling her exactly what I want her to try to do and she generally attempts it, God bless her!


I can honestly say I've never had to haggle over sex. Usually sex wasn't the deal breaker or the thing that led to boredom. But this is a different generation that was brought up on expectations they got from porn, and I'm glad I'm not dating in it. My generation was casual sex for pretty much the first time in history, and most of us were just too glad to have that freedom to have any entitlement about it or complain about the particulars. 

It was a lot of, I will if you go first. I think men put the skids on back then more than women did. There were a lot of things men wouldn't do that they would expect women to do. Always wanting to get you in a two girl one guy three way but never wanting to do it your way with two guys. Like never. So that was usually the end of that conversation.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I think if someone tells you they don't want to do it, that ought to be sufficient. If you keep going beyond that it's emotional coercion. Most people will offer an explanation, but if they have some reason they don't want to, no should be enough.


I agree with you, and I would certainly give my partner the freedom to refuse anything (not just sexual things)...however, if it is something I don't want to give up in my life (or sex life), then it's not emotional coercion to make it a deal-breaker.

I will respect any of my partner's boundaries...but I will also honor my own.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

minimalME said:


> The problem that I have with statements like these is that, as human beings, we are _never _100% honest/open/transparent.
> 
> Sometimes we explain ourselves, sometimes we don't.
> 
> ...


I think this is a great principle to live by in many situations...however in others, this is how you can be taken advantage of and used.

I hope to find a relationship where I CAN feel like this towards my partner, and still know I am valued and loved!


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> Well it is biblical in origin, so one thing I know for sure is it doesn't mean oral and anal because sodomy is prohibited biblically. Bear in mind that I am not subscribed to any religion but I was raised Christian so I at least know that much. So it certainly does not mean you can do whatever you want with your spouse. That would have been the obey clause that was never in there that got put in their layer and now no one uses it in this part of the world.


Oral is not forbidden in the Bible as far as I've ever heard. And I'm pretty sure "sodomy" was anal sex between men.


----------



## 346745 (Oct 7, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> Oral is not forbidden in the Bible as far as I've ever heard. And I'm pretty sure "sodomy" was anal sex between men.


No Bible ban on oral.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> I agree with you, and I would certainly give my partner the freedom to refuse anything (not just sexual things)...however, if it is something I don't want to give up in my life (or sex life), then it's not emotional coercion to make it a deal-breaker.
> 
> I will respect any of my partner's boundaries...but I will also honor my own.


Oh of course. You always have the right to leave.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> Oral is not forbidden in the Bible as far as I've ever heard. And I'm pretty sure "sodomy" was anal sex between men.


The Bible uses the term sodomy to include oral, as in the definition given in the Cornell law School article in the first paragraph below, as well as the current Webster's dictionary.

"Sodomy | Definition of Sodomy by Merriam-Webster" Definition of SODOMY

"Sodomy | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute" Sodomy


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

*1 Corinthians 6:13

English Standard Version*



13 “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
1 Corinthians 6:13 ESV - “

I'm afraid y'all are some lost little lambs.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> *1 Corinthians 6:13
> 
> English Standard Version*
> 
> ...


Here, Paul is writing about sexual immorality as what you do without being married - so sex with other people besides your spouse - NOT what two married people do. 

Jehovah's Witnesses ban oral sex, but it's based on their personal view of that, not on anything Biblical. For Christians (and maybe even Jews), it's NOT mentioned or banned at all, even in the Old Testament morality verses (Leviticus).

But I do believe that it's still against the law in a few states, if that's what you want to fall back on! 
I would have loved to be in the room when that law was written...Lol!!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> *1 Corinthians 6:13
> 
> English Standard Version*
> 
> ...


Careful not to take things out of context.

Oral sex is approved.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> Here, Paul is writing about sexual immorality as what you do without being married - so sex with other people besides your spouse - NOT what two married people do.
> 
> Jehovah's Witnesses ban oral sex, but it's based on their personal view of that, not on anything Biblical. For Christians (and maybe even Jews), it's NOT mentioned or banned at all, even in the Old Testament morality verses (Leviticus).
> 
> ...


Sodomy really doesn't encompass both oral and anal by all official definitions and it always has as long as I can remember in my lifetime. I love the part about the stomach is for food. Subtle.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> Careful not to take things out of context.
> 
> Oral sex is approved.


No it's not. Sodomy has always been defined as both oral and anal sex just like those links I put up there and it's been that way as long as I've been alive and a lot further back than that. Not that I care whether it is approved or not, mind you. But the definition is what it is and it's been the same for a very long time.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DownByTheRiver said:


> No it's not. Sodomy has always been defined as both oral and anal sex just like those links I put up there and it's been that way as long as I've been alive and a lot further back than that. Not that I care whether it is approved or not, mind you. But the definition is what it is and it's been the same for a very long time.


You are wrong. You are trying to explain my religion to me and that is awkward for you. You are going not by the criteria of my beliefs but different, outside, sources. Trust that sodomy is absolutely not oral biblically.😆


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> It was a lot of, I will if you go first. I think men put the skids on back then more than women did. There were a lot of things men wouldn't do that they would expect women to do.




My new GF had an observation about that when we first got physical. 

I basically named off things I'd be willing to do if she was interested or wanted to and she was surprised that I was as open to experiences as I was. She'd been used to guys picking the activities or doing things and not necessarily having stuff done to them.

She did think that since I was open to things that she wouldn't have as many excuses to not try new things.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

ConanHub said:


> You are wrong. You are trying to explain my religion to me and that is awkward for you. You are going not by the criteria of my beliefs but different, outside, sources. Trust that sodomy is absolutely not oral biblically.😆


I'm not explaining anything to you. What I'm doing is providing you references and definitions of what the word means, so take it up with Mr Webster. What religious beliefs we accept are very often a matter of convenience.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

I think everyone will enjoy this time article about the mainstreaming of fellatio. Only stats are women doing it to men. Interesting there's no stats on men doing it to women. 

It's very informative and interesting and sometimes funny. 

"Fifty Shades of Grey and How Sex Acts Go Mainstream: An 'Oral' History | Time" 'Fifty Shades of Grey' and How One Sex Act Went Mainstream


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

DownByTheRiver said:


> I'm not explaining anything to you. What I'm doing is providing you references and definitions of what the word means, so take it up with Mr Webster. What religious beliefs we accept are very often a matter of convenience.


You aren't really suggesting that Christians follow the definitions of Webster's dictionary over the Bible, are you?
Because "sodomy" is NOT a Biblical word, it's a word from about 1000 years later meant to define homosexual acts - anal sex and oral sex between MEN only - that was never used in the Bible. 

There is NOTHING in the Bible against oral sex. And people who study the Bible specifically say that it's not mentioned at all.


----------



## uphillbattle (Aug 17, 2011)

ConanHub said:


> You are wrong. You are trying to explain my religion to me and that is awkward for you. You are going not by the criteria of my beliefs but different, outside, sources. Trust that sodomy is absolutely not oral biblically.😆


How many sects and interpretations are there on Christianity? Might it be possible that someone interprets things differently?


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

LisaDiane said:


> You aren't really suggesting that Christians follow the definitions of Webster's dictionary over the Bible, are you?
> Because "sodomy" is NOT a Biblical word, it's a word from about 1000 years later meant to define homosexual acts - anal sex and oral sex between MEN only - that was never used in the Bible.
> 
> There is NOTHING in the Bible against oral sex. And people who study the Bible specifically say that it's not mentioned at all.


Webster's researches the root of everything they publish. Realizing there were translations of the Bible, sodomy was apparently the closest translation and as long as the history goes back, it's always had a broader meaning than just homosexuality anal. It's always meant sex acts other than intercourse.


----------



## DownByTheRiver (Jul 2, 2020)

uphillbattle said:


> How many sects and interpretations are there on Christianity? Might it be possible that someone interprets things differently?


I believe there are as many religions as there are people.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

uphillbattle said:


> How many sects and interpretations are there on Christianity? Might it be possible that someone interprets things differently?


Since so many cannot agree on how to interpret their religious texts, there is circa 45,000 Christian denominations. With some references citing anywhere between circa 4,000 to 10,000 distinct religions otherwise.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

uphillbattle said:


> How many sects and interpretations are there on Christianity? Might it be possible that someone interprets things differently?


Of course...but that doesn't change the fact that oral sex IS NOT forbidden in the Bible. And the word "sodomy" is NOT used in the Bible either. Sexual immorality is forbidden, but that is unmarried sex for the most part, and also incest.

I am not sure if anal sex between a husband and wife is even forbidden in the Bible. It wasn't discussed much in my Christian school...Lol!!

There are Christian religions that forbid sexual things on their own (Jehovah's Witnesses, for example), but that IS NOT BIBLICAL.

This IS very specific, interestingly...

_3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 T*he wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.* 5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control._ 
1 Corinthians 7:3- 5 
ESV


----------



## Enigma32 (Jul 6, 2020)

While you guys fight over what is or is not allowed under Christianity, I will start my own religion and we are all about the oral sex over here.


----------



## Hiner112 (Nov 17, 2019)

Oral sex is probably OK.

According to a few interpretations.

The Song of Solomon seems to celebrate it in particular.

The first person scene in Sodom and Gamorra involves forced sex so "sexual immorality" on that basis could either be the same-sex portion of that or the lack of consent.

This seems way, way OT though.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Bringing religious interpretations into this thread seems seriously off-topic.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

LisaDiane said:


> Of course...but that doesn't change the fact that oral sex IS NOT forbidden in the Bible. And the word "sodomy" is NOT used in the Bible either. Sexual immorality is forbidden, but that is unmarried sex for the most part, and also incest.
> 
> I am not sure if anal sex between a husband and wife is even forbidden in the Bible. It wasn't discussed much in my Christian school...Lol!!
> 
> ...


You've expressed this very well. Thank's for taking the time and effort to do so.

I couldn't bring myself to engage with others who promote with broad strokes "church bad for sex and cause family problems" blah blahs blah.


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> You've expressed this very well. Thank's for taking the time and effort to do so.
> 
> I couldn't bring myself to engage with others who promote with broad strokes "church bad for sex and cause family problems" blah blahs blah.


Even though I am not religious, I don't like the blanket judgements that Christians are labeled with when they aren't accurate. Many of the toxic things attributed to Christians (and probably other religions, but I don't know much about those) are actually MAN-MADE rules and regulations, based on very outdated world views (like, from the Middle Ages!)...and people of very poor character.

My VERY religious mother forced my step-dad into sexlessness, while also condemning adultery and remaining drunk constantly, all while touting that she had the high ground as a "devout" Christian. Umm...NOPE. She was a hypocrite.


----------

