# Is it me, my wife, or nature?



## last worthless evening (Feb 11, 2014)

Both of these articles seem to question the reason for women who seem to be LD. The scholarly article seems to say the same. So the question appears to be is the problem of an LD wife, really an LD issue or basically being bored with their partner and in need of varied sexual stimuli? Would be interested in hearing from the ladies on this. 

Is monogamy good for women? - OMG Chronicles OMG Chronicles 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-like-me-divorce-can-be-the-best-aphrodisiac/ 

Does Monogamy Harm Women? Deconstructing Monogamy with a Feminist Lens | Ziegler | Journal für Psychologie


Recent research has found that women have a greater need than men for novel stimuli in order to maintain sexual arousal (for a discussion, see Bergner, 2013), and, without the introduction of new stimuli women’s sexual arousal is likely to diminish. In other words, it is probable that women sexually habituate to their male partners in monogamous relationships; thus, the notion that monogamy affords women a lifetime of exciting sex seems empirically unfounded.

Given that women habituate to their monogamous partners, it is not surprising that research has found that women in polyamorous relationships report high sexual satisfaction (Sheff, 2005). Indeed, women in polyamorous relationships find the sexual diversity to be a particularly beneficial component of their relationships. And, furthermore, women cite the opportunity to explore the multifaceted nature of their sexuality, including a variety partners as well as genders, as contributing to their increased sexual satisfaction (Sheff, 2005).

In addition to sexual satisfaction, women in polyamorous relationships also experience greater sexual agency. Research shows that polyamorous relationships provide a space for women to exert sexual autonomy without risk of stigmatization (Sheff, 2005). This is a result of basic tenets of polyamory that conflict with traditional femininity, including the prescriptive stereotypes of women’s sexual purity and inhibited sexual desire (Sheff, 2005). Within the dominant monogamist culture, there is a sexual double standard that describes the ways in which women are judged much more harshly than men for engaging in the same sexual behaviors (Reiss, 1964). Although no research has documented that polyamorous women reject the power dynamic embedded in the sexual double standard, it seems likely that these women are attuned to the ways in which monogamy limits women’s sexuality. Simply put, polyamory is a relationship type that typically emphasizes equality among partners; thus, gender identity may not be a prescription for the organization, roles, or partner dynamics within these relationships.

In sum, women’s high rates of sexual desire disorders as well as decreases in sexual desire in monogamous relationships suggests that women could benefit from an increase in sexual variety—a benefit that can be provided by polyamorous relationships.

Maybe this is part of the answer to why the problems regarding our desire discrepancy seem so intractable.....


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

last worthless evening said:


> So the question appears to be is the problem of an LD wife, really an LD issue or basically being bored with their partner and in need of varied sexual stimuli? Would be interested in hearing from the ladies on this.


Maybe she's just bored with _sex_. May have nothing to do with you, but the _activity_ of sex. 

Sex can be like... chicken. No matter how much you 'dress it up' (new positions, new places, new foreplay, new bedroom 'attire', introducing toys, etc.) in the end, it's still _sex_! 

And yes, it COULD be her partner. Perhaps her partner CONSTANTLY talked about sex, even if they were having sex regularly. She would then get the impression that sex is always on your brain, which seems BORING to her. It's like listening to the same song over and over again. At first, she may have loved the song. She bought the CD and played it many times every day for WEEKS. But after a while, it got 'played out'. Nowadays, even though she still LOVES the song, she appreciates it when she hears it because she doesn't hear it as often. 

Make sense?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

I think there may be something to that. Obviously not all women will report being unhappy or bored with one partner the rest of their lives, and may very well be over the moon. And certainly men like novelty, as well.

But to be very, very general about genders and sexuality, we know, more or less, that men require a whole lot less stimuli to get in the mood than women do. More often than not, we're ready to go at just about any time. Whereas women (again generally speaking) require more than that.

I think there's probably some logic in this, somewhere.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

alexm said:


> But to be very, very general about genders and sexuality, we know, more or less, that men require a whole lot less stimuli to get in the mood than women do. More often than not, we're ready to go at just about any time. Whereas women (again generally speaking) require more than that.


In order for the human species to propagate, men MUST reach orgasm. Meanwhile women are fully capable of procreation without reaching an orgasm. The rest is evolution.

For those that do not believe in evolution, men that were known to impotent were historically not allowed to marry by the church.

Why The Church Cannot Marry the Impotent | Catholic Answers

So in this case it is actually religion is what bred these impotent men out of existence. 

Badsanta


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> Maybe she's just bored with _sex_. May have nothing to do with you, but the _activity_ of sex.
> 
> Sex can be like... chicken. No matter how much you 'dress it up' (new positions, new places, new foreplay, new bedroom 'attire', introducing toys, etc.) in the end, it's still _sex_!
> 
> ...


I tend to agree with this. Though, when one is naturally very attracted to their spouse, they sometimes feel like they just can't quite have enough sex. 

Still, in many marriages, it gets stale. They increase the intensity, number of positions, variety of things they will do together, and even this will get old after a while. And on and on. 

I think it's just the nature of humans.

And, no, I don't believe women need many partners all the time to be happy. I think they are similar to men. We all need more than one person in our platonic lives to let us have the indisputable knowledge that we have made the correct choice in our spouse. Those do not have to be the opposite sex. We only have to listen to the rantings of other married folks. 

I don't believe men need many partners all the time to be happy, either. 

Just the right one and some character will work well. Much of the issue seems to be that we are expected, as married couples, to have similar feelings as we did when we were first dating. That's impossible. We didn't know each other. We didn't have mutual responsibilities that were dependent upon another so fully, our lives would change if those responsibilities were not attended to properly.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

2ntnuf said:


> Just the right one and some character will work well. Much of the issue seems to be that we are expected, as married couples, to have similar feelings as we did when we were first dating. That's impossible. We didn't know each other. We didn't have mutual responsibilities that were dependent upon another so fully, our lives would change if those responsibilities were not attended to properly.


But the premise is that it's more often than not the woman who effectively shuts down or dictates marital sex at some point. We know this to be *generally* true. The man also has the stresses of life, work, children, bills, etc. yet we're just about always "ready to go". It's the woman who tends to put aside the sexual aspect of the relationship over time.

The theory proposed in this thread is that it's a genetic thing, and through, essentially, boredom of the 'same old, same old', the woman will often put much less of an emphasis on this subject, comparatively speaking.

We men are still having sex with the same person over and over again, perhaps in the same positions, on the same days of the week, etc. Yet we tend to still have that drive to do it, even if it's somewhat underwhelming. It seems, more often than not, that the woman will lose interest, even though the man is also having the same old sex she is.

Furthermore, the amount of stories here, and IRL, about women going a little... crazy... post-divorce, can probably attest to this. Yes, we men certainly do the same, but it often appears as though a newly single woman will go outside of their comfort zone, sexually, at least for a brief period of time.

So if you have two people doing the same thing over and over again, yet only one gender *typically* gets bored of it and winds up dictating the amount of it, then what's the reason?


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> I tend to agree with this. Though, when one is naturally very attracted to their spouse, they sometimes feel like they just can't quite have enough sex.
> 
> Still, in many marriages, it gets stale. They increase the intensity, number of positions, variety of things they will do together, and even this will get old after a while. And on and on.
> 
> ...






alexm said:


> But the premise is that it's more often than not the woman who effectively shuts down or dictates marital sex at some point. We know this to be *generally* true. The man also has the stresses of life, work, children, bills, etc. yet we're just about always "ready to go". It's the woman who tends to put aside the sexual aspect of the relationship over time.
> 
> The theory proposed in this thread is that it's a genetic thing, and through, essentially, boredom of the 'same old, same old', the woman will often put much less of an emphasis on this subject, comparatively speaking.
> 
> We men are still having sex with the same person over and over again, perhaps in the same positions, on the same days of the week, etc. Yet we tend to still have that drive to do it, even if it's somewhat underwhelming. It seems, more often than not, that the woman will lose interest, even though the man is also having the same old sex she is.


I got this part. I really did. 

See the part about character, I posted. Part of having good character is honesty. Do you agree? Where is that honesty within these marriages where sex is less than what they expected? I think it's lacking. Some of that is likely due to fear of rejection. 

I think it's unlikely that two married honest individuals who have done their homework to find the most compatible partner and are honest with themselves and their partner, will have these types of problems that lead to suggesting that their genes or whatever are responsible for their boredom and the resulting affairs. 

It's just another excuse for bad character and justification of infidelity within marriage. Those who don't want to be monogamous should be truthful with their partner before marriage. There's nothing wrong with that. It's honorable. 



alexm said:


> Furthermore, the amount of stories here, and IRL, about women going a little... crazy... post-divorce, can probably attest to this. Yes, we men certainly do the same, but it often appears as though a newly single woman will go outside of their comfort zone, sexually, at least for a brief period of time.


And men don't go outside their comfort zone? I think each of us has our own individual comfort zone and after marriage, we do go outside of it. 

My comfort zone is to have sex within a monogamous relationship, preferably marriage. I have not had sex in a long time. I am way outside my comfort zone. 

A psychiatrist told me that when someone is depressed, they will sometimes do sexual things they would not normally do. I've avoided that for personal reasons, but not from genetics.

I think a feeling of rejection, which is extremely hurtful to many, is another cause of this. Many folks want to feel like there is really nothing wrong with them and can only be sure by having plenty of sex. It validates them and assuages any feelings of low sexual self worth brought on by rejection(divorce is rejection and sex is a big part of marriage). 



alexm said:


> So if you have two people doing the same thing over and over again, yet only one gender *typically* gets bored of it and winds up dictating the amount of it, then what's the reason?


Generally, I believe it's due to a woman's desire to feel wanted and needed. It's likely due to her needing to be selected by a suitor as the one woman who means more to him than others. He shows her that before the marriage. He slowly gets comfortable and thinks he doesn't have to work as hard for sex because they have a contract between them that says her body is his and his her's or something to that effect. 

So, as time passes and he forgets she needs him to love her before sex ever enters her mind, she loses interest in the mundane. Heck, she can get that kind of sex outside of marriage. She can even get a man to treat her better with less responsibility to him. She doesn't have to do much, except be herself, and he wants her. 

Doesn't seem that way in marriage. 

So, I think she wants him to keep showing her she is special and all things will fall into place ... excitement, variety, and soforth.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Sex is absolutely a brain thing.

Training your thoughts delivers results.

Lazy or unimaginative people make excuses and do shytty research to show monogamy to be the downfall of desire in women.

My wife has only been with me for nearly twenty five years.

She is far more of a wanton wh0re with me than ever before and getting better at old tricks while trying new ones as well.

I say wh0re in this post with the utmost respect. No offense intended to any woman.

I fully believe that many women lose interest with a boring man.

Not laying this all at the feet of men, women need to take responsibility for their sexuality as well but having an attentive, adventurous lover who doesn't take them for granted, makes them feel safe and is also a little demanding sometimes works wonders.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

I've been blessed with a great imagination. This provides a lot of variety and things to look forward to. In the last year, I felt confident enough to reveal my freaky fantasies to my husband. It was some of the female posters on TAM that helped me become comfortable. I thought my husband would think badly of me that I could think of the things I do. He married me because I am a good girl. But he is great, what a relief and release.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

ConanHub said:


> Sex is absolutely a brain thing.
> 
> Training your thoughts delivers results.
> 
> ...


I think good girl complex and religious teachings may play a role. The fear that the husband will think that she is not as good as she seems, inhibits lots of women. It's hard to reconcile perverted  thoughts with the image of purity. 

I'm Catholic and the nuns indoctrinated to believe that only dirty girls think about sex. It's not easy to change that mindset. 

I now understand that humans are sexual and it's normal to have sexual fantasies to entertain ourselves.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Catherine602 said:


> I think good girl complex and religious teachings may play a role. The fear that the husband will think that she is not as good as she seems, inhibits lots of women. It's hard to reconcile perverted  thoughts with the image of purity.
> 
> I'm Catholic and the nuns indoctrinated to believe that only dirty girls think about sex. It's not easy to change that mindset.
> 
> *I now understand that humans are sexual and it's normal to have sexual fantasies to entertain ourselves*.


Seems it would also be normal for those nuns. I imagine they talked in ways that supported their beliefs and bolstered their commitment to celibacy. 

It's sad that they gave the impression to so many that sex is a sin. I sometimes wonder if they did say that, or if they were saying sex outside of marriage is the sin. The latter would be accurate to doctrine. 

Sorry for your situation. I am not making light of it.


----------



## Spotthedeaddog (Sep 27, 2015)

Nope, they're puting the cart before the horse, a common problem with such social studies resulting from having either a cultural or an academic narrowing influence on the test population.

What happens in a stable relationship if the man starts wanting new stuff, or doing things differently? She shuts him down or even suspects he's having an affair or accuses him of having mental deviancy. We actual see those kinds of posts here on TAM with suprising frequency.

For a guy to be _permitted_ to disrupt the normal flow of his wifes relationship he must re-woo her - which generally will get him VAR'd and all his receipts checked, as the sudden increase in relationship interest will be a trigger signal for her. Studies like those in the OP make many huge assumptions about the relationship; that it's between equals, that the partners still have love, that the partners have been together under 5 years (because a lot of these studies are done by colleges or universities), that both partners seek sexual gratifiation as part of the relationship (see previous comment, and the effect of young woman's hormonal mating drive).

As is often said anecdotally; (young)women give sex because they seek attention, while men give attention because they seek sexual partners.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> It's sad that they gave the impression to so many that sex is a sin. I sometimes wonder if they did say that, or if they were saying sex outside of marriage is the sin. The latter would be accurate to doctrine.


I agree that religion DID say that sex outside of marriage was a sin. But sex outside of marriage meant a lot of things.

Masturbation was seen as a sin.
Fornication was seen as a sin.
Adultery was seen as a sin.
Having more than one spouse is a sin.
Homosexuality/Lesbianism is also a sin. 

And any form of sex (anal sex, bj, hj, etc.) other than intercourse was also seen as a sin.

The church saw the purpose of sex as to procreate and the ONLY way we can procreate is the 'natural' way; through intercourse. Birth control (except for abstinence and/or the rhythm method) is also seen as sinful because it interferes with the 'natural' possibility of impregnation. 

It was only in recent history that the Catholic church took a more favorable view of sex as an expression of love between husband and wife. 

There are actually reasons why the church believes the sinfulness of the list I presented above and many of the reasons DO make sense. For example: Fornication. Two unmarried people having sex. Even if one of them is using birth control, birth control CAN and DOES fail. You then may have an unplanned pregnancy. Since there's no commitment of marriage, you may have had sex with more than one person. If you KNOW who the father is, he MAY marry you. Then again, he may not. If he doesn't marry you, you can TRY to collect child support. Good luck with that, plus there will probably be a lot of hostility between the two of you...which would eventually effect the child. 

If you don't know who he is, you have to make another choice and that's to either have an abortion (which can have psychological and/or physical effects on the mother) or to raise the child without the benefit of both parents. If you decide to raise the child on your own, you'll either get a job that pays enough or you won't. You and the child can BOTH end up living in poverty. The child may begin to grow up resenting his or her predicament and turn to drugs, alcohol, crime and/or prostitution. 

Of course, that's only ONE scenario. Even if no pregnancy is involved, there can still be a lot of turmoil. Even if you 'promise' to remain monogamous, it doesn't mean that you both plan to uphold that promise, especially if marriage isn't even in the cards (yet). And since you're both still technically 'single', you're free to sleep with whoever you want...which means one of you COULD contract an STD...and in some cases, that STD can be incurable or even _deadly_.

And what about the _psychological_ effects? What about the boy who tells the girl that he's "in love" with her only to use her for sex? It can cause a woman to lose trust in ALL men that she can end up dragging into her relationships, including marriage. Something similar can happen to a man whereas, a woman tells him she's in love with him, only for him to discover that she's been sleeping around. He can become angry and direct that anger and mistrust at ALL women, even his wife if he marries. 

ALL of this could have been avoided if abstinence was practiced instead of fornication. At least, that's how the church would see it (and I suspect a lot of people would agree whether they're "believers" or not)


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

badsanta said:


> In order for the human species to propagate, men MUST reach orgasm. Meanwhile women are fully capable of procreation without reaching an orgasm. The rest is evolution.
> 
> For those that do not believe in evolution, men that were known to impotent were historically not allowed to marry by the church.
> 
> ...


This reminds me of the joke about sterility being hereditary: if your parents didn't have any children, you probably won't either.

In a slightly longer version, it seems to me that if a man is impotent, assuming this means he cannot impregnate a woman, he will not reproduce regardless of his marital status. So I don't think we can blame religion for the lack of descendants of impotent men.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> For those that do not believe in evolution, men that were known to impotent were historically not allowed to marry by the church.


Just how is a man going to know if he’s impotent BEFORE he gets married if he’s not supposed to be having sex or even MASTURBATING BEFORE he gets married?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Two points:

1) A confounding factor; women who like sex more likely to be found in polyamorous relationship than women who do not like sex.

2) The probability that men and women, with tens of thousands of years of separate socialization and evolution would have exactly the same sexual drives is vanishingly unlikely


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Vega said:


> Just how is a man going to know if he’s impotent BEFORE he gets married if he’s not supposed to be having sex or even MASTURBATING BEFORE he gets married?


Erections. Men typically become erect when asleep, have "morning wood", and become erect for random reasons from seeing the perfect steak to seeing the perfect physical example of femininity since Marilyn Monroe.

If a man isn't experiencing erections, it's pretty safe to assume he is impotent. If he is having the normal range of erections, he's assumed to be capable of consummation. The Church asks if there is any reason to suspect impotency, which there isn't if the man is able to become erect.

To the original question, check the sources. The last article I read on the subject made me curious enough to read the original research. It turned out to be a survey of 300 people in the town surrounding the university. Not exactly a large and varied sample of the population.

I have always been HD and have never bought into the sexual double standard. I preferred casual sex and enjoyed the company of a variety of men. If someone I was casually seeing was also dating others, I never minded. Then I met my DH. I fell in love and realized I'm actually a monogamist and quite...territorial and possessive. As I still love the man, I'd be miserable in a poly or open relationship and I think the same is true for the vast majority of women.

I think a lot of people in open marriages or poly relationships are basically living that lifestyle because they don't want to leave their primary partner, but they are unsatisfied by that relationship. So, they add another person in an attempt to have some need met without clandestinely cheating or having to split up.


----------



## Mostlycontent (Apr 16, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> I've been blessed with a great imagination. This provides a lot of variety and things to look forward to. In the last year, I felt confident enough to reveal my freaky fantasies to my husband. It was some of the female posters on TAM that helped me become comfortable. I thought my husband would think badly of me that I could think of the things I do. He married me because I am a good girl. But he is great, what a relief and release.



This is great stuff, Catherine. My wife and I also experienced something similar. We began to explore our fantasies after some 20 years together and if I had to guess as to why it took her so long to share them with me, it was because she was concerned with what I might think of her.

Once we cracked that door open a bit, she would even say to me or ask for reassurance that I didn't think she was too kinky. I would always say, "hell no", and that I not only enjoyed the discussion but was titillated that my wife had these thoughts and ideas.

The idea that a man wants a "lady on the outside but a wh0re in the bedroom" sort of rings true. What most men fear, I think, is that you may have engaged in your fantasies with other men and not your husband. No man wants that.

Since it took my wife 20 years to share her inner most fantasies with me, I'm quite confident that I'm the only man alive who knows her thoughts on such things and she assured me as much.

After we got this out in the open, we had a wonderful period of about 5 years of really lustful and experimental sex in many different ways and in various different venues. It was quite a boost to an already good sex life. After we had explored it every way possible, it kind of just stopped.

Our kids got older and I think my wife started feeling more guilty about some stuff we did or just hung up on "what if the kids somehow found out about stuff we might be into" and that kind of thing. Couple that with the fact that it had pretty much run its course and the "exciting and new" stuff had kind of worn off and we just kind of slowly reverted back to a more normal sex life.

I must say that I miss the excitement of it and sharing our fantasies and even trying some of them. There was nothing nefarious about it but needless to say, I wouldn't want anyone I knew or was related to finding out about some of the stuff we did.

I will say one final thing about it that helped us. My wife actually opened up to me about a particular thought, perhaps not quite a fantasy at that point, that she had been having and feeling a bit guilty about. Well, I did everything I could to help her be comfortable with it and to encourage her to go with it and explore it more. That pretty much got the ball rolling. Had I shut it down right then or been judgmental, we would have never gone through that awesome sexual time together.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Mostlycontent said:


> The idea that a man wants a "lady on the outside but a wh0re in the bedroom" sort of rings true.


I look at sexuality as one part of the whole. Which means that everything has it's time and place. So a wife's sexuality is not something to be paraded around the neighborhood or at the office, but is expected in the home. Not that her sexuality is something to be ashamed of or hidden, just that wearing wh0re-like outfits aren't right for the neighborhood block party or going to work.

On the other hand, she doesn't have to pretend she isn't sexual in those circumstances. She doesn't have to wear the high collar and long sleeves, feigning indignation when someone makes an innuendo. This is where I think a lot of women get it wrong. Both a husband and a wife should be "presentable" in public, dressed nicely and acting politely in accordance with the circumstances. But that is only one part of the whole. Sexuality is another part of the whole, a part which is not erased simply because other parts exist also.



Mostlycontent said:


> What most men fear, I think, is that you may have engaged in your fantasies with other men and not your husband. No man wants that.


This is, unfortunately for me, true in my wife's case. One of the biggest blockages for me to staying in the marriage. Finding out some of this stuff long after the wedding and from outside sources doesn't help.



Mostlycontent said:


> Since it took my wife 20 years to share her inner most fantasies with me, I'm quite confident that I'm the only man alive who knows her thoughts on such things and she assured me as much.


Why do so many women not get this? Husbands want their wives! Men marry women because they love them and are attracted to them. Men want to experience everything with their wife, and it builds emotional connection to do so.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Thor said:


> Why do so many women not get this? Husbands want their wives! Men marry women because they love them and are attracted to them. Men want to experience everything with their wife, and it builds emotional connection to do so.


Some are afraid their husband will think they are sick or disgusting. Maybe they figure he won't respect them or want them any more. They don't want to be ashamed of themselves. They may be afraid their partner will talk and try to find out how to handle these new ideas with someone and the secret will get out. 

Lots of possible shame involved with a chance to lose status in society and who knows what else.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Some are afraid their husband will think they are sick or disgusting. Maybe they figure he won't respect them or want them any more. They don't want to be ashamed of themselves. They may be afraid their partner will talk and try to find out how to handle these new ideas with someone and the secret will get out.
> 
> Lots of possible shame involved with a chance to lose status in society and who knows what else.


But not enough shame to keep from doing those things with boyfriends they don't marry or with their posom AP...


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

It just doesn't seem surprising to me that lots of us might be more sexually happy if we could do whatever we wanted. For me it seems essential to figure out the place of sex in my life. It's one of several competing priorities, and I forego some possible sexual pleasure for the sake of other goals.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Thor said:


> But not enough shame to keep from doing those things with boyfriends they don't marry or with their posom AP...


Well, that is a conundrum. Isn't it? It's something I never understood.

If I had to guess, I'd guess they don't believe they will be marrying that boyfriend and eventually, he won't remember them.

Or, they don't care what he thinks, because he isn't the guy they want to respect them.

Maybe the posom has as much to lose with exposure as they do, and so they figure none of it will get out. But, that flies in the face of the reconcilers who think they are once again, first choice. The only way they would be, is if the ws exposed everything with anger, disgust, and hate which turns into indifference. 

Edit: Maybe she has more respect, trust and love for the OM and boyfriends than her husband and they also turn her on more than her husband, but her husband makes more money and they want that income and status to be a part of their life and think or hope they can change him, but aren't worried about the consequences of cheating to find another man before they divorce? Obviously, that would mean divorce is not a negative consequence and neither is cheating. Wow, that was a huge guess there. I don't trust that one, but it popped in my head. ee.

I truly don't know, @Thor.

Maybe some women will take a shot at this?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

2ntnuf said:


> Well, that is a conundrum. Isn't it? It's something I never understood.
> 
> If I had to guess, I'd guess they don't believe they will be marrying that boyfriend and eventually, he won't remember them.
> 
> ...


I'm not a woman, but *this *is the reason that:

1. Many men get very upset when they find out about this type of history; and
2. Many wives (or wives-to-be) don't want to tell their husbands their actual history.

Of course this is very convenient for the women, but not so much for the husbands.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

I really like both of those posts, @OliviaG.

If men accept this, we are accepting responsibility for communicating clearly our desires rather than _hoping_ our wives will start that dialogue.

Not willing to take the risk? Then don't expect the reward.

It starts with communicating what we want, not asking if what we want is okay. The difference between the two is immeasurable. 


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

I think in many cases the woman is looking for something different when she gets married than dating. She's looking for the steady and secure relationship, not the hot sexy relationship. So she picks a man she may not be as sexually attracted to as prior boyfriends or future APs. Not that the husband doesn't want to do those things with her, but she isn't interested in them with him. Sexual attraction is low on the list of priorities for her.

If he asks for something, she may genuinely not be all that interested in it because she is generally not interested in sex. With him. And then that item goes off the table for the husband and he doesn't ask for it again.

Not everything my wife did is something I want to repeat with her. Most certainly some of it is stuff I don't want her to repeat (groups, parties, public stuff, etc) even if I were involved!

Lots of mainstream stuff should be on the table but isn't for many husbands. Whether it be the oft mentioned bj, or just what I would call carefree fun where the woman shows interest and desire. Maybe it would have turned out this way even if the wife had married one of the badboy boyfriends or a wild AP. Maybe it would have become stale for the woman and turn into boring duty sex.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

OliviaG said:


> I'm just guessing here as I have no experience, but could it be that the husband is waiting for her to express an interest in something "wild" verbally, whereas the OM just confidently takes the lead and does it, whatever it is, so she doesn't have to verbalize it? Is the husband too passive to go ahead without discussion and the OM is not?


I've asked my wife numerous times to tell, show, or otherwise indicate to me what she wants. All I get are shrugs and comments that she's fine with what we do.

I've tried initiating various things, but getting consistently refused or shut down is a clear message. Just as bad is observing she's going along out of duty. In my wife's case with her CSA history I also (now after learning about her CSA) recognize when she starts zoning out. That's a super creepy feeling. Anyhow, that's more a specific case than the generality of wives not being interested in wild sex with husbands.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

tech-novelist said:


> I'm not a woman, but *this *is the reason that:
> 
> 1. Many men get very upset when they find out about this type of history; and
> 2. Many wives (or wives-to-be) don't want to tell their husbands their actual history.
> ...


I don't understand @tech-novelist. I wasn't trying to offend anyone. What did I say?

Edit: You know, sometimes we need to just admit that things like settling do go on. I'm not saying every woman or man settles. Let's not get lost in semantics. Fear of the unknown drives wedges between folks.

Wouldn't it be better if we all knew what real love and desire look like? Many men don't even know if their wife has had a real orgasm. I've read some threads here where a man is lacking in something in sex. He's a great husband, but isn't very satisfying or is not adventurous enough or is a candidate for male starfish. Go look at SIM. You'll see what I mean. ee.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I really like both of those posts, OliviaG.
> 
> If men accept this, we are accepting responsibility for communicating clearly our desires rather than _hoping_ our wives will start that dialogue.
> 
> ...


I did too, but I found myself, at least in my first marriage, the one who spoke up about fantasies. 

And yes, she did try to talk about those with other folks who were not involved in the marriage. It got back to me. So, there is a great deal of risk. 

What I never heard from either wife or any girlfriend I had sex with, except one, was what they wanted.

My second wife, did the worst thing anyone could do, she just went for it and it was not something I would have agreed to, so it was tremendously surprising, even shocking. 

The one who told me, I hope I didn't shame in any way. I tried not to, but I did reject what she wanted. That, in itself, could have made her feel shame, though, in retrospect, she didn't leave me after that conversation, so I guess I didn't shame her. I don't know.

Edit: Look at all the posts on TAM about penis size, anal sex, swallowing, wives who are surprised when they find out their husband is bisexual, and many other things. There are some posts that are shaming, if not intended that way. I think it goes both ways to tell the truth. ee.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

I didn't read the articles listed in the opening post.. but I've read a # speaking on the new research, bought one such book entitled 

What do women want ? Adventures in the science of Female desire"... 



> Daniel Bergne disseminates the latest scientific research and paints an unprecedented portrait of female lust: the triggers, the fantasies, the mind-body connection (and disconnection), the reasons behind the loss of libido, and, most revelatory, that this loss is not inevitable.
> 
> Bergner asks: Are women actually the less monogamous gender? Do women really crave intimacy and emotional connection? Are women more disposed to sex with strangers and multiple pairings than either science or society have ever let on? And is “the fairer sex” actually more sexually aggressive and anarchic than men?
> 
> While debunking the myths popularized by evolutionary psychology, Bergner also looks at the future of female sexuality.....


Personally I found this book very feminist / liberal minded and I can't say it speaks for me ..

This speaks how women want one night stands.. and how the idea of monogamy is just "cultural"... that we have progressed.. and now we should just embrace our non monogamous ways.. Websites like OpenMinded.com  are sprouting up all over the place...Tinder & Hooking up is the new norm... 

I can't relate to any of the posts/ stories where women just want to get it on with the bad boys, easily discarding them..then once they had their fill... looking for a different sort of man, those who may value commitment, the marrying type. 

Maybe it was how I was raised (I'm sure it's part of it.. but also understanding the aftermath of many of these situations)...I wasn't the type who wanted a lust fling.. I wanted so much MORE than that.... 

I find it normal to have fantasies .. the idea of fusing my body with the Hot guy ... but the reality that he wouldn't be there the next day...the day after.. No.. that blows.. it destroys the fantasy for me.. my mind says "not worth [email protected]#"...

I yearned to find my soul mate from an early age...someone I'd grow together with, sharing our all (bodies, dreams , laughter & tears)... make babies with, sharing a home, sexing it up all the while and still be holding hands till we're in our rocking chairs.. that was my dream, my prayer. 

*Is this not excitement enough for people , don't we make our own "Excitement", it coming from within? * This doesn't mean my husband doesn't notice beautiful women.. a fleeting fantasy of the "10" walking along the beach....he's checking her out... we joke about it ...we're best friends ! We watch some porn together.. we still crave each other.. I still wake him up saying "I want your body....give it to me baby".. we still feel passion for each other.. there is no place I'd rather be than in his arms and him IN ME..

I am a bit sex crazed even....sure some of this is hormones in mid life...but it's so much more than that, or I'd be looking over that fence... 

I've always looked upon sex as something very special, meaningful.. why would I want to change this...I don't care if it IS "cultural" / what I've been taught... it has brought me happiness... If I didn't look upon sex the way I do.. with my appetite....I'm afraid that might get me in a whole lot of trouble.. so it's really a blessing ...

It's emotional, physical, almost spiritual.. there is no greater high.. 

I get that fantasies, meeting someone new could be alluring, passionate , exciting... but again... it's fleeting...maybe some do not mind that.. I wouldn't like it at all. 

Why would I want to fuse my body with someone that knows so little about me..just for a moment of lust...would this person care to hear all my secrets...appreciate my quirks.. miss them if something tragic happened to me.. would he be there to dry my tears.. Sex, for me is an all encompassing experience.. it's trust.. it's exclusivity.. it's not something to be shared with others....

Feeling this way is a part of who I am... there are studies ongoing how some of us are naturally more Monogamous over others, due to vasopressin receptors ...one such article : Monogamy gene found in people 

Maybe we can't really help how we are wired..it's a fair question...

So it's imperative, for our own happiness & well being.. most especially if one is more wired towards monogamy ... that they settle down with another who is like them... we don't want someone getting bored with us, suddenly feeling they "missed out", that marriage is some restraint , a kill joy ...fighting against one's own nature... that's just sad ...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> Just how is a man going to know if he’s impotent BEFORE he gets married if he’s not supposed to be having sex or even MASTURBATING BEFORE he gets married?


During historical times it was considered a male's civic duty to visit the Roman brothels so that he could be well educated on all topics of sexuality. 

Thus the *ROMAN* Catholic Church would know very well which members of the congregation were impotent, since the clergymen also frequented the brothels. 










Meanwhile the Popes had exclusive mistresses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vannozza_dei_Cattanei
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giulia_Farnese


----------



## Mostlycontent (Apr 16, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I can't speak for all women, but both those qualities were important for me. I don't think I would have married a man who didn't fill both of those needs.


I think this is exactly right, Olivia. Most women, I'd wager, want steady and secure as well as hot and lustful. Men are no different. We want the good wife and great mother but also the vixen in bed too.

We don't usually get all that we want but some semblance of both if we're lucky.

In the biggest fights that my wife and I have had, and there have been a number of them over 30 years, she has either implied or outright said that she wondered if she made the best choice for a husband and instead chose me because of her wild attraction for me. You see, I'm not as nice or as considerate as I need to be, at least according to her.

I have worked on and continue to work on that throughout our marriage. What's interesting is that when she has made these statements, and it's only been a few times but I'm sure it was intended to cut as she was quite angry, it wasn't necessarily received that way by me.

What I heard was that she was incredibly attracted to me and lusted after me. Perhaps that even clouded her judgment as it relates to choosing a more suitable mate but I didn't take that as an insult. In fact, I found it comforting. I would much rather work on areas I can improve upon than to be many years into marriage either wondering or knowing that my wife wasn't all that attracted to me.

Every dog has fleas, as it were, but some you just can't fix or get rid of no matter what you do. Not having sexual attraction is one of those.

You know what's even more comforting, although maybe it shouldn't be, is that my wife dated a guy several years before she and I met that was probably more compatible with her than I am in a lot of ways, in fact they were very close friends, but she just wasn't very attracted to him sexually. After a year or year and a half with him, she walked away.

So you see, when she makes comments like that to me, I know it's just in anger as that's not what she really wants. Oh sure, she'd like me to be perfect but there's no such thing. I know that deep down that she'd prefer the guy who has some flaws that are tough to live with occasionally but with whom she is very sexually aroused than the other way around. I know this because she's already made that choice once before.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

2ntnuf said:


> I don't understand @tech-novelist. I wasn't trying to offend anyone. What did I say?
> 
> Edit: You know, sometimes we need to just admit that things like settling do go on. I'm not saying every woman or man settles. Let's not get lost in semantics. Fear of the unknown drives wedges between folks.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better if we all knew what real love and desire look like? Many men don't even know if their wife has had a real orgasm. I've read some threads here where a man is lacking in something in sex. He's a great husband, but isn't very satisfying or is not adventurous enough or is a candidate for male starfish. Go look at SIM. You'll see what I mean.


You didn't offend me, if that's what you thought. I was merely pointing out that a lot of wives don't want to admit their sexual history because a lot of husbands don't want to think that their wives were more attracted to former partners than they are to their husbands.

I hope that clarifies my comment.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Mostlycontent said:


> In the biggest fights that my wife and I have had, and there have been a number of them over 30 years, she has either implied or outright said that she wondered if she made the best choice for a husband and instead chose me because of her wild attraction for me. You see, I'm not as nice or as considerate as I need to be, at least according to her.
> 
> I have worked on and continue to work on that throughout our marriage. What's interesting is that when she has made these statements, and it's only been a few times but I'm sure it was intended to cut as she was quite angry, it wasn't necessarily received that way by me.


Nor should it have been. That is a much better position to be in than for her to think you are nice but not very attractive to her. Congratulations!


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

tech-novelist said:


> You didn't offend me, if that's what you thought. I was merely pointing out that a lot of wives don't want to admit their sexual history because a lot of husbands don't want to think that their wives were more attracted to former partners than they are to their husbands.
> 
> I hope that clarifies my comment.


Yeah thanks. I realize you meant the same as what I posted.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

For me personally I am only interested in my husband. I would have no interest at all in another man or in being in any sort of relationship that involved anyone else. It would put me off sex.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> During historical times it was considered a male's civic duty to visit the Roman brothels so that he could be well educated on all topics of sexuality.
> 
> Thus the *ROMAN* Catholic Church would know very well which members of the congregation were impotent, since the clergymen also frequented the brothels.
> 
> ...


Yet, the scriptures strictly prohibited FORNICATION and/or MASTURBATION. 

Interesting...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> But not enough shame to keep from doing those things with boyfriends they don't marry or with their posom AP...


Shame is what they would feel AFTER they did "those things"; not before. 

And as for the boyfriend they didn't marry, that boyfriend could have _talked_ about marrying these women SO MUCH that the women believed that they were going to marry each other 'someday'. Chances are, she loved him and believed he loved her, too.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> Shame is what they would feel AFTER they did "those things"; not before.
> 
> And as for the boyfriend they didn't marry, that boyfriend could have _talked_ about marrying these women SO MUCH that the women believed that they were going to marry each other 'someday'. Chances are, she loved him and believed he loved her, too.


I don't doubt that men and women love partners they end up not marrying. The difference between behaviors with those people and one's spouse is interesting, though.

The man in the middle, the husband, gets turned down for various sex encounters. She did them with people (more than one most likely) before marriage, and if she had an affair she almost certainly does those things with the AP. And when the AP is an ex-bf as is so common, where's the shame then?

But her fear of shame would be what stops her from doing it with her husband? 

I don't buy into the shame argument very much actually. The one person she should not feel any shame with is her husband, especially after many years together.

I think much more frequently it is fear of rejection when she is in a relationship with a potential future husband. She fears he won't want her if he knew the truth about what she did _and what she would still enjoy doing but not with him._ She puts him into the _husband_ category, not the _lover_ or _sex partner_ category.

Many times this seems to be the precursor to future affairs, because the woman feels sexually bored or unfulfilled. She hits 30, 40, 50 with a bunch of kids and obligations, and she misses the wild times she had when single. And in comes the long lost ex-bf or some new man who gets her all excited about sex again. She wouldn't dream of a bj in the car with her husband, but she'll do it with some guy she just met during her GNO. We see this all the time here on TAM and in real life with people we know.

Not all women are like this. But it is certainly a very common occurrence where the husband is not getting the same acts as bf's or ap's, and the wife is not willing to be open about her desires or fantasies with her husband.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Actually, it's the husband who presents the most risk for revealing and acting out fantasies. An affair partner or bf or hookup are short lived relationships, they can be ended at any time. If a woman husbands reacts poorly to revelation of fantasies, she has to live with her mistake day after day. She could also lose her marriage. Too risky, most women shut up. 

Men say they want to know but I've read of men wonder where the idea originated and begin to suspect their wives of being more adventurous in the past than they admitted. They then harangue their wives for information.

Most men marry women who they perceive as good girls. The assumption is that these women have not had a varied and adventurous sex life. Her husband can't ignore the fact that he spurned sexual women for a sexually repressed one. 

If he wants her to open up and tell him what she wants or is thinking, he needs to convince her that he has had a sudden change of heart and no longer holds sexual women in disregard. Otherwise, he has to live with his choice and not blame the innocent repressed woman he married.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Vega said:


> Yet, the scriptures strictly prohibited FORNICATION and/or MASTURBATION.
> 
> Interesting...


 One of the very many reasons why I would have nothing to do with the RC church. Having said that the Bible doesnt actually forbid masturbation, but it does forbid sex outside marriage.


----------



## Talker67 (Apr 7, 2016)

yes sex does get boring with the same person over many years. But so what? I think the people that happens too are either lazy, boring, or unimaginative types! There are just sooooo many things you can do to spice up your marriage today:

* Watch sexy things, like the starz series outlander, romantic movies, kinky movies, etc

* sit down as a couple on the computer, cruise on over to the ADAM AND EVE store, and pull out the credit card

* Ask about each other's kinky sex fantasies, and ROLE PLAY those fantasies out

* have sex in new locations, like hike to the top of a mountain, and do it on the top

* buy one of those "Cosmo" magazines that are running a "50 new ways to have sex" articles, and Start ticking off the list! one....check....two....check....three....

* dress better AT HOME. Get some sexy duds for both of you...something in-fashion that is risque, and wear them AT HOME when you are lounging around. this helps the whole "body image" thing many women seem to have.

and on and on. Only after you have pulled out all the stops on trying to re-ignite your sex life can you then start *****ing about it!


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Thor said:


> Not everything my wife did is something I want to repeat with her. Most certainly some of it is stuff I don't want her to repeat (groups, parties, public stuff, etc) even if I were involved!
> 
> Lots of mainstream stuff should be on the table but isn't for many husbands. Whether it be the oft mentioned bj, or just what I would call carefree fun where the woman shows interest and desire. Maybe it would have turned out this way even if the wife had married one of the badboy boyfriends or a wild AP. Maybe it would have become stale for the woman and turn into boring duty sex.


Funny you say this, as the one thing I know my wife did before me was sex in public. I don't recall how that subject came up, but it did, and it didn't bother me in the slightest (I've done that type of thing before, too, and it's not really that "crazy").

What bothered me, though, was the few times I brought up the possibility of us doing something like that, and her reaction of basically "hell no!"

I know people grow up, tastes change, and perhaps when they did things like that, their inhibitions were lowered, but all the same.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> I can't speak for all women, but both those qualities were important for me. I don't think I would have married a man who didn't fill both of those needs.


Depends on the person, I suppose.

My ex wife seemed to want both. Even though we figured out fairly soon that we weren't sexually compatible for a variety of reasons, she still had an interest in going outside the box, experimenting, etc. and she was clearly (at one point, anyway) attracted to ME. And she had some experience prior to me, as well, so this wasn't all "new" things she was checking off the list. In fact, she was fairly open about sex, and I was usually aware when something was new, or it was something she had done before but liked and wanted to do with me.

My ex wife was a lot of bad things, but when it came to sex, she never made me feel like I wasn't worthy of something she had done previously, with somebody else.

My current wife is quite the opposite. Now while we certainly don't have vanilla sex (it's honestly the best sex I've ever had, and she claims the same), there's a severe lack of adventurousness. In essence, she already knows what she likes and doesn't like, and the things she doesn't want to repeat, for whatever reason, no matter how relatively insignificant they are (like my example above of sex outdoors). I'm not talking actual sex acts - my current wife is far more freaky than my ex wife - it's more about scenarios, times, places, etc.

My ex wife, for example, would tell me to pull the car over on the side of the highway at night and park somewhere. If I suggested that to my current wife, she'd laugh, and tell me to wait til Saturday night at home, in bed. And it'd be a Tuesday.

And the thing is, my current wife, I know, had far more experience than my ex wife, and certainly was adventurous at one point. The one saving grace to this is that I know she was quite vanilla with her ex before me, so I'm not the first she's viewed in this way. But all the same. It's not really that uncommon with women when they find "the one". It's almost like some of them separate adventurous exciting sex from a deep, meaningful relationship, and the two can't be combined. We men don't do that.

And here's the thing - gender roles and attitudes have changed dramatically over the last few generations, and generally for the good. Women are far more likely to be sexually adventurous, go out and get it, try new things, etc. and generally not be ashamed of doing so. That's not a bad thing. That's what men have been doing for millennia. The problem is, many women still hit that roadblock when they meet the person they eventually marry, I think, and can't maintain the same level of sexuality they enjoyed when it, generally speaking, didn't mean anything. For some, it's impossible to compute high levels of sexuality and adventurousness with love and marriage. The two are mutually exclusive.

So in effect, you have many women who are no longer ashamed of being sexual beings (which is a good thing, obviously), yet something in the back of their minds tells them that, once they meet "the one", that part of their life is no longer acceptable. "What if my husband thinks I'm a wh0re?" or "He'll think less of me for being a sexual person." It's inadvertently sexist - towards ones own self, meanwhile, while they're enjoying their sexuality feeling like they're being an ace feminist (they are), all of a sudden things revert to gender stereotypes when they meet a man they want to spend their lives with. The sexuality and accompanying empowerment disappears.

And this is one area where it doesn't compute for me about my wife. She's a strong, independent women, raised by a strong, independent woman, along with her two male siblings. Her career is in a heavily (like 99%) male-dominated field, and she's been in it since she was 18 or 19. She's broken through more than one glass ceiling in her life, and she's anything but a stereotype. She knows how the game is played, and she wins at it. She's no housewife, no princess, and she's nobody's woman. Yet when it comes to sexuality, she plays that stereotype to a "T".

Luckily, a lot more women are starting to clue in to the fact that many/most/all of us men DO want a woman who is sexual and can own that - with us. Unfortunately, many don't, and think that we men want Snow White.

It's funny, because when my ex wife and I started dating, we were both open about our past sex lives, and it affected absolutely nothing, because neither of us had any shame, for one, but because it also established both of us as sexual beings in the others eyes. My current wife was (and still is) extremely hush-hush about things like that, which resonates some level of shame or embarrassment, or at least a lack of ownership for her sexual self. In other words, she didn't want me to think of her in a certain light. The irony is that has the opposite effect. I don't require complete openness with one's past life, nor do I want details, but ownership of ones self is a positive thing, isn't it? My ex wife handled that area beautifully, because she included me in her sexuality, past AND present. My current wife didn't, and does not. It's separate, and the two worlds shall never collide.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Minor detail, the ex wife cheated if I remember correctly .


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

alexm said:


> What bothered me, though, was the few times I brought up the possibility of us doing something like that, and her reaction of basically "hell no!"
> 
> I know people grow up, tastes change, and perhaps when they did things like that, their inhibitions were lowered, but all the same.


I have also had sex "in public" with my late husband. It wasn't something I really wanted to do at the time, but I went along with it so as not to cause a scene. I will never do that again. Why....?

Aside from it being illegal, I realized what kind of person he was. He loved the THRILL of taking that risk. He WANTED people to see him and to BE JEALOUS of him. It was all for BRAGGING RIGHTS because he wanted others to be ENVIOUS of him. It was all about HIM and his EGO. 

You guessed it. He was a FLAMING narcissist. 

When I hear or read about men who are "upset" that their wives won't do something sexual with them that they did with someone they didn't marry, the underlying theme is the always the same: Jealousy. Competition. Envy. Ego. 

I wonder if these men are TRULY upset or if it's just another manipulative tactic manufactured to instill enough guilt in their wives so their wives will 'give in' to their 'requests', despite knowing that their wives aren't interested in doing "that" again. 

It seems like if a...............

Oh wow. 

I just thought of something...

I just realized that this has _NOTHING_ to do with sex! 

Let's say you were married before or you had a LTR with someone. The two of you had your favorite restaurants that you would go to on those special occasions (Valentine's day, birthdays, anniversaries). You and your LTR split up. You date for a while and meet someone new. You are now in an LTR with HER. 

I can tell you that the _LAST_ thing your new Lady Friend wants to do is to frequent the SAME restaurant as you went to with "her". The woman doesn't want to compete with your memories or hear thing like, "When 'Mary' and I came here...". She wants NEW memories which would include a new place to eat. 

It's the same way with sex for her. She may have done some sexual things with someone else and doesn't want to try t or them with YOU because she doesn't want the memories. She wants to make NEW memories with YOU, and by you pressuring her, it's like you're trying to keep her hitched to the past.

She might feel the same way (avoiding) whether it's sex or eating at the same restaurant for the same holiday, or traveling to the same foreign country or going to "that little café around the corner".


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> You're definitely onto something here. ESPECIALLY if she felt coerced into the "freaky" things she did in the past, and has negative associations with them - associations that are neither loving nor safe. Why would she want to hitch those memories up to the man she loves?


Makes some sense. Unfortunately it is at odds with current general practices and supports "**** shaming", date one type of women but marry a virgin. Men aren't supposed to expect that these days and women shouldn't expect to have it both ways....

What does "the best sex of my life" mean? Is that an individual occurrence or over time for example? 

If I were to look back for an individual session that was exemplary I'd probably choose 1 where I allowed the gap to get to 5 months or so and waited for her to finally come back to it on her own. It was really good, I'd shoot myself in the head before I tried to recreate that one though .


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> You're definitely onto something here. ESPECIALLY if she felt coerced into the "freaky" things she did in the past, and has negative associations with them - associations that are neither loving nor safe. Why would she want to hitch those memories up to the man she loves?


TAM has had threads go 'round and 'round about this forever and no common ground between men and women has ever been found.

The men are (almost) never expecting their wives to do anything they actively dislike(d) but the women are always assuming that the men are trying to do exactly that.

.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> I wonder if these men are TRULY upset or if it's just another manipulative tactic manufactured to instill enough guilt in their wives so their wives will 'give in' to their 'requests', despite knowing that their wives aren't interested in doing "that" again.


They are TRULY upset.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Catherine602 said:


> Actually, it's the husband who presents the most risk for revealing and acting out fantasies. An affair partner or bf or hookup are short lived relationships, they can be ended at any time. If a woman husbands reacts poorly to revelation of fantasies, she has to live with her mistake day after day. She could also lose her marriage. Too risky, most women shut up.
> 
> Men say they want to know but I've read of men wonder where the idea originated and begin to suspect their wives of being more adventurous in the past than they admitted. They then harangue their wives for information.
> 
> ...


But what you're missing is what happens before the marriage and even before getting engaged. _Tha_t is when those conversations are happening and she is hiding her true self.

So here's what happens. Women want to have wild sex lives (or just not boring ones). They have fantasies. They are afraid their eventual husband won't want a woman who likes sex (this is false but it is the common message in the dominant media and propagated historically by religious sexual shaming). So what do women do? They go live out some of their fantasies and let their inhibitions down before they go find a nice stable hard working family type man to marry.

The woman sabotages her future in two ways. First she does exactly what she fears will be unwanted, having a healthy sex life. Then, she selects a husband for reasons other than a healthy sex life.

Now if women would be honest sexually with potential husbands, they would find men who they actually match up to. Instead they are sexually bored and afraid to discuss it _years later when it now becomes dangerous to mention their sexual interests_.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

OliviaG said:


> When I wrote that I was thinking about what Thor has written about his wife. It really bothers him that she had a wild and adventurous sexual past and has no desire to have wild and adventurous sex with him. But she did have a troubled past too. Maybe the troubled past and the wild and adventurous sex and inextricably combined in her mind, or at least in her emotions. Maybe she doesn't even realize this, she just knows she doesn't want to introduce those feelings into her marriage.


To some extent you are correct. The public group stuff at parties in high school were probably directly due to her trauma. And those kinds of things I don't want to recreate with her.

At the other end of the spectrum are what I would call normal but fun, exciting, and less frequent experiences. Sex in the car, on a blanket under the stars, or on a camping trip. The surprise bj, or jumping in the shower unexpectedly. These are all normal things which every couple happily engages in.

In my wife's case and in many others (here on TAM or known in real life), the wife has a number of previous partners where they did those normal things but then don't or won't with their husband. Or they do a bit of it before the wedding but then not after. In my wife's case her CSA seems to be the culprit. I understand this is not the typical situation for other husbands many times, too. But to know of all the normal things my wife happily did with other men but won't do (can't do) with me is really disheartening.

Towards the risque side of the spectrum but not dysfunctional may be things some would not be comfortable with but which are definitely fun for some. Anal is one that comes to mind, which I have zero interest in (and zero understanding of) but which some people enjoy. Now let's imagine a woman who's done anal with several of her previous boyfriends and enjoyed it. Or substitute something else, bj's or 69 or sex in the ocean after dark. If she enjoyed it and desired it, she should probably enjoy and desire it with her husband.

And this is where most husbands are on the issue. If she enjoyed and desired it with other men, it means something that she doesn't with her husband.

In some cases it may be a maturing process and/or she just doesn't like it any more. Risking arrest for public sex under the boardwalk in daylight may no longer seem like fun. And I think most husbands understand such changes.

As to the wild or adventurous things she did, another aspect to consider is the damage of finding out much later than I should have. This is very much like the affair which is discovered years later after it has long ended. Whether the acts in question were driven by trauma or were just normal fun, the time to find out is before the wedding and not years later. Perhaps this is an area of particular vulnerability for men, which women can't really grasp.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I don't understand the above. What are "current general practices", who is ****shaming? And in what ways are women expecting to "have it both ways"? I'm baffled.


Buddy and Thor explained it pretty well. Current general practice - we don't get married at 18 these days, waiting till marriage is generally not what happens. For me, I was never looking for anything before marriage I didn't expect to have after marriage. Women should not expect anything different either I think. I mean, leave out the occasional I tried X once or twice and decided it wasn't for me - that's perfectly fair. But this whole "he made me do it but I wouldn't do it with someone I really love" is troubling. Get your **** together girls. That is a comment for the average women with no history of trauma, I get that that is a whole other distressingly common can of worms. 



OliviaG said:


> I'm guessing that's because she had desire after that long, rather than just going through the motions. That's too long to wait; how did you manage that?


Yes, I agree. 

This was quite a few years ago. We were at "once a month if you are lucky" which really meant yes this month and maybe no next month. 

At one point I got totally disgusted with the situation and decided screw it, I'll just jerk off a lot. Threw myself into a hobby and ignored her for quite a while. I'd say it was at least 3 months, probably closer to 4 before she realized it was an issue. Then another few weeks before she sheepishly brought it up. 

That was pre-menopause, at least there was a pilot light . It is a constant battle, not an approach to take today as I suspect the boiler would go stone cold now a days...


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> When I wrote that I was thinking about what Thor has written about his wife. It really bothers him that she had a wild and adventurous sexual past and has no desire to have wild and adventurous sex with him. But she did have a troubled past too. Maybe the troubled past and the wild and adventurous sex and inextricably combined in her mind, or at least in her emotions. Maybe she doesn't even realize this, she just knows she doesn't want to introduce those feelings into her marriage.


If a "troubled past" means doing things that you didn't want to do and regret doing, that is usually understood to be a good reason.

If a "troubled past" means doing things that you liked then, don't regret and still won't do with your husband, I think that still is generally perceived to be a problem.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I understand when most of the guys are coming from and have been surprised an their absolute failure to get women to understand (if not approve). It seems to be a really big trigger for women.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Thor said:


> To some extent you are correct. The public group stuff at parties in high school were probably directly due to her trauma. And those kinds of things I don't want to recreate with her.
> 
> At the other end of the spectrum are what I would call normal but fun, exciting, and less frequent experiences. Sex in the car, on a blanket under the stars, or on a camping trip. The surprise bj, or jumping in the shower unexpectedly. These are all normal things which every couple happily engages in.
> 
> ...


The undercurrent of this entire problem is deception. 

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

For my wife, she is simply LD with no other qualifier. It's always been like this. Recently I tried to pick her brain on the subject and she said "you satisfy my every need" , sexually speaking.
Someone that has all their sexual needs met and desires nothing more or nothing different does not fall into the O.P's article.

I guess some people like vanilla ice cream and never want to taste anything else, providing the vanilla ice cream is not shoved in their face on a daily basis.
That is my wife.

Once I realized that my wife only wants vanilla twice per week, I adapted to that without pushing for more. I do throw in the odd cookies and cream and try to mix in some chocolate. If it's not too obvious, she's ok with it.

Vanilla can be tasty providing you don't eat it every day and make certain it is the best friggen vanilla on planet earth!


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

OliviaG said:


> When I wrote that I was thinking about what Thor has written about his wife. It really bothers him that she had a wild and adventurous sexual past and has no desire to have wild and adventurous sex with him.


I want to clarify on this a bit.

What I knew of her history prior to us getting married didn't bother me any more than is typical. I didn't love the idea she'd been with other men, just like other men feel about their wives.

In fact I was attracted to how she seemed comfortable with her sexuality. I grew up in a time and place where Catholic sexual shame ran pretty strong. Meeting her was refreshing.

I remember quite vividly thinking how I would never be one of those poor schmuck husbands who ended up in a sexless marriage with a repressed wife. Not with her! Because she liked sex. She liked it with me and she obviously liked it with the several ex-bfs she told me about.

What did bother me after the wedding when the sex really dried up was this _differential_ between her past ease with sex and this new dislike. Toss in some obvious still burning embers for one particular ex and it sure didn't add up nicely for me.

And that was where the sting came from, that she could be so freely sexual with others before me but not so with me. It wasn't her history by itself which is the love killer, but the difference between before me and with me.

I didn't know about her trauma until recent years, which is decades after we got married. And a lot of my knowledge of her sexual past has been discovered more recently, too. Along with comments from her indicating there is more she is hiding.

Deception is certainly one big component of my particular situation. All of that could have been avoided had she been forthright prior to the wedding about her true sexual history and her trauma history.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> Let me get this straight:
> 
> Your ex-wife was more open about her sexuality, was more adventurous with scenarios, times, places, etc. (not "freaky" sex acts). Yet she is your *EX-WIFE*.
> 
> ...


Yes, my ex wife cheated on me repeatedly. Which is why I came to TAM in the first place, when that marriage ended.

And the sex was bad. For both of us. I mean the actual physical sex. We weren't physically compatible. The reasons why have been mentioned in previous posts of mine, so I will not repeat them here. However, our drives matched quite well, as did our sense of adventure, and believe it or not, our desire for each other. Of course, after many years of her not being fully satisfied (much easier for a man to at least hit the minimal levels of sexual satisfaction) she went "exploring".

And yes, I'm having the best sex of my life with my wife now. I have no complaints about the SEX, only that it's 2-4 times a month, always on the same day, blah blah blah. It's still great sex. And no, she's not open about her sexuality, her past, her needs wants or desires. Doesn't mean the physical aspect isn't present.

In a nutshell, my ex wife and I were VERY mentally compatible when it came to sex, just not physical. My current wife, VERY physically compatible, and not mental.

So having experienced either side of this, I can honestly say that the mental aspect is more important to me. Go figure.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> I have also had sex "in public" with my late husband. It wasn't something I really wanted to do at the time, but I went along with it so as not to cause a scene. I will never do that again. Why....?
> 
> Aside from it being illegal, I realized what kind of person he was. He loved the THRILL of taking that risk. He WANTED people to see him and to BE JEALOUS of him. It was all for BRAGGING RIGHTS because he wanted others to be ENVIOUS of him. It was all about HIM and his EGO.
> 
> ...


<snip>

I understand where you're coming from, I do. But it's also the complete opposite of where I stand. Certainly, some of these scenarios are driven by narcissism. No doubt about that. Many are not.

I'm not upset my wife won't do something with me that she's done with others, simply because I feel *I* should benefit in some way, too. There's no competition for me. It's not even jealousy, I promise you.

In fact, the thing I brought up (sex in a public place), I didn't want to do it simply because she already had. Hell, I've done that, too. It's something that, on occasion, I've had an interest in doing - with my wife, in that moment, because I was in the mood. Not simply because it was a), b) or c). (Also, let me clarify - I have no interest in having sex in public because it's a thrill, or we could get caught. In fact, the handful of times I've done it, I've made sure it was in a place where we wouldn't get caught. So it's not some sort of thrill fetish. Just saying. It's simply because the mood has struck me, it's different, it's against the grain and it's not the norm.)

Anyway, as I said, I didn't proposition my wife to do this because she had done it before with others and not me. Not even remotely. That thought didn't cross my mind during those times.

The issue is that she had happened to mention she had done something like that before (and sadly, I even know exactly where, because it was rather novel and actually kind of amusing!)

So I get where you're coming from, in a way. However the way I (and others) look at it is like this. Wife: "I had the greatest banana sundae I've ever had at this little restaurant in New York years ago." Husband, several years later: "Honey, let's go out and get a banana sundae somewhere, I really feel like one!" Wife: "Nah, I'm not a fan of banana sundaes, nor will I be the next time you ask, either. It's just not something I'm into." Husband: "Huh??"

Things like this aren't always about competition, jealousy or the ego. Often it's about something just not making any sense, and the confusion that ensues around why one person would have good memories of doing something in which they don't even remotely want to share with anybody else, under the guise of "totally not interested in THAT. Who do you think I am?"


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> I submit to you that the mental aspect is only more important to you presently because you don't have it.
> 
> Were you to trade the physical for the mental then the physical would be more important.
> 
> ...


And I wholeheartedly disagree.

With my ex wife, the sex wasn't any better than "good", and even that was rare, and mostly at the beginning of our relationship. I had had good and great sex before her, however I had never been with someone who was mentally on the same level as I am, in terms of sex and sexuality.

Throughout the ~14 years spent with her, never did I once complain about the quality of our sex. It was what it was. Everything was fantastic, with the exception of the actual, physical act, again, for reasons I've mentioned on this forum before. I never cheated, nor even fantasized about having better sex.

Maybe I'm an anomaly among males (though I suspect there are many more just like me out there), in that the connection is more important than the physical. My ex wife and I would flirt, tease, talk about what we were going to do, etc. Like many "normal" couples do (and many do not). And even though the sex itself wasn't mind blowing, we were both there in the moment, enjoying each other and ourselves, as best as we could. And that was enough - for ME - for the entire time I was with her. Maybe I would have cracked eventually, I don't know, she beat me to it. She decided she needed to see if she could get her mind blown elsewhere, I suppose, so she did. Apparently the last guy must have, because she left me for him. Maybe she had the same physical sex with the others as she did with me, so it didn't solve that problem. The physical issues that prevented us from great sex were hers, and insurmountable by me, despite both of us trying over the years. I guess some people have a lower % of people they're physically compatible with than others. I don't know.

My current wife knows what the hell she is doing in bed, and it's exactly how we both like it. We're physically compatible, and know each other's bodies inside and out (no pun intended). We just work well together in that respect.

Outside of that space of time, once a week or so, there's not a sexual side to her. No flirting, teasing, talking, obvious desire or interest - nothing. Sex and sexuality does not exist until it's happening.

That, more than anything, is what I desire. So yes, I was more satisfied having the mental and not the physical than I am with the physical and not the mental. I suppose the ultimate goal is to have both, but that seems more rare than some of us think. Often, couples don't have either, so I consider myself lucky to have one.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I guess the only solution is every man and woman for themselves. The object of the game is to extract from (or deny) your spouse whatever seems reasonable to you (since it seems impossible to understand the other point of view).


Hah! Proves my point that men and women can not be reconciled on this. Even the wonderful OliviaG thinks it's all about men extracting things from their wives while ignoring their wishes.

Again, this has never been an issue for me, but if it happened, it probably would be.

For the purpose of this example, let's assume that most women like fancy dinners (I know this isn't the case, just replace "fancy dinners" with whatever it is you really want).

You meet a man who is wonderful in almost every way. However, he thinks that fancy dinners are a waste of money and let's you know that he won't be doing that with you (he has plenty of money, so it's not that he can't afford them). Fair enough, you've been warned. There are enough other fabulous things about him that you decide you can live without the fancy dinners.

Several years later, you're sitting around with some old friends of his and they start going on about how he was always taking his dates out to fancy dinners. And it wasn't even just special women or women who unreasonably insisted on fancy dinners. He'd take women he'd just met out to fancy dinners. Sometimes he enjoyed the dinners, other times he was indifferent; but he never hated them or found them unpleasant.

If I were that woman, it wouldn't be the fact that I missed out on the fancy dinners that bothered me. After all, I knowingly gave up any expectation of that. I'm not about extracting fancy dinners from men. I'm not that shallow.

What would bother me is wondering why he apparently cared about making those other women happy more than he cares about me. He freely gave to other women (whom he presumably liked less than me) something that he refused to do for me even though he knew how much happiness it brought me. Did he just settle on me because he figured he wouldn't have to put any effort into making me happy?

That's it. Nothing else.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> (Men) become erect for random reasons from seeing the perfect steak...


Interesting... never had a steak give me a boner.

I must not be eating at the right restaurants.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I submit to you that the mental aspect is only more important to you presently because you don't have it.
> 
> Were you to trade the physical for the mental then the physical would be more important.
> 
> ...


What we "have" now tends not to be what we "will have" in the future. It's the ole' boil the frog routine... That's why it's hard to accept it's an attraction issue or a resentment issue. In retrospect you can see the decline but in real time you don't, she has great excuses, etc. 

Then you reach indifference, his and hers, and that's all she wrote.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Catherine602 said:


> Actually, it's the husband who presents the most risk for revealing and acting out fantasies. An affair partner or bf or hookup are short lived relationships, they can be ended at any time. If a woman husbands reacts poorly to revelation of fantasies, she has to live with her mistake day after day. She could also lose her marriage. Too risky, most women shut up.


Agree.



Catherine602 said:


> Men say they want to know but I've read of men wonder where the idea originated and begin to suspect their wives of being more adventurous in the past than they admitted. They then harangue their wives for information.


And you think they wonder because...



Catherine602 said:


> *Most men marry women who they perceive as good girls.* The assumption is that these women have not had a varied and adventurous sex life. Her husband can't ignore the fact that he spurned sexual women for a sexually repressed one.


I was right with you until the bold. I don't think most men marry women they perceive as good girls. I didn't with either of my two wives. I can't imagine any sane adult male thinking anything other than she has probably had at least some sexual experience. 

Spurned sexual women? Not sure what you mean by that. 

Do you mean like when I was sitting in a bar about twenty years ago and some woman comes in all drunk and horny with cutoff jean shorts on and a revealing top, messed up hair and the smell of stale perfume and alcohol on her breath? She hit on me like crazy. 

Her boyfriend came in and told me to do her. She needed it. She was horny from going through menopause and her husband...yeah, her husband wasn't into her for some reason. Husband knew of her escapades, supposedly, at least as they pertained to this boyfriend. 

He told me she wanted me and I should go and have a good time with her. She was sane and wouldn't tell. 

She was very sexual. Do you think I spurned her? Why or why not?

Do you think I thought she was marriage material? Why or why not? 

This is a true story. It happened in the '90s when I was going out a lot and between marriages. 



Catherine602 said:


> If he wants her to open up and tell him what she wants or is thinking, he needs to convince her that he has had a sudden change of heart and no longer holds sexual women in disregard. Otherwise, he has to live with the choice he made and not blame his repressed woman he married.


In my mind, there are two types of sexual women. Those who are sexual within monogamous relationships and those who are sexual in promiscuous relationships. 

There are also women who are not sexual, for various reasons. 

Maybe what you are saying is it's not possible for a woman to be sexual and monogamous? 

If that last sentence of mine is true, that would be the fantasy men buy into. 

Edit: I think for many men, a monogamous sexual woman is the goal. If that's not possible, who is spreading that false stereotype? Men? ee.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> What we "have" now tends not to be what we "will have" in the future. It's the ole' boil the frog routine... That's why it's hard to accept it's an attraction issue or a resentment issue. In retrospect you can see the decline but in real time you don't, she has great excuses, etc.
> 
> Then you reach indifference, his and hers, and that's all she wrote.


I'm interested in the indifference part.

Indifference is often assumed to be an end point but it's really neutral.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I haven't read the rest of your comment because your opening lines stopped me in my tracks:
> 
> You actually proved MY point...! Which was that many people involved in this discussion seem to be very single-minded about this and unable to understand what the other side is trying to say.
> 
> ...


I'm a big fan of yours, it was meant lightly as in "even this wonderful person who I admire thinks....."

not that that necessarily helps dig me out of the hole:smile2:


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm interested in the indifference part.
> 
> Indifference is often assumed to be an end point but it's really neutral.


You've got that indifference thing *down*!

In your situation, that's probably the optimal outcome.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Hah! Proves my point that men and women can not be reconciled on this. Even the wonderful OliviaG thinks it's all about men extracting things from their wives while ignoring their wishes.
> 
> Again, this has never been an issue for me, but if it happened, it probably would be.
> 
> ...


I think I'm starting to understand why chicks fail to appreciate these types of analogies.

the most overwhelming detail to them in these scenarios is WHO is the other person and HOW DO I FEEL ABOUT HIM.

I believe to them it is inconceivable that you could consider an act in isolation apart from the identity of the person with whom that act is shared and, more importantly, how she particularly FEELS about that particular person at that particular moment.

This difference in perspective essentially means that there is no possibility, in a woman's mind, of objectively evaluating this type of situation.

There is ONLY a subjective perspective.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Thor said:


> Deception is certainly one big component of my particular situation. All of that could have been avoided had she been forthright prior to the wedding about her true sexual history and her trauma history.


Do you mind me asking, prior to marriage, how was sex with her? I guess I am wondering, do you feel that (depending on how things were prior to marriage) she acted a certain way with you sexually prior to marriage in part to seal the deal (i.e. marriage)?

That does in part seem to be an issue from speaking to others where maybe the female was LD or had some sort of past trauma but knew she had to "sell the goods" to get her goal (i.e. marriage). Once accomplished, she can then revert back to her true self (LD or other) and the guy feels like he was conned.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> Either that or you're eating steak too often.


This is me thinking about a good steak right now lol ... gotta get these kids to bed!!!


----------



## Lurkster (Feb 8, 2016)

EllisRedding said:


> This is me thinking about a good steak right now lol ... gotta get these kids to bed!!!



A steak......or a 'tube steak'??

:laugh:

Now I'm thinking about eating a taco later tonight......

:wink2:


----------



## Lurkster (Feb 8, 2016)

OliviaG said:


> You guys are killing me...lololol....



If you're lucky, you'll be eaten alive!

:laugh:


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

EllisRedding said:


> Do you mind me asking, prior to marriage, how was sex with her? I guess I am wondering, do you feel that (depending on how things were prior to marriage) she acted a certain way with you sexually prior to marriage in part to seal the deal (i.e. marriage)?
> 
> That does in part seem to be an issue from speaking to others where maybe the female was LD or had some sort of past trauma but knew she had to "sell the goods" to get her goal (i.e. marriage). Once accomplished, she can then revert back to her true self (LD or other) and the guy feels like he was conned.


The brief answer is that things started hot and cooled a little bit over the 3 years from when we met until we got married. She was the one who jumped in bed with me, before I ever expected it. She was pretty uninhibited. A few months prior to the wedding things suddenly cooled off, which I attributed to all the stress of the wedding. There were a lot of family issues on both sides.

Then after the wedding it never picked back up.

This was textbook behavior for a sex abuse victim. She was promiscuous (her words) as a teen. The wedding flips a switch in many CSA victims where they then have great difficulty with sex with their husband. He's now become one of the dangerous group, adult male relatives. Chances are an abuser was either a relative or was trusted by relatives. Boyfriends, though, are not dangerous. CSA victims learn they are valued for sexuality, and they can be quite sexual when single. It gets them attention, approval, and status.

For many like me it can feel like bait/switch but it really isn't. She had no idea what was going on and doesn't understand why things are difficult in the marriage.

Being a CSA victim is a very high risk factor for infidelity, too. It is an entirely messed up situation for all involved.

Gotta run now. Off on a 10 day solo walkabout getaway. Probably won't have much internet until I get back but I'll check in when I can.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> I have to wonder then, @alexm: why didn't you look for that mental side of things in your next relationship? Why did you settle for a relationship that was missing something so important to you?


You know, usually I'm not a big fan of people digging up somebody's old threads on here, but in this case, it'd actually be beneficial!

It started out like that. Just like many (many) other dudes here, our wives were different in the beginning. Some feel they got the bait and switch, some feel they lost their mojo, some feel their wives changed.

Isn't that kind of what THIS thread is about, sort of, a little bit?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

alexm said:


> < It's simply because the mood has struck me, it's different, it's against the grain and it's not the norm.)


It's also against the law. Despite your idea that the place you had in mind you "couldn't get caught" doesn't matter. There's always that slight chance that you could get caught and it IS against the law! 



> So I get where you're coming from, in a way. However the way I (and others) look at it is like this. Wife: "I had the greatest banana sundae I've ever had at this little restaurant in New York years ago." Husband, several years later: "Honey, let's go out and get a banana sundae somewhere, I really feel like one!" Wife: "Nah, I'm not a fan of banana sundaes, nor will I be the next time you ask, either. It's just not something I'm into." Husband: "Huh??"


Once again, comparing a banana sundae to having sex outside is comparing apples and oranges (apples and bananas?!). One is against the law, while the other obviously isn't. 

Your wife may have had fun doing it back then and had fun taking that chance. But people _*DO*_ grow up. She may feel that there's more at risk now, and she just doesn't want to take that chance anymore. She may see the activity as a little too immature for her. 

Teenagers will have sex in a car because there's no where else to have sex. Sometimes they're caught; sometimes they're not. But as they grow up they get jobs, apartments and beds, they no longer HAVE to have sex in the back of a car anymore, IF they want sex. 

Even though they may have liked it back then, as young adults, they can now have sex in the safety and comfort of their own apartment without any risk at all.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> @Buddy400 I tried, but the dinner analogy doesn't work for me. I'd just think he associated fancy dinners with the hollowness and superficiality of all those other women and not with what he had with me. I don't think it's the right analogy. I'm trying to think of one that would be better, but having a hard time so far.


Okay then - apples to apples: oral sex. I know not all women like oral sex performed on them, but it seems to be a fairly common complaint about husbands and boyfriends, amiright?

So if you are one of those women that really enjoy oral sex, and are unlucky enough to be married to a man who simply doesn't do it, yet you KNOW he did it with other people before you, then there you go.

Really, you can substitute oral sex for any basic, normal preference you may have in bed. If it's something you like or want, and he won't do it for you, and you know he used to do it with/for others, how would that make you feel?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> It's also against the law. Despite your idea that the place you had in mind you "couldn't get caught" doesn't matter. There's always that slight chance that you could get caught and it IS against the law!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I don't know what to tell you, then! I don't believe it's illegal to have sex in a tent while camping, for one. I'm not talking about a park bench or a public bathroom or anything like that. In fact, let's not focus on the whole "sex outside the house" thing, it's turning into the focus of what I said 3 pages back, and not at all the point 

And I don't want to beat a dead horse, but while it's technically illegal (no arguments there), I think it's more along the lines of jaywalking or littering. Depending on where you live, exactly, you're more likely to simply be asked to stop and move along, rather than arrested and booked (unless it's REALLY in public, and obviously for the sole purpose of being risky). Anyway, that's not at all the kind of sex I was talking about and wasn't my point!


----------



## Lurkster (Feb 8, 2016)

Say what??!!

Sex outdoors is NOT against the law. If it was, my wife & I would be sent away for 300 years, just for things we do in the yard, not to mention out in the four-wheeler and camping. (we are very rural, closest neighbor is over a mile away, so you know) 

Sex in public is against the law, at least in most places. Hard to say of late. 

:grin2:


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> So, you see there's another benefit (that I'd never thought of) to keeping your sexual history to yourself, besides it being nobody else's business. Nothing good can come of discussing past sexual relationships with a current partner. IMO.


I agree in part. But do our current partners' have a right to know whether or not we ever contracted an STD/STI and how long ago? Do they have the right to know if we ever had an abortion (if female) or if he ever impregnated a woman outside of marriage and how it ended (does he have a child somewhere or did she abort?)

When it comes to sex with previous partners, how much privacy are we entitled to?


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Not if cured, maybe if it screwed up your head,no unless a birth resulted. 

If you want to disclose feel free, not required though.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Of course you owe it to a partner to disclose anything that might harm his or her health or about any children you have.
> 
> I'm talking about discussing previous sex acts, previous partners likes and dislikes, number of partners, details about our sex lives that should be nobody else's business. I wouldn't want to be with a partner that told about a previous partner because I'd know if we broke up he'd then be talking about me! No, I don't discuss that stuff. I won't.


I absolutely agree with all of this. Seems that remaining silent on the issue would prevent a lot of turmoil such as retroactive jealousy and double-standards, etc. from rearing their ugly heads. 

Of course, we're always going to have those few immature people who would try to threaten, coerce and intimate their partner into 'talking'. 

Too bad that "little blue pill" doesn't cure immaturity!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Of course you owe it to a partner to disclose anything that might harm his or her health or about any children you have.
> 
> I'm talking about discussing previous sex acts, previous partners likes and dislikes, number of partners, details about our sex lives that should be nobody else's business. I wouldn't want to be with a partner that told about a previous partner because I'd know if we broke up he'd then be talking about me! No, I don't discuss that stuff. I won't.


Agreed, no good comes from talking about sex with previous partners.

However, there have been a few instances on TAM where the husband found out from others.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Men have a tendency to get fixated on a particular sexual act to the extent that a razor sharp attention is focused on how to get this one thing from a disinterested partner. The rationalization is that the woman should make a sacrifice to fulfill her husbands needs to show her love. This is not fun, adventure, hot, spontaneous sex. 

For about 2 yrs, my husband came up with several scenarios for outdoor sex where he guaranteed we would not be shot or arrested. I listened to his plans but none sounded foolproof so I told him I was not comfortable. After the last request, I said no absolutely. I asked him to look at this from my shoes. If we are caught, he will not be humiliated but I will. 

There may be a remote chance of that happening but I cannot get it out of my mind so it would be no fun for me in fact, I would be anxious the whole time. I asked if he still felt that it would be a hot adventure for both of us? It was a bad argument.

We talked reasonably about this a few times. I am just coming out of my fantasy shell and sharing some with him but this worried me. I wondered if we try something that I don't like, can I say no even if he likes it? Will he be able to move on? 

My husband and I made an agreement that it's a hell yes when we are both having fun and hell no if one or both says no. We talked about how to handle things if he gets fixated (he is prone to it but I am not). It is probably a testosterone thing. We agreed do a work around when it happens. The outdoor sex thing - we are going camping with BIL and SIL this summer. 

Fun and adventures are great if there is also freedom and safety. If two people are embarking on exploration, the needs, likes and dislikes of each person are equal otherwise it is exploration for one person with the other along as a needed accessory.


----------



## Mostlycontent (Apr 16, 2014)

Thor said:


> But what you're missing is what happens before the marriage and even before getting engaged. _Tha_t is when those conversations are happening and she is hiding her true self.
> 
> So here's what happens. Women want to have wild sex lives (or just not boring ones). They have fantasies. They are afraid their eventual husband won't want a woman who likes sex (this is false but it is the common message in the dominant media and propagated historically by religious sexual shaming). So what do women do? They go live out some of their fantasies and let their inhibitions down before they go find a nice stable hard working family type man to marry.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with any of this but don't we men, many of us anyway, do exactly the same thing?

Whether it be family pressure or social pressure, don't we also look high and low for the "good girl" after having our fun casually with the "not marriage material" types? I know I did. 

Now how you define a "good girl" or "hard working, family type man" can vary from person to person, I suppose, but the fact seems to me that both genders do this to one degree or another.

Then lo and behold, they find themselves sexually incompatible or married to a LD spouse when they themselves may have preferred something much, much different.

I think your final point is also very accurate but I believe the women, and men as well, need to first be honest with themselves. If you enjoyed sex and were somewhat adventurous and wish to continue that, it is incumbent on you, meaning the man or woman with those preferences, to either communicate that during the dating process or make certain you choose someone similarly to yourself.

All concealing your past does is lead to disappointment in the future. Not always, certainly, but plenty of times.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Mostlycontent said:


> I don't disagree with any of this but don't we men, many of us anyway, do exactly the same thing?


I must be really odd. I did not do this. I didn't go out and get me some from almost whomever when I was single and horny. I don't do it now, either. I guess most of you will say that's because I'm LD. I see it as self-respect and believing sex is something to be cherished, not something to do with whomever is willing and within some wide range of potential partners. 

This is even when I am super attracted to a woman. Believe me, there have been a few that I really felt an attraction to, but pursuing them would be either inappropriate, or just plain wasting my time and effort on someone who would not be interested. 



Mostlycontent said:


> Whether it be family pressure or social pressure, don't we also look high and low for the "good girl" after having our fun casually with the "not marriage material" types? I know I did.


Again, I must be really odd. I never did this. I just didn't want a woman who was promiscuous or one who was a cold fish. I had chances I turned down because I wanted to be special to someone, not just a quick piece and a release. What does it say about me, if I treat myself like a vibrator for a woman, or her like a fleshlight? 



Mostlycontent said:


> Now how you define a "good girl" or "hard working, family type man" can vary from person to person, I suppose, but the fact seems to me that both genders do this to one degree or another.


Sorry, I don't. Sometimes, I wish I could have, but I just can't get myself over the edge. I just can't get the gross out of my head unless I am super duper attracted to her, in which case, even the outdoor sex at my age would likely not be a factor, because I would be completely focused on her and have tunnel vision. That's not so good, but I would also be very aggressive toward anyone disturbing us. How do I know? Been there in my younger years.



Mostlycontent said:


> Then lo and behold, they find themselves sexually incompatible or married to a LD spouse when they themselves may have preferred something much, much different.


What I did was to attempt to do the things that would make me happy in the long term. There's no way I could know what would make her happy in the long-term. Believe me, those things did not include outdoor sex, nor anal, nor bd/sm, nor pegging, nor threesomes, nor swapping, nor open relationships, nor anything over the top.

All that other stuff, could be explored, if desired, after we trusted each other very well, but only if we talked about it and both agreed to try. 



Mostlycontent said:


> I think your final point is also very accurate but I believe the women, and men as well, need to first be honest with themselves. If you enjoyed sex and were somewhat adventurous and wish to continue that, it is incumbent on you, meaning the man or woman with those preferences, to either communicate that during the dating process or make certain you choose someone similarly to yourself.
> 
> All concealing your past does is lead to disappointment in the future. Not always, certainly, but plenty of times.


Yeah, it all starts with open and honest communication, which leads me back to the idea about talking about past partners. I didn't really want to know what went on with past partners and who they were. That stuff turns me off. I did want to know what she liked or wanted to try that was not within the normal repertoire of things we did. 

Of course, that is not really possible because of shaming and the threat of losing her man from disgust and the realization that she probably didn't come up with those things she did herself, since she won't share those thoughts with you. So, it's very likely some man attempted something and she either went along with it or refused his advances. 

I understand that concept in light of the fears involved.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Mostlycontent said:


> I don't disagree with any of this but don't we men, many of us anyway, do exactly the same thing?
> 
> Whether it be family pressure or social pressure, don't we also look high and low for the "good girl" after having our fun casually with the "not marriage material" types? I know I did.


Nope, this wasn't me. I had no desire to run around sowing my seed until I was ready to find "the one". I know quite a few guys who are the same way as well, and I think in part this goes along with the stereotype that all guys are just out there for sex. Not saying that there aren't guys out there who do this (I do know some who did go this route) but at least in my experience I don't believe it is as prevalent as it may seem.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> There was a thread not too long ago where we were "discussing" (not arguing about..lol..) what you should disclose about your sex life with previous partners. Most everyone was against me there, when I stated that I don't disclose anything about my sex life with a previous partner. Nothing at all. Neither will my husband.
> 
> So, he knows nothing about my sexual history other than that I was not a virgin when we met. And I know the same about him. If he was doing wild and crazy things with others that he won't do with me, I am unaware of it so nothing for me to be jealous about, and vice versa.
> 
> So, you see there's another benefit (that I'd never thought of) to keeping your sexual history to yourself, besides it being nobody else's business. Nothing good can come of discussing past sexual relationships with a current partner. IMO.


I don't think oral sex is wild and crazy!

As far as sexual history goes, I'm with you. Not a fan. But, you know, things tend to come out over the course of time.

But if one's husband never performed oral sex on them, and this was something they really wanted or liked, surely there'd be a discussion at some point about this? And the question of whether it was something he had done previously would come up?

As in: "How come you never go down on me?" "I've never done it before." or "It's not something I enjoy." So you'd end up knowing whether it's something he's done or not.

(And then obviously: "If you've never done it before, how do you know you won't like it?" or "Maybe you'd enjoy it with me!")

People's basic sexual pasts come through, almost always. It's nearly impossible to maintain a blank slate, IMO. I'm not talking details or weird stuff or purposefully divulging info.

For example, I figured out early on that my wife likes doggystyle and does not like woman on top. Right from the first time we had sex, she'd turn around at some point, and still does, just about every time. Yet she never got on top of me on her own. I asked her about that once, and she said it's murder on her hips. So it wasn't difficult to figure out she's experienced with both positions and knows what she likes and doesn't like.

That's what I'm talking about - you figure things out as you go along, and you quickly learn what one likes and doesn't like or simply won't do - because they've done it before with somebody else. And occasionally these things come up verbally or anecdotally.

I had a post/reply in some thread a while back about something along those lines. My wife, early in our relationship, expressly told me to never slap or spank her butt during sex - she didn't like that. My first reaction was laughter, as that's not something I would have done. My second was "wait a minute... what?" And I left it. A long while later, we were sitting with a mutual female friend, and she says to my wife something along the lines of "remember that guy who was into spanking you?". So clearly it was a "thing", and there was the reason for her telling me to never do that! I never really addressed it with her, but I did kind of tell her that I could do without the mental pictures things like that create.

So it was accidental, and totally not her fault (or anybody's fault), yet it came out. And things like that have the inadvertent effect of creating mental pictures for many people. It bothered me only in that she felt she needed to get out in front of it, rather than keep it to her self unless I, one day, tried to slap her butt during sex. What it says to me is that, in the moment she told me never to do that, she had a flashback of sorts and assumed I might just wind up and spank her butt or something. Honestly, that weirds me out that she'd even have thought that in that particular moment. That indicates a particularly bad (or even traumatic) past experience for her, which she thought about right then and there.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I really think that if you're struggling with jealousy over what you know your partner did in the past with others, no matter how you found out about it, it's incumbent on you to realize that (a) this info is info that you should never have been told in the first place and (b) since it's none of your business, and you can't know the emotions and feelings of your partner at the time s/he was doing those things, you really need to get control over your thoughts about it. It's an adult responsibility you have to put those thoughts in their place. Squash them, knowing that they are not fair to her, not good for you and not good for the marriage.


I honestly don't see the benefit of going into detail about your sexual past with your SO. I do know there are people who are open about it and both parties are fine with disclosing, but it seems like in most cases all it will do it cause jealousy or be used as a form of manipulation / showboating. 



OliviaG said:


> That's something totally different from bait and switch though, where s/he presented herself as someone different *to you* before marriage to the person she is right after marriage.


Whether it is the guy or girl doing the bait and switch, that really is f'd up they would do that and somehow expect they would still have a healthy relationship/marriage.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

alexm said:


> I don't think oral sex is wild and crazy!
> 
> As far as sexual history goes, I'm with you. Not a fan. But, you know, things tend to come out over the course of time.
> 
> ...


I think the question/issue though would be the amount of detail. In your oral sex example, one response could be "Well, I have given oral sex before and I found it is just not something I like or enjoy doing." That response I would think would garner a different response then "I used to love giving oral sex, playing with a dudes balls, and even an occasional ass eating, but those days are behind me.". So I think there is s till a way to provide some details about your history in a more tactful way lol.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> I agree in part. But do our current partners' have a right to know whether or not we ever contracted an STD/STI and how long ago? Do they have the right to know if we ever had an abortion (if female) or if he ever impregnated a woman outside of marriage and how it ended (does he have a child somewhere or did she abort?)
> 
> When it comes to sex with previous partners, how much privacy are we entitled to?


I think the only one of those topics that would be imperative to disclose is if one has a child somewhere, even if they don't have any contact with them. More often than not, contact will be made at some point down the road, and that's not the type of thing one wants to be a surprise.

Abortions, STD's - no (provided the STD is gone, of course). Abortion is nobody's business but your own, IMO.

One is entitled to however much privacy THEY decide to give. It's their life, and unless it's something that has a high likelihood of biting you in the ass down the road, then it's really nobody's business.

Furthermore, IMO, if it's something that many people know, yet your spouse is in the dark about, then that's not all that okay. In other words, if you have to make an effort to keep something a secret ("Please don't ever tell my husband/wife about this...") then you're walking a fine line.

There's a huge difference between privacy and secrets. Like most people, I'm not a fan of secrets in marriage. Trying to keep a secret often leads to having to lie, and sometimes colluding with other people in order to keep said secret.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> Too bad that "little blue pill" doesn't cure immaturity!


Why are we assuming it's only men who want to know about past histories?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

EllisRedding said:


> I think the question/issue though would be the amount of detail. In your oral sex example, one response could be "Well, I have given oral sex before and I found it is just not something I like or enjoy doing." That response I would think would garner a different response then "I used to love giving oral sex, playing with a dudes balls, and even an occasional ass eating, but those days are behind me.". So I think there is s till a way to provide some details about your history in a more tactful way lol.


Fully agree.

I'm just saying that when those instances pop up, the other persons mind will often wander without further detail. Tact is paramount, for sure. Some people just don't have it, though!

Certainly people's tastes will change, or they'll do things they "don't mind" doing for others, yet grow and mature and realize they really don't want to do those things for anybody, any more.

But in your example above, I think this thread is more about those who happily and willingly do a) b) or c) with other partners, but for whatever reason decide not to do that with you. Or even worse, they do those things with you for x-amount of time, then suddenly decide "nope, not happening".

Obviously, oral sex, BJ's are usually at the top of this list for us men.

My wife used to give me an occasional one when the relationship was new. Definitely not a regular thing, and few and far between, but all the same - it did happen once in a while. I never complained about the frequency (or lack of), I was genuinely just happy it happened every now and again, honestly. Then they just stopped altogether, for no apparent reason.

Of course I asked at some point, probably a good year after the last one, and her response was that she "hates" doing that. So obviously I asked why she did in the first place, at all? "Because you like getting them and it was for you." "So why stop?" "Because I don't like doing it." And around and around in a circle.

But obviously at some point, her desire to do something like that for me was now out-weighed by her dislike of it. I don't want her to do anything she "hates", obviously, but it's also hard to reconcile that she was once willing to do something for me (especially when she didn't like doing it), and now it's no longer worth it, in her mind.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

alexm said:


> But obviously at some point, her desire to do something like that for me was now out-weighed by her dislike of it. I don't want her to do anything she "hates", obviously, but it's also hard to reconcile that she was once willing to do something for me (especially when she didn't like doing it), and now it's no longer worth it, in her mind.


That is a shame, and if I was in that position, just like you, I would have a very difficult time reconciling it as well. Really, in my mind the question becomes "So it is not worth it to put in the effort with me anymore?", which starts to feel more like a bait and switch.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> For about 2 yrs, my husband came up with several scenarios for outdoor sex where he guaranteed we would not be shot or arrested. I listened to his plans but none sounded foolproof so I told him I was not comfortable. After the last request, I said no absolutely. I asked him to look at this from my shoes. If we are caught, he will not be humiliated but I will.
> 
> There may be a remote chance of that happening but I cannot get it out of my mind so it would be no fun for me in fact, I would be anxious the whole time.


My exwife and prior gf both enjoyed public sex immensely. They seemed to "get off" precisely on the notion that they "might get caught". That's what made it so hot and exciting to them. I suspect your husband is the same. 

I personally am like you. I have no interesting in being discovered and therefore humiliated having someone catch me with my pants down. It does nothing for me what so ever and frankly makes the sex far less enjoyable due to the anxiety.

In hindsight, it's probably what made cheating so exciting to my POSXW too. Welp, she got caught and she didn't look too thrilled when I divorce her haha.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Mostlycontent said:


> "...I believe the women, and men as well, need to first be honest with themselves. .


Not all men and women are aware that they're NOT being honest with themselves. 

Both may be honest at the time, but like I've said before, THINGS CHANGE. A woman may start out being fairly HD, but once you throw a few kids into the mix, a job to keep, kids to raise and a house to clean, she may lose her libido somewhere. Add a husband who has ALSO changed (stopped wooing her, starts insulting her and showing contempt for her) and her libido would become a memory quickly.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Yes, that is a tough thing to hear. Its possible that she had decided that she hates them more over time, but its all too easy to decide that she cares less about you than she did before.

Maybe that is one of the big problems with discussing a sexual past: the worry that your partner no longer does some things because of YOU, not because of them 




alexm said:


> snip
> My wife used to give me an occasional one when the relationship was new. Definitely not a regular thing, and few and far between, but all the same - it did happen once in a while. I never complained about the frequency (or lack of), I was genuinely just happy it happened every now and again, honestly. Then they just stopped altogether, for no apparent reason.
> 
> Of course I asked at some point, probably a good year after the last one, and her response was that she "hates" doing that. So obviously I asked why she did in the first place, at all? "Because you like getting them and it was for you." "So why stop?" "Because I don't like doing it." And around and around in a circle.
> ...


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Catherine602 said:


> Men have a tendency to get fixated on a particular sexual act to the extent that a razor sharp attention is focused on how to get this one thing from a disinterested partner. The rationalization is that the woman should make a sacrifice to fulfill her husbands needs to show her love. This is not fun, adventure, hot, spontaneous sex.


 I have never experienced this from my husband...... speaking about this thread.. I spoke how some get bored with the same person sexually.. his response was... *"It's not sex, it's Love"*...



Talker67 said:


> *yes sex does get boring with the same person over many years. But so what? I think the people that happens too are either lazy, boring, or unimaginative types!** There are just sooooo many things you can do to spice up your marriage today:*
> 
> * Watch sexy things, like the starz series outlander, romantic movies, kinky movies, etc
> 
> ...


I really Liked this post...







...







...the emphasis on the "Spicing" part.. trying new things.. enthusiasm for our partners..it's important.. get creative...Show desire...

I specifically wanted to comment on the "boring" part.... I've been with the same man for 34 yrs .... he was completely inexperienced when we met...I can't say I've ever felt sex was boring.. I may not have craved it as much as him (initially) in our past... but once he got me going... he'd better not stop !!!! He always got me dripping.. if I can say... There was nothing more exhilarating than getting lost in each other like that...

How can sharing an orgasm with someone you love ever get boring...really? 

Upon coming here...after a time I realized the vast majority have explored far more than my husband & I.. in comparison we were very "vanilla"... I remember this one thread...this couple tried every position, various places, anal, box full of sex toys, role play, they've done it all !!...and there he was asking..."What else is there?.. been there, done that..is this all there is?.. He was bored...

In trying to find some way to speak to that... 

It HIT ME... what he was missing was the emotional connection with his wife (some other threads surely hinted to this as well)...other problems just sucked the "oommph", the craving for each other, this is vital in sustaining us ...introducing Novelty & spice is a LOT OF FUN.. don't get me wrong.. but it takes more...

Here we were, never cared to try toys, didn't even think of them...role play.. what's that!....we were a missionary/ cowgirl couple with nothing brighter than a dim light for 19 years... we had to be the most boring couple alive in the bedroom...yet we were both satisfied ..every memory was breath-taking exhilarating, I was pretty quiet in the bedroom back then... but there were times I'd be so hot.. I'd say out loud "







how can anything feel this damn good!! ".. it couldn't be contained.. ya know.. then we'd collapse in each others arms and bask in the "after glow"...(I didn't even know there was a word for that until I found a thread here speaking about it... this too adds to the experience, it's bonding you together.. 

Looking back, all that makes sense is.... The "*Emotional Connection*" was flowing so high with each other - we felt fulfilled & satisfied. So in this way, never underestimate the "emotional".... the simple sensual, the 2







's connecting"... that "making love" is meant to be.*

It's the highlight of our day... We've often said if we could do it again & again ....we'd never get out of bed...

I've done some posts on Spicing things up.. was living to do just that ...when my drive was higher over his... I wanted to BRING HIM THERE with me.. adding some novelty.. it's all gooooood ...it kept the sparks flying..... but ultimately... I believe Loving on each other, basking in each other, like my husband said.. is the secret to long term satisfying sex.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> That is a shame, and if I was in that position, just like you, I would have a very difficult time reconciling it as well. Really, in my mind the question becomes "*So it is not worth it to put in the effort with me anymore*".


So, any women understand this?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

EllisRedding said:


> That is a shame, and if I was in that position, just like you, I would have a very difficult time reconciling it as well. Really, in my mind the question becomes "So it is not worth it to put in the effort with me anymore?", which starts to feel more like a bait and switch.


To be fair, she picked up in other areas that were slacking. As said before, people change. It's just unfortunate when it's something one really, really likes!

Also, to be fair, this doesn't happen on it's OWN any more. During sex, absolutely. It's part of foreplay, or it's an interlude, or sometimes it's the big finish. It's the "on it's own" part that she decided she hates, or isn't worth it for her any more.


----------



## last worthless evening (Feb 11, 2014)

My wife doesn't have fantasies. Not ever. I know that because she told me so, lol. May be that whole Catholic school thing...

Also, not just about sex, but just general expressions of affection, holding hands, hugging, kissing.....and not talking about PDA, God forbid.

Lots of responses to consider, appreciate all of everyone's thoughtfulness. More to come....


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, that is a tough thing to hear. Its possible that she had decided that she hates them more over time, but its all too easy to decide that she cares less about you than she did before.
> 
> Maybe that is one of the big problems with discussing a sexual past: the worry that your partner no longer does some things because of YOU, not because of them


EXACTLY!!!!!


Quote:



> Originally Posted by EllisRedding View Post
> 
> That is a shame, and if I was in that position, just like you, I would have a very difficult time reconciling it as well. Really, in my mind the question becomes "So it is not worth it to put in the effort with me anymore".
> [/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega: You have just summed up why I no longer have sex with my wife. It frees me to refuse to ever go window shopping with her.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Vega said:


> Some of you may have gone window shopping with your wives, only to realize that you're not really THAT into it. It has nothing to do with your wife and everything to do with window shopping. How would you feel if you wife kept badgering you to do something you no longer find appealing? How would you feel if your wife kept telling you that she felt that you "don't love her anymore" because you won't make the 'sacrifice' to go window shopping with her?
> 
> Would you feel just slightly manipulated?


If it were THAT important to her and I loved her deeply, I'd just suck it up and do it to make her happy.

I don't think doing something once a week I hate is that big a deal. Sh!t I spend 40 hours a week at my job and I hate that.

That's just me I suppose. From reading TAM, this is some sort of crazy concept.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

BetrayedDad said:


> If it were THAT important to her and I loved her deeply, I'd just suck it up and do it to make her happy.
> 
> I don't think doing something once a week I hate is that big a deal. Sh!t I spend 40 hours a week at my job and I hate that.
> 
> That's just me I suppose. From reading TAM, this is some sort of crazy concept.


Try doing that 'something' once a week...EVERY week...for DECADES. 

Also, unless your wife is clueless, she's eventually going to pick up on your 'vibe', that you may not REALLY want to be there. 

I know if I realized that my h. REALLY didn't like doing something that *I* liked, I wouldn't want to drag him along.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Vega said:


> Try doing that 'something' once a week...EVERY week...for DECADES.


Every week I take out the trash. It stinks, it's gross and it's dirty. I take the 10 mins once and week, suck it up and do it without complaining cause it needs to get done.

Life's full of sh!tty choirs.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

BetrayedDad said:


> Every week I take out the trash. It stinks, it's gross and it's dirty. I take the 10 mins once and week, suck it up and do it without complaining cause it needs to get done.
> 
> Life's full of sh!tty choirs.


Soooo.....giving my husband a bj or a hj can be seen as a "chore"???? 

No thanks!

Besides, you're not taking out the trash FOR your wife. You would have to take out the trash even if you weren't married.

Ironic how you have related blow jobs and hand jobs to "garbage".:surprise::rofl:


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> Some of you may have gone window shopping with your wives, only to realize that you're not really THAT into it. It has nothing to do with your wife and everything to do with window shopping. How would you feel if you wife kept badgering you to do something you no longer find appealing? How would you feel if your wife kept telling you that she felt that you "don't love her anymore" because you won't make the 'sacrifice' to go window shopping with her?
> 
> Would you feel just slightly manipulated?


Fill in any activity I do not HATE and I'm happy to do it with my wife if she wants me there. Not a problem at all. "Not really that into it" actually describes a hell of a lot of activities a guy wouldn't do other than the fact that it is with his partner. 

Now, there are two activities - one sporting and one sort of travel related which we did extensively while dating, quite important to me. Got married, those stopped, not tapered off, never happened again. THAT made me feel manipulated, window shopping - not so much.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Vega said:


> Soooo.....giving my husband a bj or a hj can be seen as a "chore"????
> 
> No thanks!
> 
> ...


Well obviously YOU see it as a chore since 10 mins of your time once a week is such a HORRIFIC notion. I'd never consider making a spouse happy a chore.

My whole philosophy is this. If you didn't suck his d!ck prior to the marriage and he still married you then that's his problem. He has no right to change you.

But if you sucked his d!ck all the time, then all of a sudden after getting married you decide, "No thanks! Don't feel like it anymore." That's bvllsh!t.

It means you baited him and you deserve to get dumped if he's man enough to do it. Most guys sadly are brainwashed to believe that bad sex isn't worth divorcing over.

No different if he was an avid window shopper prior to marriage, then all of a sudden you get married and he's like, "Fvck that, I'm going golfing with my crew. Peace!" You'd be upset.

And no I'm not comparing blowjobs to garbage but if he can move some trash to a curb, you can move a little d!ck around in your mouth. And he'd probably just appreciate the effort.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

anonmd said:


> Now, there are two activities - one sporting and one sort of travel related which we did extensively while dating, quite important to me. Got married, those stopped, not tapered off, never happened again. THAT made me feel manipulated, window shopping - not so much.


Did you TALK to her about this? 

Also, some people tend to believe that once married, you have to become more "serious" about life. She may have seen the two activities you mentioned as "fun". But once married, the "fun" gets put on the back burner in favor of obligations, duties and responsibilities. 

Sex may have been fun and spontaneous before marriage, but it was also _voluntary_. It wasn't expected, so it was easier to 'give'. But once married, she may have wrestled with a whole different _psychology_ of marriage. I know that some people do this. 

A man may see that his future wife is cooking for him out of love; because she WANTS to. But once married, his idea about WHY she's doing it may change. He may see her as cooking for him because she HAS to, and she HAS to because she's his WIFE. No longer is she cooking for him out of 'love'; now it's out of a sense of DUTY. She's not doing it because she WANTS to do it; it's because she HAS to do it. 

And likewise with women when it comes to BJ's. 

I'm telling ya, the whole idea of marriage and what one believes about it can really mess with someone's head...and the marriage itself!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

BetrayedDad said:


> Well obviously YOU see it as a chore since 10 mins of your time once a week is such a HORRIFIC notion. I'd never consider making a spouse happy a chore.


Whoa....slow down there, cowboy. I was simply responding to what YOU wrote. 

As for me *personally*, I never saw giving bj's or hj's as a "chore".

And my late husband was pretty well endowed...
And it took LONGER than 10 minutes... 
And it was MORE often than once a week...
And it was ALWAYS to completion...

I really, really, REALLY wish heterosexual men could experience "giving" a blow job at least ONCE in their lives, just so they could see WHY their wives may have an aversion to it after a while. *sigh*


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> I really, really, REALLY wish heterosexual men could experience "giving" a blow job at least ONCE in their lives, just so they could see WHY their wives may have an aversion to it after a while. *sigh*


Based on the above, I'm having a hard time believing that you didn't consider it a chore.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Based on the above, I'm having a hard time believing that you didn't consider it a chore.


*I* didn't see it as a chore. But like others here, I can absolutely understand how some people WOULD see it as a chore. 

It was actually my late husband who saw it as *my obligation* of marriage....

...which turned me off to _*it*_...

...and _*HIM*_.

ETA: Personally, I enjoyed doing it, as long as it was _voluntary_. But the moment anyone tells me that I'm *OBLIGATED* to do it, or it's my "JOB" or my "DUTY" or my "RESPONSIBILITY" is the _LAST_ time I'll do it!


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Vega said:


> I really, really, REALLY wish heterosexual men could experience "giving" a blow job at least ONCE in their lives, just so they could see WHY their wives may have an aversion to it after a while. *sigh*


Oral on some women ain't no picnic either


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

BetrayedDad said:


> Oral on some women ain't no picnic either


Sure. I get that. 

But if you're tongue gets tired after 5 minutes, think of how my jaw feels after _*20*_ minutes. Plus as a man, you don't have to deal with the gag reflex!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> pI don't want her to do anything she "hates", obviously, but it's also hard to reconcile that she was once willing to do something for me (especially when she didn't like doing it), and now it's no longer worth it, in her mind.


Think of it this way: If you've (one) never done something, you might be curious and willing to try.

And because it is so new, you are willing to try a few different ways. If it doesn't feel great, well, maybe it was your technique. Maybe you were doing it wrong. Maybe if you tried x, y, z, it might work better.

But suppose you don't actually enjoy it all. It's uncomfortable, sometimes a bit painful and no reward for you. The *only* pleasure is that you give your partner.

So, you say to yourself, I will do this because my partner seems to enjoy it. So you keep doing it. For no pleasure.

Years pass, you keep doing something that is becoming less and less pleasurable, and you say to yourself, "Why?" "what about *my* pleasure? "What about *my* needs?

We all have the right to assert our own needs and pleasures, and really the rest is about what *both* are willing to compromise. Otherwise resentment will build.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> Did you TALK to her about this?
> 
> 
> I'm telling ya, the whole idea of marriage and what one believes about it can really mess with someone's head...and the marriage itself!


Sure, "no thanks"

I really think she, and possibly women in general (??) Have some frikken master plan in their heads, now they're married and off they go on building their family unit. They only reason not to get preggo on the honeymoon is the initial trial period to make sure the guy is not a serial killer:smile2:


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

@SimplyAmorous I feel you are right, it's probably relief of boredom for some men rather than a fixation. That seems reasonable in situations where there is little variety. But in a situations where a partner is willing to try most things, boredom can't be the issue, can it? 

Several posters on this thread asked why their wives were unwilling to reveal fantasies or try new things. Some of the resistance may be fear that their husband not taking no for an answer if they try something and don't like it. 

One thing to try is to discuss this upfront and agree that mutual enjoyment is the goal and never vary from that agreement. The wife will feel that she can anticipate pleasure because she decides what happens to her. She may slowly peak her heard out and try.

This is why I mentioned my experience with my husband. We resolved it successfully, I think, only because of what I learned on TAM about detailed communication. Instead of shutting down and assuming that he was trying to coerce me, I assumed that I did not make it clear exactly what troubled me. 

The aspect that bothered me was fear of discovery not enjoying the great outdoors. Surveillance cameras are everywhere, I imagined a video of us in perpetuity on You Tube. Our compromises mitigated the discovery issue to my level of comfort and my husband is excited.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

anonmd said:


> Sure, "no thanks"
> 
> I really think she, and possibly women in general (??) Have some frikken master plan in their heads, now they're married and off they go on building their family unit. They only reason not to get preggo on the honeymoon is the initial trial period to make sure the guy is not a serial killer:smile2:


LOL! Hey, I hear ya! I'm sure that a lot of men have a similar "master plan" in their own heads. They'll woo and wine and dine the woman until marriage, buying her flowers, leaving her little love notes all with the belief that once married he can STOP because now his wife "owes" him all the sex he wants for all of his 'hard work'.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Okay, I came up with an analogy that I think works: foot rubs/massage. I LOVE them. I've let H know many times that I wish he'd give me one. He has never done it for me. I don't know why (I have nice feet!)
> 
> I just let it go. Obviously, he doesn't want to do it.


Just curious Olivia but, did you ever ask him WHY he hasn't done this?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I don't think I ever did. I just said I'd love him to do it on several occasions and he didn't react at the time or afterwards. I let it go without asking why.


Awww. It would be interesting to know WHY just to compare his reasoning for _not_ doing something you would obviously enjoy to some of the reasons given here on this thread. 

I know that if I asked my late husband to do something for me and he balked, his reasoning was bizarre. He thought that if he "gave an inch" I would "want a mile". Wasn't the truth, and DEFINITELY projection on his part.

But I wonder how many WOMEN feel that way...


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> LOL! Hey, I hear ya! I'm sure that a lot of men have a similar "master plan" in their own heads. They'll woo and wine and dine the woman until marriage, buying her flowers, leaving her little love notes all with the belief that once married he can STOP because now his wife "owes" him all the sex he wants for all of his 'hard work'.


Hey, I'll give you the second half at least. I WAS under the delusion that frequency would get better I suppose it did, for about a week LOL. Actually, for the first 6 months we were long distance due to a job change, relocation etc. So with me driving 5 or 6 hours up and back every week or two it all seemed normal until we were finally under the same roof.

I think we are arguing over who became disallusioned first>


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> Some of you may have gone window shopping with your wives, only to realize that you're not really THAT into it. It has nothing to do with your wife and everything to do with window shopping. How would you feel if you wife kept badgering you to do something you no longer find appealing? How would you feel if your wife kept telling you that she felt that you "don't love her anymore" because you won't make the 'sacrifice' to go window shopping with her?
> 
> Would you feel just slightly manipulated?


Wow. No.

My ex wife loved to shop, and loved to shop with me in tow. I used to wonder just WHY she wanted me there, as I felt I contributed nothing to this.

Then I realized she wanted ME there with her, doing something SHE enjoyed.

I inwardly grumbled when she asked me to go shopping with her, but on the outside, I put on my happy face and said "sure!" It made her happy and valued that I wanted to spend time with her. And yes, she knew full well I would be bored silly the entire time.

But guess what? Good things usually came from it...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Think of it this way: If you've (one) never done something, you might be curious and willing to try.
> 
> And because it is so new, you are willing to try a few different ways. If it doesn't feel great, well, maybe it was your technique. Maybe you were doing it wrong. Maybe if you tried x, y, z, it might work better.
> 
> ...


That's all well and good (and logical) when there's never much of anything in return. Like Vega's example of her late husbands thinking that BJ's were an obligation.

Many of us non-Neanderthal men recognize that things like that aren't an obligation for our wives, nor is anything we do for them an obligation.

Married life is full of compromises. Probably mainly compromises, actually. You do this, I do that. That's your area of expertise, this is mine. These things we can share. etc etc etc. Part of those compromises comes in pleasing one's partner. Not just sexually, but emotionally and mentally. This entails doing things one would often not necessarily want to do, as it derives no pleasure for themselves, yet most definitely does for their partner. However when one makes the effort to please their partner, their partner will make the effort to please them.

Even in the tightest of marriages, one spouse will require things that the other is not fond of doing. But in good marriages, each spouse endeavours to do the things that makes the other happy.

Not just because it makes their spouse happy (although that's a big part of it) but also because it exponentially increases the odds of them making YOU happy.

And really, at the end of the day, that's kind of the secret to a happy and fulfilling marriage.

As others have said, life is full of things we don't want to do, yet we do them, even if some of them aren't completely necessary. When you stop and think about it, huge portions of our lives are spent doing mundane things, things we dislike or hate, things that we'd much rather not ever do. But that's life.

I'm uncertain as to why there are different views when it comes to marriage. Marriage isn't some kind of paradise where the person we're with caters to our every needs, while we sit back and relax and enjoy ourselves. The closest one can get to that is by, quite literally, taking care of our spouse in the ways they desire, and in return, they will do the same. So at least everybody's getting what they need, but it also requires some work in return.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Vega said:


> Sure. I get that.
> 
> But if you're tongue gets tired after 5 minutes, think of how my jaw feels after _*20*_ minutes. Plus as a man, you don't have to deal with the gag reflex!


There is very little appreciation of how difficult it is to get good at giving. If there was, I believe far more women would continue giving. 

You have to do several things right at the same time for 10 to 15 mins. For a reward, you get a viscous, warm, bleachy tasting wad squirt into your mouth. Your lips are numb, your jaw aches and your neck is stiff. 

Men who feel entitled, don't feel a need to be appreciative of their partner or to think about how difficult it is. There would be less problems if reciprocal oral sex was practiced, her first then him. Also, some respect for the technical aspects of giving a good bj would be nice. 

Another disincentive is the pressure to swallow. After all of the work that it takes, being rewarded with a dissatisfied man is the opposite of positive reinforcement. I didn't swallow at first and my husband was not pissy about it. He'd clean my face or wherever very lovingly. 

I got some advice from one of the ladies on TAM and now i do most of the time. I kept trying because he was loving and supportive not angry and frustrated.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> That's all well and good (and logical) when there's never much of anything in return. Like Vega's example of her late husbands thinking that BJ's were an obligation.
> 
> Many of us non-Neanderthal men recognize that things like that aren't an obligation for our wives, nor is anything we do for them an obligation.


And yet, here you are doing your best to turn it into one --an obligation that is.

Compromise is a two-way street. And by that I don't mean trading shopping for sex. Just because my SO won't meet my every sexual whim doesn't mean that he hasn't made efforts in other areas that are also "chores".


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> There is very little appreciation of how difficult it is to get good at giving. If there was, I believe far more woman would continue giving.
> 
> You have to do several things right at the same time for 10 to 15 mins. For a reward, you get a viscous, warm, bleachy tasting wad squirt into your mouth. Your lips are numb, your jaw aches and your neck is stiff.
> 
> ...


This is a really good post and I think men ought to learn from it.

I have never been just a taker in bed but the way you put this taught me something.

I am very grateful to the women of TAM. My wife appreciates the results!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> There is very little appreciation of how difficult it is to get good at giving. If there was, I believe far more woman would continue giving.
> 
> You have to do several things right at the same time for 10 to 15 mins. For a reward, you get a viscous, warm, bleachy tasting wad squirt into your mouth. Your lips are numb, your jaw aches and your neck is stiff.
> 
> ...


If only...:crying:

I'll tell ya. I'm a service-oriented person, both in my home life and in the world-at-large. But unfortunately, too many men took advantage of my nature and I was treated like a doormat instead of appreciated for what I brought to "the table". 

I'm really surprised that I don't believe that ALL men are self-serving entitled slobs and even MORE surprised that I'm getting ready to go back out into the dating world to try ONE MORE TIME. 

Somebody stop me!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> This is a really good post and I think men ought to learn from it.
> 
> I have never been just a taker in bed but the way you put this taught me something.
> 
> ...


Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...

If your wife gave your a bj or hj to completion, did you ever look into her eyes lovingly and say, "Thank you"?

I don't mean in some flippant way like, "Thanks!" I mean a sincere heart-felt, slow, deliberate "Thank you. I really appreciate what you did for me, and I love you all the more for it."


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

OliviaG said:


> Okay, I came up with an analogy that I think works: foot rubs/massage. I LOVE them. I've let H know many times that I wish he'd give me one. He has never done it for me. I don't know why (I have nice feet!)
> 
> I just let it go. Obviously, he doesn't want to do it.


And then you find out he used to give foot rubs/massages to numerous previous girlfriends. In fact he was known to be really good at it.

But for you, nah he has no interest.

Kinda makes you wonder what it is about you or the marriage now doesn't it? It isn't about him any more, because he has a history of not only doing it but enjoying it. If you didn't know that about him, you'd be able to say what you do, which is he just isn't into it. But now with this additional information you have to say he just isn't into it _with you_. For some reason, to him _you're just not worth the same effort or interest as other woman_.

But, you csn look at his behavior and see he values you for all kinds of things. He values you for doing the laundry and giving birth to his kids. He values you for paying the mortgage and cooking nice meals. 

He'll give you a brief neck rub a few times each year, and really that's pretty clsoe to being a foot massage. So it's nothing personal that he won't do the foot massage. He just isn't into doing foot rubs with you.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> And then you find out he used to give foot rubs/massages to numerous previous girlfriends. In fact he was known to be really good at it.
> 
> But for you, nah he has no interest.
> 
> ...


Maybe he got tired of giving foot rubs after realizing that he wasn't getting a whole lot out of it, or they weren't appreciated or after a while they were EXPECTED of him...or they expected MORE from him than just foot rubs.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> Maybe he got tired of giving foot rubs after realizing that he wasn't getting a whole lot out of it, or they weren't appreciated or after a while they were EXPECTED of him...or they expected MORE from him than just foot rubs.


But he's never given you a foot rub, or maybe just once half heartedly. He hasn't given you the chance to show you don't appreciate them. You haven't come to expect them of him, and you didn't then start expecting even more from him.

He made some comment early in your relationship with him that he didn't like doing them or he can't do them well. Or the one foot rub he gave you he was obviuosly not interested in doing it.

Armed with just that much info, you'd come to the conclusion he just never was into foot rubs. For some reason it isn't his thing. And by itself that would be ok with you. Or perhaps, unfortunately, he finds foot rubs unpleaasant, maybe hurting his hands. You don't want him to do anything he dislikes.

But only after that you realize the real truth is he used to do foot rubs for those several previous girl friends before you. Now it is different, isn't it? You didn't take him for granted, you didn't treat him poorly in a way which taught him that giving you foot rubs was unpleasant.

So now you realize your relationship is the only one he doesn't do foot rubs in. Maybe you even find out he gave a few casual foot rubs to girls he barely knew. And the real kick in the face, he has an affair and gives the OW all kinds of foot rubs.

You're the only one. You're the outlier. Your relationship is the only one in which he never had an interest in giving foot rubs. Maybe your feet stink. Maybe he just doesn't care about your needs. Maybe he got arthritis and finds it painful now. The thing is, you're the only one he doesn't do it with. There has to be a reason, right?

And it probably would bother you that he brushed off the idea of foot rubs from the beginning, and lied when saying he never did them or that he didn't like them., when in reality he did enjoy them regularly with many other women.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Thor said:


> But only after that you realize the real truth is he used to do foot rubs for those several previous girl friends before you. Now it is different, isn't it? You didn't take him for granted, you didn't treat him poorly in a way which taught him that giving you foot rubs was unpleasant.
> 
> So now you realize your relationship is the only one he doesn't do foot rubs in. Maybe you even find out he gave a few casual foot rubs to girls he barely knew. And the real kick in the face, he has an affair and gives the OW all kinds of foot rubs.
> 
> ...



All of this sounds to me like a whole lot of self-torture at the expense of the spouse.

All sorts of unfair and hypothetical comparisons, speculations about motives and guessing at activities and meaning.

Why would anyone do this to themselves and their partner? What's to gain?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Vega said:


> Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...
> 
> If your wife gave your a bj or hj to completion, did you ever look into her eyes lovingly and say, "Thank you"?
> 
> I don't mean in some flippant way like, "Thanks!" I mean a sincere heart-felt, slow, deliberate "Thank you. I really appreciate what you did for me, and I love you all the more for it."


Ok. She has only done a bj or hj during foreplay. She has been getting progressively better at it though.

I talk to her before, during and after to let her know how much I truly love and appreciate her.

When a woman feels loved and safe she really has room to show her sexual strength!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> Armed with just that much info, you'd come to the conclusion he just never was into foot rubs.
> 
> But only after that you realize the real truth is he used to do foot rubs for those several previous girl friends before you. Now it is different, isn't it?
> 
> There has to be a reason, right?


First of all, I'm CERTAIN that my late husband did things with other women that he didn't do with me. For instance, he once told me that he got oral sex from a woman while they were in a DJ booth. 

Am I supposed to feel 'bad' that he didn't do that with ME? 

Hardly. 

Hypothetical story: I once went skinny dipping in the ocean at midnight with my boyfriend while at the Jersey Shore. I was all of 20 years old. Did I have fun? Hell, yeah! Would I do it again? Hell NO!! Why not?

Because I learned more about _life_ since then. I'm much more aware of the world-at-large than I am of my own little world. Back then I was more naïve and I didn't even _think_ about the possible dangers involved, such as sharks, jellyfish, stingrays and riptides. And no, you wouldn't be able to convince me that "those things won't happen". 

I also had sex without a condom in the 1970's. And yes, I had fun. But by the time the mid-80s came around, there was NO WAY that I would have unprotected sex with someone new, even though I did before. 

Before you decide that she's being 'selfish', maybe you should ask yourself WHY it's so important to YOU that you "catch up" with some other man who's not even in her life anymore. 

I mean, if she even told you her reasons for not wanting to do these things with you, would you even accept her reasons...?

Or would you try to punch holes through them by playing the tired and manipulative, "You would if you loved me" card?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> I talk to her before, during and after to let her know how much I truly love and appreciate her.
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Good for you!  



> When a woman feels loved and safe she really has room to show her sexual strength!


Boy oh boy, you said a mouthful here! 

There are so many ways in which a woman can feel safe or UN safe! She'll feel safe IF she can trust you and the only way she can trust you is _if you're trust worthy. _

If we have sex, is what we do going to be between US, or are you going to brag to your friends/co-workers about our sex life? 

If we have sex and we have an ugly break up, are you going to be a gentleman and keep your mouth closed about our sex life, or are you going to spread it around just to 'get even' with me?

If we have sex are you going to protect me by using a condom or are you going to be self-serving and try to convince me NOT to use one because it feels 'better' for you? 

She also sees if she can trust you in OTHER AREAS of life, which will eventually find its way to the bedroom:

Is he going with me to my parents house THIS time, or is he going to come up with ANOTHER excuse for him NOT to go?

Did he actually LOOK for a job today while I was at work, or did he spend the day having cybersex with total strangers?

Maybe one reason why she doesn't tell you WHY she doesn't want to do these things with you is because she doesn't trust you with her reasons. Maybe she doesn't trust that you can HANDLE the truth....?

*When I write 'you' Conan, I wasn't directing my post at YOU in particular. The 'you' is plural.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> Good for you!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I understand how these are trust issues important to receiving openness and honesty.



Vega said:


> If we have sex are you going to protect me by using a condom or are you going to be self-serving and try to convince me NOT to use one because it feels 'better' for you?


Not sure I understand how this is a trust issue. Isn't this something decided between the two beforehand? I guess some men say they will wear one and then the woman doesn't check to see if he is putting one on before he puts it in? Since it's so important, why wouldn't a woman check? Too hot and bothered to think about it or it would set her mood back and it takes too long to get back in the mood? 



Vega said:


> She also sees if she can trust you in OTHER AREAS of life, which will eventually find its way to the bedroom:
> 
> Is he going with me to my parents house THIS time, or is he going to come up with ANOTHER excuse for him NOT to go?


Not sure I get why this is a trust issue and not just common courtesy to accompany you. 



Vega said:


> Did he actually LOOK for a job today while I was at work, or did he spend the day having cybersex with total strangers?


I get why this is a trust issue. He told you he would do it on a particular day. 



Vega said:


> Maybe one reason why she doesn't tell you WHY she doesn't want to do these things with you is because she doesn't trust you with her reasons. Maybe she doesn't trust that you can HANDLE the truth....?


I can see how a woman might not trust a man enough to give him a bj, if he has forced her to do something sexual. I guess I must compartmentalize. 

I suppose a woman is so vulnerable and wrapped up in her emotions and enjoying the pleasurable feelings of sexual interaction, she lets her mind go and just follows along letting the man do as he will and doing what he asks without much thought of safety. So, she has to trust him because she will not be able to think about consequences or safety for herself? 

I imagine there is also the factor of him being the larger and possibly stronger individual and the fear of being overpowered and hurt? 

I'm truly not trying to be an a$$ there. These are honest questions. Maybe they show my inexperience or naivety, but I'd rather ask. 



Vega said:


> *When I write 'you' Conan, I wasn't directing my post at YOU in particular. The 'you' is plural.


I keep thinking compatibility is very important. I think it's very important to have had similar sexual experience because it seems it would be easier for a man to shrug off any fantasies or realities about the woman, she exposes to him or he is made aware of by others. 

Someone with little experience would not have a clue how to handle this stuff, not being exposed to enough of it to have accepted it in his own life. It seems that he would have no or little ability to process his feelings. 

I think a woman who has a great amount of experience would have an inexperienced man asking how high when she asks him to jump. I think it places a huge amount of burden on the woman, so as not to use him and then lose respect for him.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> And yet, here you are doing your best to turn it into one --an obligation that is.
> 
> Compromise is a two-way street. And by that I don't mean trading shopping for sex. Just because my SO won't meet my every sexual whim doesn't mean that he hasn't made efforts in other areas that are also "chores".


I absolutely am not.

I am saying that more people would be happier and marriages would be stronger if we didn't take so many things off the table over time.

Like anything in life, if you put in some effort, you will (or should...) get a healthy return. If you put in overtime at work, you get compensated. If you invest wisely, you will make money. If you work hard in school, you increase your chances of a better job and future.

There's a great saying that more people should live by: "You get what you give". That's true in life, true in relationships, true in marriages. And if for some reason it doesn't work out that way, then you move on to the next job, or the next person.

The only obligation one has is to themselves. If you don't want to put in the effort, you're not likely to see much return.

And if one views these as obligations towards somebody else, that's their prerogative. I see them as obligations towards ones own self. It's always a choice, of course, but in the long run, they affect you and your life, as well.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Catherine602 said:


> There is very little appreciation of how difficult it is to get good at giving. If there was, I believe far more woman would continue giving.
> 
> You have to do several things right at the same time for 10 to 15 mins. For a reward, you get a viscous, warm, bleachy tasting wad squirt into your mouth. Your lips are numb, your jaw aches and your neck is stiff.
> 
> ...


This is an excellent post, and yes, more men would be wise to not take this sort of thing for granted.

I'd like to think that many of us don't, or at least not as many as you would think. I'm only one guy, but I can tell you I've never thought a BJ was "easy" to give. People have different levels of empathy, for starters and for whatever reason, I've always been at the top of that spectrum.

And this isn't some sort of competition, but I'm not certain all women quite see the effort (or physical exertion) we men put in during sex. More often than not, it's we guys who are doing the bulk of the "work" (no complaints, though! Usually...). Missionary position is essentially push-ups. If it's woman on top, every single woman I've been with either can't do it for long, or simply doesn't like it (sore hips seems to be a common complaint).

But it's usually us who are doing the thrusting, making sure we hit the right spot(s), don't go too deep, maintain the pace you want us to, increase or decrease speed, and try to time everything "just right". Finish too soon, and it sucks for you. Take too long and it sucks for you. For the few of us who have nagging injuries, or maybe aren't in great shape, or are just getting older, we have to contend with all of that.

And jaw pain? Hey, we get that too! Not to mention sore tongues and a stiff neck. Hand cramps? Check!

None of this is meant to minimize what you guys potentially go through to please us, but it goes both ways


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> Okay, I came up with an analogy that I think works: foot rubs/massage. I LOVE them. I've let H know many times that I wish he'd give me one. He has never done it for me. I don't know why (I have nice feet!)
> 
> I just let it go. Obviously, he doesn't want to do it.


See, this is bizarre to me. My wife loves to get head massages, she basically melts when I do them. Sure, my hand gets tired or it gets awkward at times contorting my hand when she is lying on my chest, but I know it is something she loves which makes it worth it for me to do. Why wouldn't you do something for the one you love that you know they enjoy? The only reason I would cut back TBH would be if she wasn't reciprocating.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> See, this is bizarre to me. My wife loves to get head massages, she basically melts when I do them. Sure, my hand gets tired or it gets awkward at times contorting my hand when she is lying on my chest, but I know it is something she loves which makes it worth it for me to do. Why wouldn't you do something for the one you love that you know they enjoy? The only reason I would cut back TBH would be if she wasn't reciprocating.


Does she expect you to do them? Have you ever DENIED her? How often do you do them? Do you do them without her asking?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> Does she expect you to do them? Have you ever DENIED her? How often do you do them? Do you do them without her asking?


She does not expect me to do them. I do them on my own doing, she doesn't ask. Since she doesn't specifically ask for I have never denied her. I probably do I would guess 2-3 times a week (we get very little alone time, most days lucky for 15-30 minutes).


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Sadly there really is no way to experience / understand what any sort of sex is like to the other gender. 

That said, is it the physical action of doing a BJ that you fine unpleasant, or the the psychological issues. Would doing the same actions on a dildo be as unpleasant?

I can easily imagine that doing it for a long time would be unpleasant. For some men though, using hands first, then finishing with a BJ might be just as good, and a lot less physical effort. 

OTOH, if it is sort of the psychological issues, then that doesn't help at all. 

BTW - I'm using "psychological" for lack of a better word.  I don't in any way mean to imply that it is something wrong, but rather I men sort of how it makes you feel mentially / emotionally as opposed to physically. 





Vega said:


> Whoa....slow down there, cowboy. I was simply responding to what YOU wrote.
> 
> As for me *personally*, I never saw giving bj's or hj's as a "chore".
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I agree that oral on women is likely a lot easier physically than oral on men. Generally not 5 minutes though....... Usually my tongue muscles are stiff / sore the next day - but that just reminds me of how much fun it was the previous night :wink2:




Vega said:


> Sure. I get that.
> 
> But if you're tongue gets tired after 5 minutes, think of how my jaw feels after _*20*_ minutes. Plus as a man, you don't have to deal with the gag reflex!


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
My response is usually more of the form of a long hug and kiss and making purring noises. Always followed by doing whatever she wants in bed in return (she dislikes giving BJs but also gets turned on by doing them). 




Vega said:


> Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...
> 
> If your wife gave your a bj or hj to completion, did you ever look into her eyes lovingly and say, "Thank you"?
> 
> I don't mean in some flippant way like, "Thanks!" I mean a sincere heart-felt, slow, deliberate "Thank you. I really appreciate what you did for me, and I love you all the more for it."


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...
> 
> If your wife gave your a bj or hj to completion, did you ever look into her eyes lovingly and say, "Thank you"?
> 
> I don't mean in some flippant way like, "Thanks!" I mean a sincere heart-felt, slow, deliberate "Thank you. I really appreciate what you did for me, and I love you all the more for it."


Of course, I am extraordinarily appreciative; as is she when the tables are turned.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I don't know why he won't do it; it's not like he denies me very much of what I want, although I certainly don't get *everything* that I want. Maybe he thinks he's doing enough for me already and asking for more is selfish of me? Maybe he can't relate to wanting a foot rub because it doesn't appeal to him to have his feet rubbed?
> 
> I have no idea.


Not gonna lie, I am sitting here questioning the cleanliness of your feet :surprise:


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> "Olivia, I don't want it to start to feel like work."


Uggghhhh.... that is a way to minimize your feelings, especially when it was something he was so eager to provide before ... that would undoubtedly rub me the wrong way as well.

Funny enough (well, not funny in terms of your situation) , I battle with the whole "don't want things to feel like work" when I try to navigate whether or not to initiate sex with the W. Don't know why really since I am the one who does most of the work (gladly, that is not an issue).


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> The thing is that he loves me, is not a bad guy and thought it was a perfectly good response because for the first time in his life HE was not feeling any sexual hunger - his needs had been fully met. Mine weren't but his were.
> 
> This is what I mean when I say I've come to understand that most of this cannot be figured out in terms of psychology. The reasons behind the behaviour are primarily a lack of desire. He said and did stuff like this before he really had any insight into what was going on with him. That's the other thing, to him HE HADN'T CHANGED AT ALL; it seemed to him that I had just gotten ridiculously demanding! Meanwhile, I was holding back as much as I possibly could; not demanding what I wanted, but eventually just asking for the minimum that would allow me to get by without losing my mind. At that time, I didn't know what was going on with him either, and his reactions almost made me lose my mind with doubts about our relationship, how he felt about me, my desirability, was he cheating? etc., etc..


Makes perfect sense




OliviaG said:


> I think it's always a concern that to the lower desire partner, too many demands may start to feel like work. But your wife may not be lower desire so much as responsive desire, so maybe you shouldn't worry too much about that.


It is a balancing act. Where it gets tough though, there is only so many times in a day I can keep hearing about how tired she is (not directed at me in any way, more in terms of dealing with the responsibilities of the kids) where even if she is more responsive desire it holds me back from starting anything. I have no issues managing with little sleep, she doesn't do well, so where I may have intentions of initiating, when she finally comes to bed around 9:30-10pm after spending an hour trying to get our daughter to bed, you can see where backing off may (or may not, depends) be the better option.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Olivia, does he understand, I mean really understand, that you asking wasn't a thought that just popped in your head. I mean, you probably talked yourself out of asking 10 times before you actually did? 

That is what makes the rejection crushing, not the fact that you got one no.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> It is tricky when your daily schedule with kids gives you almost zero time to sit and relax for a few minutes. Everyone needs a bit of time with nothing to do, to recharge.
> 
> You could try a back massage (or head rub) when she comes to bed, with no sexual overtones, and see if she takes it further?
> 
> *I would just ignore the "I'm tired" comments. I bet she's more exasperated with the kids demands than she is physically tired.*


lol, no, she is actually physically tired. Last week I would have initiated several times when she finally came to bed, but within a few minutes of a head rub lying on my chest she was out cold, twitching and snorting, all the fun stuff haha.

She has done a much better job of initiating on her own so undoubtedly things are much better and heading in the right direction, but naturally want to make sure we don't get complacent and let things slip back. 

She was all proud that she initiated 3 times the week prior. However, in my defense, I was planning on starting things up as well. Also, she knows when we are in bed if she dares take off her pajama pants then I pounce without hesitation, so a couple of those times she did nothing more then take off her pj pants and wait ... she was laughing afterwards b/c she said the moment her pants came off she could feel the tension building from my side of the bed lol. One of the other nights, we were both exhausted so neither were really planning on doing anything, and b/c it had been hot all day our bedroom was hot. We needed to make an agreement that due to the heat she could take off her pj pants and we would just go to bed


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> He does now, but it took as a while to get to where we knew what was happening to us. At first it was just a bewildering change that I was reeling from and he was completely oblivious to.


Wow, he's the wife and you're the husband. At least he should be able to remember how it was until the last few years (guessing @ time). 

I think I had a break through of sorts on understanding with my wife this weekend. It took an unbelievably blunt and seemingly "d1ck1sh" approach but I think she mostly understands, we'll see if it sticks this time. 

I need to follow through on some stuff from my side and probably revisit what she thinks I want because I'm worried she's assuming I want more than she can deliver long term.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I don't want to write too much about this here, but the stuff I've heard from him in the last 6 months or so has been just shockingly out of character for him. This was a guy who would not take a no very easily when he wanted to perform oral. He was always very insistent - he HAD to do it, he LOVED it, etc., etc.. If I didn't want it we were in for a confrontation, so I usually let him go ahead. But after his desire level waned this year, I really needed it and he wasn't initiating. I felt so self-conscious about asking for something that would benefit only me. It took me weeks to get the nerve up, even though I thoroughly expected him to give me an enthusiastic YESSSS!!! So finally I asked him and this is what he said,
> 
> "Olivia, I don't want it to start to feel like work."
> 
> (This was one of the first of many lock-myself-in-the-bathroom-and-cry-my-eyes-out moments of the past few months - I was humiliated. He was oblivious to how I felt. I couldn't believe it.)


This is exactly what happens to so many men, the wife says, essentially, "I don't want it to do it if I don't have desire". That's why you now understand where the men are coming from. 

As you said elsewhere, it isn't work if you're feeling the desire.

So what happens when one partner doesn't feel the desire?

Their partner is just expected to deal with it?

Obviously some here think that's exactly what should happen.

I'm of the opinion that, if I lose desire then it's on me to try to get it back. If it's my partner's behavior, I need to address that. If it's medical, I need to see a doctor. If my spouse is doing nothing wrong then it's up to me to substitute love for desire to the degree needed to reach a happy compromise.

And if you require your partner to have desire? Then you're pretty much out of luck.

I think it all comes down to "givers" vs. "takers". Unfortunately, givers and takers often pair up. They both have the same goal, the taker's happiness.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> He does now, but it took as a while to get to where we knew what was happening to us. At first it was just a bewildering change that I was reeling from and he was completely oblivious to.


That's the HD's requirement in all of this; make sure it's VERY clear.

The LD, by definition, will be oblivious.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I don't want to write too much about this here, but the stuff I've heard from him in the last 6 months or so has been just shockingly out of character for him. This was a guy who would not take a no very easily when he wanted to perform oral. He was always very insistent - he HAD to do it, he LOVED it, etc., etc.. If I didn't want it we were in for a confrontation, so I usually let him go ahead. But after his desire level waned this year, I really needed it and he wasn't initiating. I felt so self-conscious about asking for something that would benefit only me. It took me weeks to get the nerve up, even though I thoroughly expected him to give me an enthusiastic YESSSS!!! So finally I asked him and this is what he said,
> 
> "Olivia, I don't want it to start to feel like work."
> 
> (This was one of the first of many lock-myself-in-the-bathroom-and-cry-my-eyes-out moments of the past few months - I was humiliated. He was oblivious to how I felt. I couldn't believe it.)


thanks for sharing. that is a tough thing to hear.

this stuff happens to guys too but we're not allowed to be sad about it. showing emotion just proves why we're undeserving.

not trying to diminish your situation though.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> This is exactly what happens to so many men, the wife says, essentially, "I don't want it to do it if I don't have desire". That's why you now understand where the men are coming from.
> 
> As you said elsewhere, it isn't work if you're feeling the desire.
> 
> ...


I think the above is based on a particular assumption-- that there is this "thing" that can be freely given.

I think from the LD woman's POV, there is no possibility of giving something. The "thing" simply does not exist.

Now you can get angry about that, but ultimately it becomes pointless because there is a fundamental difference of perspective.

Neither is in the abstract "correct."


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> They are completely unaware that there's a problem, even if they've been HD before for their entire lives - that's one thing that was so surprising to me.


I'm sorry but I don't accept that. 

Denial is not the same as ignorance.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Those are really hard conversations to have but necessary. Hard because you want to be gentle with the person you love and *careful not to hurt them*. But on the other hand you have to speak plainly in order to be understood.
> 
> I hope things change for the better for you both


The careful not to hurt them part is what was preventing understanding I think.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I think the above is based on a particular assumption-- that there is this "thing" that can be freely given.
> 
> I think from the LD woman's POV, there is no possibility of giving something. The "thing" simply does not exist.
> 
> ...


For many LD (or responsive desire) women, there IS something that can be "given", your wife just isn't one of them. 

I think the deadly combo is LD and self-centered. 

The best part is that often the "giving" can turn into desire in time.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> All I can tell you is that I've seen it with my own two eyes. It was true for him, I'm sure of it.


I'm also certain that my wife was oblivious to my needs, even though that seemed impossible to me.

She does love me and does care about my happiness. She was just oblivious. Really.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Yes, and it's not that they're being selfish or conniving or any other negative thing; it's just that they don't understand at all. They are completely unaware that there's a problem, even if they've been HD before for their entire lives - that's one thing that was so surprising to me.


empathy is better than nothing, but unfortunately, empathy is not the same as desire.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I know. To a guy it must seem like the whole crying-my-eyes-out thing was a huge over-reaction. But the thing is that it's almost manly to have more desire than your wife. It's expected that you'll be shot down at least occasionally. When you are it does not shock you to your core. But there's nothing feminine or expected about your husband losing interest in having sex with you. And when you finally get up the courage to ask him for it straight up, him turning you down is soul-crushing. Him saying it would feel like work: there are no words for how that made me feel. I seriously felt less than human, however ridiculous that may sound to a guy.


I'm not so certain that it's all that much better for a guy. A little better maybe, but not much.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

So following up on the whole LD/HD, thoughts on the whole "I have to be in the right mood to have sex" excuse? Not something I have dealt with but I have had several guys complain about this "excuse" frequently being made by their wives, where basically unless conditions are perfect (maybe they had a bad day, stressed out, etc...) they are not in the mood for sex. 

I guess from my POV I don't follow because to me sex is the perfect activity to destress and forget about everything else that is going on. I can still have other things going through my head but still enjoy it. Could this be more of an LD thing where to them sex is more like work than fun for them? I am sure as well one person being selfish in terms of sex could make it seem like work / stressful activity. Sometimes though it just sounds like an excuse to maintain control over the situation (i.e. we will have sex when I say it is ok).


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

BetrayedDad said:


> I'm sorry but I don't accept that.
> 
> Denial is not the same as ignorance.


I think if you start from the assumption that you can only engage in intimacy if you have genuine desire, then the idea of "denial" does not make any sense.

I think this explains the revulsion some LDs express when they embark on trying to provide what their HD partner wants even when they are not into it.

From their perspective, it is like trying to squeeze blood from a stone-- painful to attempt and ultimately pointless.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> For many LD (or responsive desire) women, there IS something that can be "given", your wife just isn't one of them.
> 
> I think the deadly combo is LD and self-centered.
> 
> The best part is that often the "giving" can turn into desire in time.


I think this has two sides.

It's cool that giving can turn into desire over time for some people. 

On the other hand, this can create an expectation that the LD person should give and that anything less than giving until a desire emerges that is equivalent to the HD's desire is an affront to the HD spouse.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I've had situations where we both can't sleep, even though we're tired. I know if we had sex I'd be able to sleep; I *need* it before I can fall asleep much of the time. In the past, he would too. So I say "I know how what we can do..." and try to get something going. And he'll say, "Olivia, I'm too tired."


Hmmm, does seem to tie in to the whole HD/LD dynamic. It is funny, b/c same with me. If my wife and I are restless the first thing that comes to mind is might as well have sex, I know I will sleep well after. Her instinct is to grab her phone and go on Facebook, etc...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I'm not so certain that it's all that much better for a guy. A little better maybe, but not much.


the only difference is guys are more used to being the initiator. women have little experience with it so it is more anxiety provoking.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Perhaps I am the one who is speaking from a place of ignorance.

I have never lacked any desire for sex and/or affection. 

Maybe with certain women but never with all of them.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

If you've got a lifetime of experience where you've basically never been turned down flat that has to be rough.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> Here's the difference: It's *easy* to put forth that effort when your desire level is high. It's an entirely different experience putting forth that level of effort when you have zero or negligible desire.
> 
> _I know you don't see this. You can't fathom it at all_. It's true though.


First of all, what's up with that? ^^ I sense you're losing patience with me for some reason, and I can't quite understand why.

Anyway.

For me, my desire comes from pleasing my wife. I realize most people (men) aren't like this, but many of us are. I am not a people pleaser by nature, but when it comes to the woman I love, I genuinely get off on her pleasure, her happiness. It's what drives me to do the things I do for her, and in our relationship. She reciprocates as best she can, though not at the level I've set for myself - and that's okay.

And no, I'm not some pandering Beta male "yes dear" type. I don't cater to her every whim or need, and in fact, she rarely asks me for anything. I just do them, and she appreciates it greatly. I treat my wife the way I want to be treated - not necessarily the way I expect to be treated, as I know that would likely be unreasonable.

I know other people IRL like me, and I've come across a few here on TAM, too, so we're out there.

Desire for myself often has little to do with it. I have zero interest in having sex with my wife when she's not in the mood, nor do I TRY to get her in the mood in order to meet my needs. Nor do I ask her to give me BJ's (nor did I ever), especially now knowing her dislike for standalone ones.

Yet here we are, people like me who put a greater emphasis on our partners and our relationship as a whole, rather than 5 or 10 or 20 minutes out of our week doing something we'd prefer not to do, simply because we don't wanna.

I'm not saying women who don't give BJ's SHOULD give BJ's. That's their right and their prerogative to harbor whatever negative feelings they have from that sort of thing. Nobody's saying anybody, male or female, should do things they don't want to do.

What I, and others I think, are saying is that people should really not be so flippant of "doing things they don't wanna" for reasons such as "it's boring, my neck cramps, it's uncomfortable, I get nothing out of it, etc."

If there's underlying psychological issues that prevents one from doing something, fine. Absolutely fine. My wife swears up and down she hasn't had a single negative thing happen to her in regards to BJ's. She swears up and down that there's never been and sexual abuse, or that she's ever been forced to do something like that. I believe her, and I trust her. She simply dislikes doing standalone BJ's. Totally fine before, during or after sex, just never, ever on it's own. Again, that's her prerogative, and I've never tried to change her mind. I've asked her about it (see above), but it is what it is, so I leave it alone.

Yet it makes zero sense to me. It's something she's capable and willing to do during sex, but on it's own, hell no. So to me, she falls into that category of "no particular reason, just don't wanna", and to many people, that's not an acceptable reason. And that's what this thread is largely about. Everybody has a choice, everybody can say no, that's fine. There's no issue with that, and nobody's suggesting otherwise.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Are you sure that's the only difference? This is another area where we probably can't understand each other. Not you and I so much as the two genders can't. I can't say for sure that it feels worse being shot down repeatedly as a woman, but I can sure say my reaction to it was worse than any I've ever seen from a man.


well, I think the other difference is that women are generally permitted to express emotions more freely, so their reaction will seem more emotional. But under the surface I do not believe there is any more or less emotion.

the exception is anger, which is generally an acceptable emotion for men to express.

so you will see men in this situation more commonly showing anger whereas for a woman it may be expressed as sadness.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

I get it. 

It's why even when I'm thoroughly pissed off at how long it has been and I'd like to turn her down, because hey - a couple masturbation sessions and a couple of beers have gotten me past it all today . I just don't...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> That was my lifetime experience. Not only that, but it was like I had this special superpower that allowed me to turn him on whenever I wanted to - a glance across a room, a couple of words, a vague suggestion, etc., etc.. Basically he was always just waiting for any signal at all from me, some that I never even sent out..lol.. Which is a typical female experience. And women usually are a bit overwhelmed by how much attention their husbands give them (as you know..), so they're always complaining about how they can't get dressed in the morning without a thorough groping, can't do anything. Also a typical female experience. A universal experience (although there are exceptions).
> 
> So when your husband is not interested, you figure there's something wrong with YOU, not with him. Or he's just not interested in YOU, not that he's lost interest in sex altogether. So he must be having an affair. Or I must have become absolutely unappealing. Because according to every experience you've had, your girlfriends have had, have been portrayed on TV and in movies, in magazines, advertising...virtually everywhere, men are *always* looking for more sex. That is just the world as you know it.
> 
> ...


I'll tell you I know exactly how you feel about this - not because it's happened to me (it has, of course!) but because I did this to my wife.

She's not great at initiating sex. She doesn't do it in the "typical" way. As somebody said in a post above, if their wife takes off her PJ bottoms in bed, it's go time. That's my wife.

So that same sort of thing happened once a few years ago, and for whatever reason, I wasn't in the mood at all. Just wanted to sleep, and I told her so. She was SO mad at me that night, and the next day. I asked her about it, and she lit into me. My first reaction was "how do you think I feel every time you turn me down?" - something she didn't even think about up until that point. I took no great pleasure in throwing that in her face, I might add.

But all the same, for a brief instant, the tables had turned, and she, at least at that point, felt what I feel all too often. She calmed down, accepted it, and was empathetic. Hasn't stopped her from rejecting me, though 

But it sucks. That feeling of rejection sucks. You now know that. And I'm not minimizing your feelings at that time in the slightest. But I'll tell you, there have been times where I've been near tears myself due to rejection. I pull myself together, but it's not something people can or should ever get used to.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

When your spouse rejects you, you should be able to legally tase them ... just a thought >


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> So you don't think there's any difference in cultural norms or expectations for women vs men? Or if you do think so, you don't think this affects the way a person of either gender processes sexual rejection?


I think any semi attractive woman has less experience with rejection than most guys. So it is reasonable that an incidental rejection would hit a woman harder.

longer term, repeated rejection-- I don't think there is much difference in magnitude of feelings that result.

nobody of either sex gets into a relationship expecting to be repeatedly rejected.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> So following up on the whole LD/HD, thoughts on the whole "I have to be in the right mood to have sex" excuse? Not something I have dealt with but I have had several guys complain about this "excuse" frequently being made by their wives, where basically unless conditions are perfect (maybe they had a bad day, stressed out, etc...) they are not in the mood for sex.
> 
> I guess from my POV I don't follow because to me sex is the perfect activity to destress and forget about everything else that is going on. I can still have other things going through my head but still enjoy it. Could this be more of an LD thing where to them sex is more like work than fun for them? I am sure as well one person being selfish in terms of sex could make it seem like work / stressful activity. *Sometimes though it just sounds like an excuse to maintain control over the situation (i.e. we will have sex when I say it is ok)*.


Wow. It's a shame that so many people don't understand the LD enough to draw this conclusion. In fact, quite a number of LD's are trying to _avoid_ being controlled by the HD. 

It's fairly well known that the majority of women (over 2/3's) don't orgasm through intercourse. Thrusting for her doesn't cut it. But there ARE women (and men) out there who don't know this and think there is something WRONG WITH THEM if they can't have an orgasm through intercourse. Imagine how embarrassing that can be for her , and how helpless she can feel. Couple that with some guilt (not being able to share an orgasm with her partner through intercourse) and shame and voila! You now have a LD partner. 

Why would someone want to participate in an activity that does next to NOTHING for her? We talk about how sex 'bonds' a couple together. But it's not the physical activity of SEX that bonds; it's the ORGASM that bonds. Perhaps another reason why the LD is LD is that she doesn't feel "bonded" to her partner through lack of orgasms through intercourse.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> Wow. It's a shame that so many people don't understand the LD enough to draw this conclusion. In fact, quite a number of LD's are trying to _avoid_ being controlled by the HD.
> 
> *It's fairly well known that the majority of women (over 2/3's) don't orgasm through intercourse. * Thrusting for her doesn't cut it. But there ARE women (and men) out there who don't know this and think there is something WRONG WITH THEM if they can't have an orgasm through intercourse. Imagine how embarrassing that can be for her , and how helpless she can feel. Couple that with some guilt (not being able to share an orgasm with her partner through intercourse) and shame and voila! You now have a LD partner.
> 
> Why would someone want to participate in an activity that does next to NOTHING for her? We talk about how sex 'bonds' a couple together. But it's not the physical activity of SEX that bonds; it's the ORGASM that bonds. Perhaps another reason why the LD is LD is that she doesn't feel "bonded" to her partner through lack of orgasms through intercourse.


It is not really a surprise, just look at how many people come here not knowing about LD vs HD, and most people I know aren't on TAM or other equivalent forums. 

As per the bolded, is it really that fairly well known?

Also, you are making an assumption that sex is just solely PIV, so she gets nothing out of it except some unnecessary thrusting ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
It really hurts when you get up the nerve to ask for something sexual and its turned down. I know that some requests do need to be turned down, but still it hurts.





OliviaG said:


> I don't want to write too much about this here, but the stuff I've heard from him in the last 6 months or so has been just shockingly out of character for him. This was a guy who would not take a no very easily when he wanted to perform oral. He was always very insistent - he HAD to do it, he LOVED it, etc., etc.. If I didn't want it we were in for a confrontation, so I usually let him go ahead. But after his desire level waned this year, I really needed it and he wasn't initiating. I felt so self-conscious about asking for something that would benefit only me. It took me weeks to get the nerve up, even though I thoroughly expected him to give me an enthusiastic YESSSS!!! So finally I asked him and this is what he said,
> 
> "Olivia, I don't want it to start to feel like work."
> 
> (This was one of the first of many lock-myself-in-the-bathroom-and-cry-my-eyes-out moments of the past few months - I was humiliated. He was oblivious to how I felt. I couldn't believe it.)


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> As per the bolded, is it really that fairly well known?


When I say that I don't mean that EVERYONE knows that. But I believe that many people DO know it. 




> Also, you are making an assumption that sex is just solely PIV, so she gets nothing out of it except some unnecessary thrusting


When we talk about "sex", we're not usually talking about anal sex or oral sex. We're talking about the kind of sex that is either solely PIV or at least includes PIV. 

Also, I didn't say that thrusting is "unnecessary"; it's obviously necessary for the _man_ to climax. 

But it doesn't do much for _her_ to climax.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
as always, many different people, many different situations. 

In my case "wanting sex" means wanting sexual activity, lovemaking whatever you want to call it. It may or may not include PIV. It almost always includes my doing whatever works for my wife to have an "O". (often vibrators because that is what she wants). Its of course possible she has fake for 30 years but I do always offer to do anything she wants. 

I'm not saying that this is the most common, but it is pretty common in LD/HD situations. Its not that the HD wants sex and doesn't care about the LD. The HD wants lovemaking WITH the LD and cares very much about the LDs pleasure.






Vega said:


> Wow. It's a shame that so many people don't understand the LD enough to draw this conclusion. In fact, quite a number of LD's are trying to _avoid_ being controlled by the HD.
> 
> It's fairly well known that the majority of women (over 2/3's) don't orgasm through intercourse. Thrusting for her doesn't cut it. But there ARE women (and men) out there who don't know this and think there is something WRONG WITH THEM if they can't have an orgasm through intercourse. Imagine how embarrassing that can be for her , and how helpless she can feel. Couple that with some guilt (not being able to share an orgasm with her partner through intercourse) and shame and voila! You now have a LD partner.
> 
> Why would someone want to participate in an activity that does next to NOTHING for her? We talk about how sex 'bonds' a couple together. But it's not the physical activity of SEX that bonds; it's the ORGASM that bonds. Perhaps another reason why the LD is LD is that she doesn't feel "bonded" to her partner through lack of orgasms through intercourse.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> When I say that I don't mean that EVERYONE knows that. But I believe that many people DO know it.


I disagree with this, but we have our own opinions so no biggie.




Vega said:


> When we talk about "sex", we're not usually talking about anal sex or oral sex. We're talking about the kind of sex that is either solely PIV or at least includes PIV.
> 
> Also, I didn't say that thrusting is "unnecessary"; it's obviously necessary for the _man_ to climax.
> 
> But it doesn't do much for _her_ to climax.


Likewise disagree, most conversations I have about sex usually involve both PIV and Oral (rarely is anal brought in to the equation).

Also, I have seen females here state that her husband used the same excuse, so it may not entirely be gender specific and related to the female orgasm


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> Likewise disagree, most conversations I have about sex usually involve both PIV and Oral (rarely is anal brought in to the equation).


I believe we said the same thing, Ellis.


_Also, I have seen females here state that her husband used the same excuse, so it may not entirely be gender specific and related to the female orgasm_

I'm not talking about being LD from an LD _man's_ POV since it seems that the majority of LDs on TAM seem to be women OR the OP's partner is a woman. 

I know that SOME of the excuses apply to both genders, but the reasons behind the excuses may vary.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> So following up on the whole LD/HD, thoughts on the whole "I have to be in the right mood to have sex" excuse? Not something I have dealt with but I have had several guys complain about this "excuse" frequently being made by their wives, where basically unless conditions are perfect (maybe they had a bad day, stressed out, etc...) they are not in the mood for sex.
> 
> I guess from my POV I don't follow because to me sex is the perfect activity to destress and forget about everything else that is going on. I can still have other things going through my head but still enjoy it. Could this be more of an LD thing where to them sex is more like work than fun for them? I am sure as well one person being selfish in terms of sex could make it seem like work / stressful activity. Sometimes though it just sounds like an excuse to maintain control over the situation (i.e. we will have sex when I say it is ok).


To some degree, I believe it's a chick thing where they have to have their head in the right place (as explained here on TAM). This seems believable. So it puts more emphasis on their willingness to "get started" in less than perfect situations than expecting them to just be "in the mood".


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> No, I wasn't losing patience with you. I really do think that you are unable to fathom something you haven't experienced, but I'm not losing patience with you.


Fair enough.

But what makes you think I haven't experienced something that perhaps you have? And what, exactly?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I think if you start from the assumption that you can only engage in intimacy if you have genuine desire,


I think this is a relatively new concept, part of the "you shouldn't ever have sex if you don't want to" message directed at women.

While exceptionally good advice for women not in a relationship, it's not exactly helpful in a marriage. Especially if "want to" is defined as "spontaneously aroused" instead of "willing to give yourself the opportunity to be aroused (responsive desire)".

I think this is the primary reason that sex is set apart from satisfying any other needs or desires of your spouse. I think anyone who didn't spend quality time with their spouse because they "just weren't in the mood" might be considered selfish and uncaring.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> To some degree, I believe it's a chick thing where they have to have their head in the right place (as explained here on TAM). This seems believable. So it puts more emphasis on their willingness to "get started" in less than perfect situations than expecting them to just be "in the mood".


sometimes I think the female tendency of needing to be in the right mood is simply an outgrowth of over abundance.

for example, if you were a surfer and lived on a perfect, uncrowded point break where there were nice waves every day, you might decide to not go surfing unless you were really feeling great and the conditions were 100% ideal.

by comparison, if you lived in a place with sh-tty waves and limited opportunities to surf, you would jump at any chance you got to go surfing.

I think many women's attitude regarding sex is analogous to the guy who grew up on the perfect point break.

whereas most dudes are more hungry because they've never had unlimited waves.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> So you don't think there's any difference in cultural norms or expectations for women vs men? Or if you do think so, you don't think this affects the way a person of either gender processes sexual rejection?


I believe that there are, indeed, significant cultural norm or expectations for women vs men. 

The expectations are different, but the pain of rejection isn't.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I think this is a relatively new concept, part of the "you shouldn't ever have sex if you don't want to" message directed at women.
> 
> While exceptionally good advice for women not in a relationship, it's not exactly helpful in a marriage. Especially if "want to" is defined as "spontaneously aroused" instead of "willing to give yourself the opportunity to be aroused (responsive desire)".
> 
> I think this is the primary reason that sex is set apart from satisfying any other needs or desires of your spouse. I think anyone who didn't spend quality time with their spouse because they "just weren't in the mood" might be considered selfish and uncaring.


I hear what you're saying. On the other hand, there is no more logic to the idea that you should just do it. 

It just depends on what your baseline assumption is. 

if someone is making the opposite assumption on this type of thing you might as well bang your head against the wall rather than fight about it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Have you ever lost sexual desire? Not just for a day or for a person, but has your T been low enough that you just didn't care about sex anymore?


I have.

I did something about it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> sometimes I think the female tendency of needing to be in the right mood is simply an outgrowth of over abundance.
> 
> for example, if you were a surfer and lived on a perfect, uncrowded point break where there were nice waves every day, you might decide to not go surfing unless you were really feeling great and the conditions were 100% ideal.
> 
> ...


Interesting analogy.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OMG, an analogy both women agreed with. I'd have expected some comment about the polluted water around Hawaii or something first LOL!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> So, just curious, I'm not arguing (I know it looks like I am). I don't need my pain to be greater than your pain or anything like that, but I'd just like to get at the truth, whatever it may be.
> 
> There are different cultural norms with regard to being the breadwinner in the family. While both men and women often work full-time now, do you think there's any subjective difference to the experience of a middle-aged man getting fired who is then unable to find another job and has to rely on his wife to be the breadwinner for the unforeseeable future as opposed to the reverse? Assume they both earn the same. Do you think both men and women feel the same sense of panic, pain and shame when faced with the same situation?


I believe the pain/panic/shame is heavier on the male.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> So, just curious, I'm not arguing (I know it looks like I am). I don't need my pain to be greater than your pain or anything like that, but I'd just like to get at the truth, whatever it may be.
> 
> There are different cultural norms with regard to being the breadwinner in the family. While both men and women often work full-time now, do you think there's any subjective difference to the experience of a middle-aged man getting fired who is then unable to find another job and has to rely on his wife to be the breadwinner for the unforeseeable future as opposed to the reverse? Assume they both earn the same. Do you think both men and women feel the same sense of panic, pain and shame when faced with the same situation?


One gender probably copes with it better than the other since they're more used to it.

I'm not certain that men would cope with this worse. I've read a lot about how breadwinning women have a harder time worrying about breadwinner responsibilities than men.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> So do I. Much heavier.


Yes, I don't believe it is even close. Maybe this will even out over time?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> So, just curious, I'm not arguing (I know it looks like I am). I don't need my pain to be greater than your pain or anything like that, but I'd just like to get at the truth, whatever it may be.
> 
> There are different cultural norms with regard to being the breadwinner in the family. While both men and women often work full-time now, do you think there's any subjective difference to the experience of a middle-aged man getting fired who is then unable to find another job and has to rely on his wife to be the breadwinner for the unforeseeable future as opposed to the reverse? Assume they both earn the same. Do you think both men and women feel the same sense of panic, pain and shame when faced with the same situation?


I do think there is a difference there, but I would imagine it is diminishing over time as the expectation regarding men being the breadwinner wanes.

I don't think that is really analogous to the sex thing though because both men and women want to be desired. It is not really a female or male only type of expectation.

I would agree that there is more of a stereotype of men being all over their wives, so if, as a wife, that is not happening to you, I could see how that would be painful.

At the same time, there are other stereotypes that men internalize, e.g., if you can't get laid you must be some kind of loser. I've posted this here before but it's like the Rolling Stones song-- 

ain't I rough enough? 
ain't I tough enough? 
ain't I rich enough? 
I'm not too blind to see...

Men do feel the burden of not being desirable too and the culture does say there must be something wrong with you if you're not desired.

the whole thing is BS though because the problem is judging yourself in relation to someone else.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> So, just curious, I'm not arguing (I know it looks like I am). I don't need my pain to be greater than your pain or anything like that, but I'd just like to get at the truth, whatever it may be.
> 
> There are different cultural norms with regard to being the breadwinner in the family. While both men and women often work full-time now, do you think there's any subjective difference to the experience of a middle-aged man getting fired who is then unable to find another job and has to rely on his wife to be the breadwinner for the unforeseeable future as opposed to the reverse? Assume they both earn the same. Do you think both men and women feel the same sense of panic, pain and shame when faced with the same situation?


Yes, I think it would be worse for the man.

On the other hand if my wife suddenly got some giant promotion, was making a couple hundred grand or more a year and said 'why don't you retire 10 years early, I've got this' I'd be good with that.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OK, I get what you're saying. It probably is different for a woman.

one thing I don't think you have right is that a man will totally blame his wife though. 

Men will internalize this stuff too.

The best thing you can do for yourself is to learn to understand that you have an identity that is distinct from what anyone else thinks of you. I'm sure this sounds like a cliché, but it is true.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> First of all, I'm CERTAIN that my late husband did things with other women that he didn't do with me. For instance, he once told me that he got oral sex from a woman while they were in a DJ booth.
> 
> Am I supposed to feel 'bad' that he didn't do that with ME?
> 
> ...


I've never said a woman is selfish for not wanting to do something with her husband which she happily, willfully, and with enjoyment did with a previous partner. What I have said is there must be some reason she doesn't want to.

It could be a legitimate reason. But to be clear, we're talking about things she enjoyed and happily did with other men.

It is difficult to edit and quote posts on this device but I previously posted several possibilities. Some are legitimate. It is now painful, or she has learned a new perspective (perhaps fearing arrest when before she didn't). Those are fine reasons.

But if those kinds of legitimate reasons are not offered, there must be another reason. To a husband, he sees the differential in her sexual interest in him compared to others, and comes to the conclusion that there must be some reason she does not find HIM as exciting as other men, or she doesn't care about him as much as other men.

This is tenfold worse when for a significant length of time he blindly accepts her rejection of a particular thing by saying she doesn't like it, but then finds out later she lied when she said that. In fact she did those things with numerous other men and wiliingly and happily did it.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

I could go along with that  (Olivia's comment)


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> Maybe one reason why she doesn't tell you WHY she doesn't want to do these things with you is because she doesn't trust you with her reasons. Maybe she doesn't trust that you can HANDLE the truth....?


THis is the biggest pile of bull and is insulting to the man. You have no right to decide for him what truth he is entitled to. He is entitled to make a fully informed decision for himself. This means he is entitled to honest answers to questions and for an accurate representation of who he is involved with.

Now this doesn't mean all the gory details, but it does mean if he asks a specific question it is wrong to lie to him. Women frequently advocate lying to men about their sexual history, and as a result men assume the worst and expect to be lied to!

There's noting wrong with saying you won't answer his question. He can then decide based on that.

What is wrong is to lie to him either by commission or omission. It is wrong to intentionally give him a false understanding of the landscape.

Why would you want to be with a man who would not want to be with the real you?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> I've never said a woman is selfish for not wanting to do something with her husband which she happily, willfully, and with enjoyment did with a previous partner. What I have said is there must be some reason she doesn't want to.
> 
> It could be a legitimate reason. But to be clear, we're talking about things she enjoyed and happily did with other men.
> 
> ...


Thor, there ARE husbands out there who could GIVE A DAMM about what their wives did BEFORE them, with WHOM and whether or not they liked it. The reason WHY she doesn't want to do "it" NOW is irrelevant; what matters is that _she doesn't want to do it. Period_. 

It's like you're in _competition _with her past which will prevent you from focusing on the future. 

But why make the reason(s) all about YOU? Her reasons may have NOTHING TO DO WITH _*YOU*_. 

Can you accept that she simply doesn't want to do this without knowing WHY?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> THis is the biggest pile of bull and is insulting to the man. You have no right to decide for him what truth he is entitled to. He is entitled to make a fully informed decision for himself. This means he is entitled to honest answers to questions and for an accurate representation of who he is involved with.
> 
> Now this doesn't mean all the gory details, but it does mean if he asks a specific question it is wrong to lie to him. Women frequently advocate lying to men about their sexual history, and as a result men assume the worst and expect to be lied to!
> 
> ...


Thor, you seem to read into things that aren't being said. 

I didn't say that he wasn't entitled to the truth; what I said is, that it's possible that he can't HANDLE the truth. What that means is that her previous experiences of him hearing the truth may have sent him into a fit of _abusive rage_.

I also never even suggested that she should LIE to him, but she certainly doesn't owe him every little detail of her past, as YOU yourself said. 

Why in the world you would make those assumptions based on what I wrote is beyond me.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> Thor, there ARE husbands out there who could GIVE A DAMM about what their wives did BEFORE them, with WHOM and whether or not they liked it. The reason WHY she doesn't want to do "it" NOW is irrelevant; what matters is that _she doesn't want to do it. Period_.
> 
> It's like you're in _competition _with her past which will prevent you from focusing on the future.
> 
> ...


It depends on what it is. And I think you're imputing a lot of your perspective into my situation, which is quite different. I also got down this sidetrack with you on what started as a hypothetical and isn't specific to my marriage.

And I'm not talking about stuff which is likely to be upleasant somehow. Maybe a simpler example would be to say that a woman was normal to high sex desire with previous lovers, but in her marriage she is low desire.

What does that mean? It means she doesn't have sexual desire for her husband. Why? We know it isn't that she has an inherently low sex drive, because she had high drive with several previous lovers. So her low desire for her husband says something about how she feels about him and it says something about their marriage.

Maybe he stopped taking showers. Maybe it really is all his fault. But the guy is going to wonder wtf is going on when he becomes aware that is wife has a very different level of sexual interest in him compared to other men.

That is the entire point really. There is some significant difference and there must be a reason. There is an explanation.

Absent any obvious answers such as medical etc, the highest probability is that she doesn't find him as attractive or exciting as her previous lovers.

This is the precise problem. Go read that last sentence again. She feels less attracted in some way to her husband than she did about other men. Because there is no other good explanation offered.

IF she did X, Y, and Z with previous boyfriends A, B, and C, there should be some similar level of sexual activity with her husband. Maybe it isn't acts X, Y, and Z, but it is acts Q, R, and S. That is fine, there is an equivalent level of apparent sexual interenst in her husband as there was with previous lovers.

Remember, this hypothetical woman not only did X, Y, and Z, with those other men, she had regular PiV sex with them. Presuming she has PiV sex with her husband, that alone is not a similar level of sexual desire being shown by her. He is experiencing a lower level of sexual interest from her. But if she is doing Q, R, and S with her husband he is getting different stuff than the other men but is getting a similar level of apparent sexual interest.

Maybe another example. Let's say she would have sex in the car with other men, not because there was nowhere else to go but because it was fun. But now she will only have saturday night starfish sex once every few months with her husband. The problem isn't that he isn't getting car sex, it is that he isn't getting a similar level of sex. IF he were getting regualr sex from her and also they were going out into their totally private back yard under the stars for sex with some frequency, that mgiht be an equivalent apparent level of sexual interest. Different acts, car vs back yard, but still she seems as into him as she was into other men. She may no longer find car sex exciting, and she may fear arrest, which is fine. But she is showing some similar level of desire for her husband as other men.

All I'm doing is reporting to you how men commonly think. Sex is seen as an indicator of how a woman really feels about her man. If she shows a differential, the guy getting the low interest will conclude she is with him for some other reason than emotional fondness. He will not feel loved or desired.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> one thing I don't think you have right is that a man will totally blame his wife though.
> 
> Men will internalize this stuff too.
> 
> The best thing you can do for yourself is to learn to understand that you have an identity that is distinct from what anyone else thinks of you. I'm sure this sounds like a cliché, but it is true.


Yes it goes back to the old cliche "Alpha for fvcks, Beta for Bucks", meaning women are sexually interested in alpha men for sex but beta men to be steady provider husbands. This taps into not only a man's ego but to his pre-programmed fears. No man wants to be _used_ as the farm horse working hard to provide for a woman who in fact doesn't really love or respect him. Even deeper is the fear of raising another man's offspring unknowingly. 

THis is primal brain wiring stuff.

So the man looks at his wife's relative lack of sexual interest in him compared to her historical sexual interest in other men and he concludes she sees him as the work horse to hitch her wagon to.

The men I've talked to irl who have experienced finding out their wife is much less sexually interested in them than previous boyfriends have all taken it as a big hit to their confidence and ego. They are deeply hurt, feeling they've been deceived and used.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Vega said:


> Thor, you seem to read into things that aren't being said.
> 
> I didn't say that he wasn't entitled to the truth; what I said is, that it's possible that he can't HANDLE the truth. What that means is that her previous experiences of him hearing the truth may have sent him into a fit of _abusive rage_.
> 
> ...


Would you really be with a man whom you thought capable of flying into a fit of abusive rage if he knew the truth about your past? That makes zero sense to me. This is about as big a mismatch two people could ever be in. When you realize your history is something he would find so terrible that he would be in a rage, you've discovered you should not be with this person. Not that one or the other of you is necessarily "right", just that you are so very different.

Your comment about him not being able to handle the truth is a direct suggestion to keep the truth from him. WHich means intentionally keeping him from having an accurate overall understading of the landscape. That is a lie of ommission at the least.

Other women have said on this topic in various threads that they advocate lying about their pasts. You haven't specifically said that in specific words, but your statement certainly implied keeping a man from understanding the truth.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> It depends on what it is. And I think you're imputing a lot of your perspective into my situation, which is quite different. I also got down this sidetrack with you on what started as a hypothetical and isn't specific to my marriage.
> 
> And I'm not talking about stuff which is likely to be upleasant somehow. Maybe a simpler example would be to say that a woman was normal to high sex desire with previous lovers, but in her marriage she is low desire.
> 
> ...


What I've been trying to explain is that this is NOT always the case! It may have NOTHING to do with HIM and everything to do with HER. But you don't want to accept that. 

And unless you know EVERYTHING that happened in her previous relationships and her life in general, I don't think it's fair to draw that conclusion.

Maybe it's not that she's less attracted to him, but that she feels less attracTIVE _to_ him. She feels less attractive to HERSELF. Maybe she's starting to see the signs of aging in her face, or she gained 5 pounds (and I know of some women who absolutely FREAK OUT if they gain even the slightest amount of weight!) It may not be that she finds YOU unsexy, but that she finds HERSELF unsexy. If she told you that, would you believe her? Would you dismiss her concerns? Would you tell her that you don't care HOW she 'looks' (which would cause her to feel like you'd screw ANYTHING just to get laid!)Case in point: I am currently single and I have put on about 10 pounds over the past 6 months. I wouldn't even DREAM of getting naked with someone 'new' right now, even though I've had sex while weighing 30 pounds more than I weigh now! Why? Because when I weighed more, the weight was distributed all over my body, whereas THIS time it's concentrated in my stomach and looks horrible. I weigh 135 lbs. which is only 5 lbs. over my weight in high school. But my naked body doesn't LOOK the same as it did when I was in high school. My boobs sag and I have stretch marks on my stomach besides the extra FLABBY weight. Plus, my muscles are VERY undertoned. Needless to say, I am NOT feeling very "sexy" these days, and I'd be too embarrassed to change in a woman's locker room let alone in some man's apartment! So even though I had sex at 135 lbs. 15 years ago--and enjoyed it--does NOT mean that I would enjoy it at 135 lbs. TODAY. Hope that makes sense.




> IF she did X, Y, and Z with previous boyfriends A, B, and C, there should be some similar level of sexual activity with her husband.


This is pretty funny. Before we were married, I used to give my exh bj's in the car once in a while he was driving, which he loved. Shortly after we were married, we were driving somewhere and I started unzipping his pants. He stopped me and said, "I don't want my WIFE giving me head while driving!" And he looked at me like I was NUTS--as a 'married woman'--for even THINKING of "such a thing"! Apparently, in his mind, his marital status determined what KIIND of sex was 'appropriate' for married folks. 

But a woman might think the same thing. Again, it has nothing to do with YOU, and everything to do with her marital status. Sex in the back seat of a car? Ha! Married people don't do THAT. They have to be more "mature" and "refined". Sex in a tree in broad daylight? HA! Married people don't do that either! They have to be more 'respectable'. 



> Sex is seen as an indicator of how a woman really feels about her man.


It's also an indicator of how she feels about _*herself*_. But only an insecure man would make it all about himself without even thinking that the problem may have nothing to do with him.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Thor said:


> Would you really be with a man whom you thought capable of flying into a fit of abusive rage if he knew the truth about your past?


Abusive men tend to HIDE their abusive tendencies quite well. My first husband didn't 'cut loose' until the DAY WE WERE MARRIED. I had been telling him for months that I wanted him to meet some of the friends I went to school with. Two of them were men who were from the same town that my husband and I were from. 

The day we moved into our new apartment, I told my husband I wanted to call my friends and let the know we were in town. When I went to pick up the phone, he RIPPED THE PHONE OUT OF THE WALL and threw it across the room in a jealous fit of rage. At no time during our courtship did he even HINT that he was jealous. Kept saying that he couldn't wait to meet these people. 



> Your comment about him not being able to handle the truth is a direct suggestion to keep the truth from him. WHich means intentionally keeping him from having an accurate overall understading of the landscape. That is a lie of ommission at the least.
> 
> You haven't specifically said that in specific words, but your statement certainly implied keeping a man from understanding the truth


Again, you're reading into something that's not there. I don't think you know me well enough to draw that conclusion.

Thor, I think it's best for the sake of this thread that we simply agree to disagree and move on...k?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Thor said:


> All I'm doing is reporting to you how men commonly think. Sex is seen as an indicator of how a woman really feels about her man. If she shows a differential, the guy getting the low interest will conclude she is with him for some other reason than emotional fondness. He will not feel loved or desired.


I know we're never going to convince the women, but......

Women, you need to be aware that this is how most men think; even the guys like me who aren't a$$holes.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> This was after a period of him cooling off about sex in general it was not a one time rejection, although that's how I guess it sounds the way I described it. It was him cooling off about sex, being much less interested for weeks, and me going nuts trying to figure out why, then wrestling to get the courage to ask for one-sided sex because I was so desperate (which made me feel pathetic), and THEN, the rejection. It's not like he'd never ever said to me "not tonight, I've got to get up really early tomorrow" or something like that, which has never phased me. I was already feeling pretty vulnerable when I asked. I couldn't believe he wasn't aware of the anguish I'd been going through for weeks. But no, he had no idea. And then he rejected me on top of it.


This isn't directly in response to the above, but....

I believe you've commented something along the lines of "sex isn't good if your partner doesn't have desire" side, yet it seems like you and your H are working it out.

So, I've got a hypothetical for you.......

If your H was to get T-Therapy (or something) and his libido jumped back to it's old level while at the same time your high libido suddenly dropped below it's historical level, what would you do if he wanted it more than you?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Buddy400 said:


> I know we're never going to convince the women, but......
> 
> Women, you need to be aware that this is how most men think; even the guys like me who aren't a$$holes.


I think this still falls under the idea that all men want sex b/c they are hornballs and will bang anything with one leg or more.

Just speaking for myself (and I know we have probably covered this topic in others threads), sex is a requirement for me to feel emotionally connected to my W. She can compliment me night and day, cook me dinner, give me hugs, etc... but if the sex is not there I lose that emotional connection (in my view, we become roommates or friends with occasional benefits). Once you get to that point, then you start thinking she must be with you for other reasons (safety net, paycheck, lifestyle, etc...). This did become a big problem for us not too long ago, something I needed to address with her, and since then things have been significantly better.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I know we're never going to convince the women, but......


And why do you suppose that is?

If all of your life, including your teenage years, you HEAR how "all men just want sex" and EXPERIENCE a few who DO "just" want sex and UNDERSTAND that the bottom line for most men--even the 'nice guys'--is sex...
...AND, many men would leave their wives because of a LACK of sex, well...

Perhaps if men actually abstained from having sex with women BEFORE marriage, it would be easier for a woman to believe that the man equates sex with love. 

Eh. Just a thought.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> Just speaking for myself (and I know we have probably covered this topic in others threads), sex is a requirement for me to feel emotionally connected to my W.


It's suspicious when it seems that you (you generally; ;not YOU, Ellis!) ONLY want that emotional connection when you're _horny_ and at no other time...

...and that it's not HER you love but SEX you love. 

Just telling you how some women think.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> And why do you suppose that is?
> 
> If all of your life, including your teenage years, you HEAR how "all men just want sex" and EXPERIENCE a few who DO "just" want sex and UNDERSTAND that the bottom line for most men--even the 'nice guys'--is sex...
> ...AND, many men would leave their wives because of a LACK of sex, well...
> ...


Have you never been with a man that shows you that he equates sex with love? A man that looks into your eyes with an expression that melts your heart and makes it clear he wants to make love to you because he is in love with you?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Have you never been with a man that shows you that he equates sex with love? A man that looks into your eyes with an expression that melts your heart and makes it clear he wants to make love to you because he is in love with you?


ETA: A man can look into your eyes with that expression that melts you heart...and not even be CLOSE to being in love with you (although YOU might be in love with HIM) BTDT. 

Only if *I* was the ONLY woman he ever had sex with. Otherwise, what's the dif?

A young man has sex with prostitutes. Is he "loving" them? 
That same young man meets a woman in a bar and has a ONS. Did he "love" her, too? He may even look into her eyes and tell her she's 'beautiful' only to never see her again. 
The same man gets a girlfriend. He has sex with her, but if you ask him, he doesn't "love" her. Yet, he's having sex with her. 

After all of the sex he's having WITHOUT "love", how am I to believe that he's having sex with ME out of love?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> I think this still falls under the idea that all men want sex b/c they are hornballs and will bang anything with one leg or more.





Vega said:


> And why do you suppose that is?
> 
> If all of your life, including your teenage years, you HEAR how "all men just want sex" and EXPERIENCE a few who DO "just" want sex and UNDERSTAND that the bottom line for most men--even the 'nice guys'--is sex...
> ...AND, many men would leave their wives because of a LACK of sex, well...


Ellis, you might be right:smile2:


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> Only if *I* was the ONLY woman he ever had sex with. Otherwise, what's the dif?
> 
> A young man has sex with prostitutes. Is he "loving" them?
> That same young man meets a woman in a bar and has a ONS. Did he "love" her, too? He may even look into her eyes and tell her she's 'beautiful' only to never see her again.
> ...


Such a jaded POV, is this your experience in life?

Something must be very broken for you to not be able to differentiate between a man that is being truthful about his desire to make love to you and a man that is using you.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Such a jaded POV, is this your experience in life?
> 
> Something must be very broken for you to not be able to differentiate between a man that is being truthful about his desire to make love to you and a man that is using you.


Or...maybe there are _that many _ men out there who have their 'game' down to a science. 

So tell me Holland...how _DO_ you tell if a man is using you or if a man is loving you...especially since sex is involved in BOTH cases?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Buddy400 said:


> Ellis, you might be right:smile2:


lol yup, point proven :grin2:


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> Or...maybe there are _that many _ men out there who have their 'game' down to a science.
> 
> So tell me Holland...how _DO_ you tell if a man is using you or if a man is loving you...especially since sex is involved in BOTH cases?


When his words and actions are in alignment. When he is honest and open in discussion about life, love and sex.
When the intentions behind his words and actions are loving and for the greater good of us both.

I have never had cause in my post teen life to question a mans motives, they are either loving or wanting and neither is a problem for me as long as we are both on the same page. If you give a man the opportunity for honesty without judgement then he will be honest.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Vega said:


> Or...maybe there are _that many _ men out there who have their 'game' down to a science.
> 
> So tell me Holland...how _DO_ you tell if a man is using you or if a man is loving you...especially since sex is involved in BOTH cases?


Actions outside of the bedroom. Not words.

I also believe a man that is interested in you honestly won't mind waiting until you are ready and confidently having fun with you and showing you love in the meantime.

Observing someone's character around others helps to.

Many people get tunnel vision around someone they are attracted to. They don't see very clearly and often end up with a troll instead of a good mate.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> When his words and actions are in alignment. When he is honest and open in discussion about life, love and sex.
> When the intentions behind his words and actions are loving and for the greater good of us both.


Agree with all of this. 



> If you give a man the opportunity for honesty without judgement then he will be honest


Unfortunately, I have had the experience where a man has told me, "I feel so comfortable with you, so at ease, like I can tell you anything and you won't judge me!"

....and the next sentence he uttered was a complete LIE. Ugh.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> Agree with all of this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That is sad. There are plenty of good men out there.

A bit OT but we have a house full of teens here and it is vital to us to raise them with good morals, self respect and a healthy outlook on sex and relationships. We have one ATM that is preparing to start having sex with her BF and part of this is discussion around not pressuring or feeling pressured to do anything they don't want to. Being healthy both physical and emotional. 

My youngest has her first BF and she is close to 14, we have started having conversations around relationships and self respect. It was hard for her at first to talk but I made her sit down with me and gave her a very safe place to talk. She knows that in the future when the time is right that sex can be a good, healthy part of life.

Last thing I ever want to do is send my kids out into the world without a healthy outlook on life, love and sex.

My guess is that a lot of people that have a poor outlook on sex did not get good messages early on and did not have a non judgemental , safe place to have these discussions.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> Actions outside of the bedroom. Not words.
> 
> I also believe a man that is interested in you honestly won't mind waiting until you are ready and confidently having fun with you and showing you love in the meantime.
> 
> ...


See, I kind of feel like we're right back to square one, Conan. I can see your wisdom applied to single _and_ married folks. 

If a married woman doesn't see her husbands actions/words as very 'loving' OUTSIDE of the bedroom, she's not going to believe that he's "loving" her INSIDE of the bedroom. She'll feel used. 

If there's a lull in married sex won't a man who loves his wife also 'wait' for her to be more comfortable enough to resume sex with him? Could her lack of interest be because of his (in)actions OUTSIDE of the bedroom?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Vega said:


> See, I kind of feel like we're right back to square one, Conan. I can see your wisdom applied to single _and_ married folks.
> 
> If a married woman doesn't his her husbands actions/words as very 'loving' OUTSIDE of the bedroom, she's not going to believe that he's "loving" her INSIDE of the bedroom. She'll feel used.
> 
> If there's a lull in married sex won't a man who loves his wife also 'wait' for her to be more comfortable enough to resume sex with him? Could her lack of interest be because of his (in)actions OUTSIDE of the bedroom?


Yes. Her lack of desire could be.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> That is sad. There are plenty of good men out there.


That wasn't the half of it. I've been re-evaluating my life over the past few months, and when I looked at my LTR's with men I realized that the man lied to me EARLY in the relationship. Every. Single. One. 

First husband- Lied about being married. When we first started seeing each other, he told me that he was already divorced. And that was only ONE of his lies. 

Second husband-Lied about having an STD. He called it "simplex 2". I never heard of it. Only after we were married did I find out it was Herpes. (no, I never contracted it)

LTR #1- Hid a cocaine addiction from me.
LTR #2- Told me he was accused of beating his wife. Told me he never beat his wife. Later told me that they "hit each other". Then he started hitting ME...
LTR#3- Alcoholic. Alcoholism and lying go hand in hand

Third Husband- Lied about EVERYTHING. Lied about porn use (he was addicted). Lied about being in love with me. Two years after we were married, he told me that he "didn't know what love was" and that he married me because he didn't think I would have sex with him UNLESS we were married! 

LTR#4- Told me and everyone one I was the "love of his life". He had an emotional affair, and told me that he "always saw us as friends with benefits; that he was NEVER 'quite' in love with me, despite telling me he was in love with me only a week before announcing that he had been having an affair.

The most recent man I was seeing told me that he had divorced his wife for cheating on him. Turned out that SHE was the one to divorce HIM. He also told me that his previous relationship was "completely over". Meanwhile, I found out that he had been pining away for her on social media and was basically having sex with me while waiting for her to leave her ex-husband. 

Now, I KNOW that ALL men don't lie. But I'll be gosh darned that I'm having problems finding one who doesn't!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> Yes. Her lack of desire could be.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Well, if that's the truth, then why do so many people seem to automatically blame HER, instead of looking at HIS (in)actions FIRST? 

I'm sorry, but I absolutely *cringe* when I hear a man come onto TAM, complain about their wives not 'putting out' and claiming that they're a "good husband". My first instinct is to shout at the computer, "ARE YOU, *REALLY*??????"

And yes, I feel the same way when a woman says the same thing.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega have you looked at why you have been with all these men that are not of good quality? I know introspection is hard but somewhere in all of us we have to take some blame for where our life leads us. 

My whole life I have been surrounded by good quality men, my Dad and brothers, my Step Dad, family, friends etc. My eg was always that of good men. Ironically I married a high quality man but was naive to the importance of sexual compatibility. Lesson learnt and never to be repeated. Why have you had such a string of poor quality men?


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

ConanHub said:


> Ok. She has only done a bj or hj during foreplay. She has been getting progressively better at it though.
> 
> I talk to her before, during and after to let her know how much I truly love and appreciate her.
> 
> ...


I feel a need to be held afterwards, almost as if I need to be warmed-up and nurtured. THat's all the appreciation I need. I'd be very upset if my husband just went to sleep. 

It is probably not an unusual feeling, not being held while doing something intimate makes me need holding all the more.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Vega have you looked at why you have been with all these men that are not of good quality?


Sure. Like I mentioned earlier, I've been taking a sabbatical for the past few months and re-evaluating my life. Part of that is going back into my family of origin and trying to figure all this stuff out. You know....absentee father....strict Catholic (hypocritical) upbringing...sex never even mentioned in the house...yadda, yadda, yadda. It's a process. 



> I know introspection is hard but somewhere in all of us we have to take some blame for where our life leads us.


Introspection _is_ hard but only because life keeps interrupting me, lol! Believe me, if I had the next few months to do nothing but work on this I would! 

As for taking "blame", I really have no problem with that. 



> . Why have you had such a string of poor quality men


Probably part of the reason is because unlike you, *I* was NOT surrounded by good quality men when was growing up. My father and mother were divorced before I was a year old. My grandfather would always side with my grandmother...who was abusive. I had a twin brother who had emotional problems of his own. My mom was an only child, so there were no aunts, uncles or cousins around and she didn't have anything to do with my father's family (he had a HUGE family). So, no real male role models.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I hope you find a better place Vega. There is a wonderful world out there and some pretty damn amazing men. 

Of course the single life can be fantastic (I always enjoyed my single days) but being in the arms of a man that truly loves you is pure bliss.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Vega said:


> ETA: A man can look into your eyes with that expression that melts you heart...and not even be CLOSE to being in love with you (although YOU might be in love with HIM) BTDT.
> 
> Only if *I* was the ONLY woman he ever had sex with. Otherwise, what's the dif?
> 
> ...


Men don't have sex because they love all of their partners. However, with a woman they love, the emotional connection is enhanced when they have sex. Sex is associated with love sometimes.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> Men don't have sex because they love all of their partner. However, with a woman they love, the emotional connection is enhanced when they have sex. Sex is associated with love sometimes.


You're getting good at this!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Thor said:


> .
> All I'm doing is reporting to you how men commonly think. Sex is seen as an indicator of how a woman really feels about her man. If she shows a differential, the guy getting the low interest will conclude she is with him for some other reason than emotional fondness. He will not feel loved or desired.


Women commonly think like this too. He has ED because I'm old, fat and ugly; he'd rather have sex with the cutie porn star; he doesn't really want me, he just wants to get off; he's only with me because I'm convenient; he used to be more into me, but now he wants sex less because I'm too wrinkly, or saggy. And so on.

And you can spend your life torturing yourself with these sorts of thoughts if you want. But it actually doesn't solve anything, and ultimately causes a whole new set of problems.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> *Sex is associated with love sometimes*.


Yes. _Sometimes_ it is associated with love. Sometimes it isn't. But WHICH times are which? Doesn't seem to be any _consistency_. 

Getting awfully tired of being the one they're having sex with during those "sometimes" when they're NOT in love...


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

@Vega It is all in what you allow yourself to be treated. Even a good man can be turned into a selfish one by a woman who does too much. 

Bad men pick women they know will put up with their sh!t. How do they do it? First, they stay away from confident women who show that they respect themselves. I bet you can pick the self confident women out of a group of woman. Eye contact, dress, make-up and demeanor. 

The rest they try to capture in their web, they start nice then slowly begin to tear down. A criticism here and there, ignoring after a fight, distance for no reason, then isolation etc. If you stay as they slowly role out their psychopathy, they have a relationship. 

Every woman who has dated has dated a stinker. You don't have bad luck, you just ignore red flags and move ahead. One giant red flag is wanting to move the relationship ahead quickly. Another is poor work history and finances.

You know what the red flags are, when you see them dump early and as frequently as needed. Emulate the self-confident women you know, fake it, you will eventually internalize.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> @Vega It is all in what you allow yourself to be treated. Even a good man can be turned into a selfish one by a woman who does too much.
> 
> Bad men pick woman they know will put up with their sh!t. How do they do it? First, they say away from confident woman who show that they respect themselves. I bet you can pick the self confident women out of a group of woman. Eye contact, dress, make and demeanor.
> 
> ...


Wow. Thank you, Catherine. This post probably saved me about 5 years of therapy!

Only 19 left to go....(j/k) :ezpi_wink1:


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Vega said:


> Wow. Thank you, Catherine. This post probably saved me about 5 years of therapy!
> 
> Only 19 left to go....(j/k) :ezpi_wink1:


At the first red flag, let them go. I bet you make excuses for bad behavior and try to rescue them? 

There is no excuse, they are testing you. If you try to rescue them instead of dumping their sorry azzes, you're in, unfortunately. Dumping the bad ones makes room for the next one and gives you a sense of respect for yourself. You protected yourself, valued you.
you.

How can you tell if it's love or sex? It takes time to fall in love. If you have sex with a man after knowing him for a few weeks, it's most likely not love. 

Maybe you don't know if he is worthy of your love so it is not all in his control. You can wait to see if you like him well enough to have sex but there is no guarantee that love will bloom. 

Make a list of things you need to know before having sex. How much do you want to know? There should at lest be a strong attraction. You know when a man is attracted. 

Does he call, talk, see out your company, show up when he say he will, not cagey about what he does. If he disappears because he is not getting sex then you know.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> Yes. _Sometimes_ it is associated with love. Sometimes it isn't. But WHICH times are which? Doesn't seem to be any _consistency_.
> 
> Getting awfully tired of being the one they're having sex with during those "sometimes" when they're NOT in love...


I know how you feel. I've had guys spin all sorts of yarns about love, about me being special, blah, blah, blah, but all they wanted was to get laid. Story of my dating life. It got so bad, I just stopped dating altogether because I couldn't bear the bs or the rejection of it.

But then I met my SO. And while I still believe he isn't really into me sexually, at least I know that he actually likes me, for me. 

A lot of people think dating is easy for women because we don't get rejected. As if!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> At the first red flag, let them go. I bet you make excuses for bad behavior and try to rescue them?
> .


Close. My Catholic upbringing told me to FORGIVE them. It was only recently that I learned that I can forgive them, and still stay faaaaaaaar away from them! 



> There is no excuse, they are testing you. If you try to rescue them instead of dumping their sorry azzes, you're in, unfortunately. Dumping the bad ones makes room for the next one and gives you a sense of respect for yourself. You protected yourself, valued you.
> you.


Testing me? Hmm...never thought of it that way....



> How can you tell if it's love or sex? It takes time to fall in love. If you have sex with a man after knowing him for a few weeks, it's most likely not love.


I THOUGHT I was taking my time with these men. And, for the most part, I was. But I was ignorant as to what to look for. I paid too much attention to their _personality_ (funny, quick-witted, intelligent, etc.) and not enough to their character. (Ego under control, honest, fair, etc.) That's something I have changed. Having re-evaluated them with my new standards, I realized that if I knew back then what I know NOW, I would have dumped most of them within the first few WEEKS. 



> Maybe you don't know if he is worthy of your love so it is not all in his control. You can wait to see if you like him well enough to have sex but there is no guarantee that love will bloom.


I see a lot of women here on TAM and other sites who advocate waiting and a lot of men who don't. I know that when I start dating again, I'll be looking for a _serious_ relationship. And, will let 'him' know right away that I'm not going to have sex with him anytime soon. Separating the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. 



> Make a list of things you need to know before having sex. How much do you want to know? There should at lest be a strong attraction. You know when a man is attracted


.

I've actually started doing this, but right now, I'm in no rush. I've been asked out by a few men over the past few months, but I've turned them all down. I'm not ready, and I know it. 

Does he call, talk, see out your company, show up when he say he will, not cagey about what he does. If he disappears because he is not getting sex then you know

The last person I was with did these things. For about 2 weeks, then tapered off. I saw his inconsistencies. He would tell me one thing and tell others something completely different, or he would tell me something and then ACT in a complete opposite manner. I realized that he was too inconsistent for me, and deemed him as untrustworthy. I ended up telling him off. He gave me a half-hearted apology and I ignored him for a few months. I've only recently started to be cordial to him again, but that's it. I want nothing more from him. I will 'mirror' what he does. If HE says hello, I'll say hello. I will give nothing more than I get. It's good 'practice' for me for the REAL 'one'!


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

alexm said:


> Marriage isn't some kind of paradise where the person we're with caters to our every needs, while we sit back and relax and enjoy ourselves.


Obviously you haven't gotten the memo.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> If only...:crying:
> 
> I'll tell ya. I'm a service-oriented person, both in my home life and in the world-at-large. But unfortunately, too many men took advantage of my nature and I was treated like a doormat instead of appreciated for what I brought to "the table".
> 
> ...


This reminds me of the story about a man who was the gatekeeper for a city in olden days when traveling between cities was a big deal.

A man came up to him and asked, "What are the people in this city like?"

He replied, "What are the people like in the city where you are from?"

The answer was "They are mean and stingy and generally unpleasant to be around".

The gatekeeper said "I think you will find them the same here."

The next day another man came up to the gatekeeper and asked, "What are the people in this city like?"

He replied, "What are the people like in the city where you are from?"

The answer was "They are generous and pleasant to be around".

The gatekeeper said "I think you will find them the same here."


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Here's the difference: *It's *easy* to put forth that effort when your desire level is high. It's an entirely different experience putting forth that level of effort when you have zero or negligible desire.*
> 
> I know you don't see this. You can't fathom it at all. It's true though.


Thank you for agreeing that the reason that a wife doesn't want to do these things for her husband when she did them happily for a former boyfriend is that she doesn't desire her husband as she did the former boyfriend.

That's precisely why it bothers the husband.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Yes, and it's not that they're being selfish or conniving or any other negative thing; it's just that they don't understand at all. They are completely unaware that there's a problem, even if they've been HD before for their entire lives - that's one thing that was so surprising to me.


I think the best analogy is that there are types of blindness in which not only is sight lost but so is the function of the part of the brain responsible for seeing. In such a situation, not only does the person not see, but he/she cannot remember or even *imagine *what seeing is like.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> Thank you for agreeing that the reason that a wife doesn't want to do these things for her husband when she did them happily for a former boyfriend is that she doesn't desire her husband as she did the former boyfriend.
> 
> That's precisely why it bothers the husband.


I'm sorry TN, but this just sounds so high school. "You did it for him (them). How come you won't do it for MEEEEEEEEE?" 

If any man, especially my husband said that to me, I'd make him my *EX* husband pronto! 

If he can't handle that I had a past _without_ out him, _regardless of what I did in my past_, then he's not fit to be in my future.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> And why do you suppose that is?
> 
> If all of your life, including your teenage years, you HEAR how "all men just want sex" and EXPERIENCE a few who DO "just" want sex and UNDERSTAND that the bottom line for most men--even the 'nice guys'--is sex...
> ...AND, many men would leave their wives because of a LACK of sex, well...
> ...


Other than in cases of rape, the woman always has the option of whether sex is going to happen. And we know that men have far higher sex drives, on average, than women, so women can almost always have sex if they want it, whereas (most) men cannot.

Thus, it is up to *women *to abstain from having sex with men before marriage if they want premarital abstention to be the rule.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> How to answer that question...?
> 
> Historically, I've many times had sex with my husband when I wasn't 100% into it but he needed it. Like for instance I've had plenty of sex while in pain recovering from various injuries over the years. It probably slowed down my healing in some cases, but it was too important to me to keep that connection. I prioritized sex over my immediate comfort. So, I'd *like* to think that I will always make it a priority.
> 
> BUT, then again, I've always had plenty of desire. How can I know how I'd feel without it? I sure hope that never happens - *if it did, you can be sure that I'd explore every avenue to get it back.*


Unfortunately that is not generally the case, because the drive to solve problems is highly influenced by factors in common with the sex drive. This is why people without sexual desire don't generally seem to care that they don't have desire.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> I'm sorry TN, but this just sounds so high school. "You did it for him (them). How come you won't do it for MEEEEEEEEE?"
> 
> If any man, especially my husband said that to me, I'd make him my *EX* husband pronto!
> 
> If he can't handle that I had a past _without_ out him, _regardless of what I did in my past_, then he's not fit to be in my future.


Your argument is with @OliviaG, not with me. She's the one who pointed this out; I just acknowledged it.

And of course you have the right to reject any man you want on any basis you want, and vice versa. But the fact that you have had a lot of bad experiences with men might suggest that your criteria aren't doing you much good...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> Thus, it is up to *women *to abstain from having sex with men before marriage if they want premarital abstention to be the rule.


I think it should be the responsibility of BOTH genders. 

Just trying to be FAIR.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> .
> But the fact that you have had a lot of bad experiences with men might suggest that your criteria aren't doing you much good...


Actually my bad experiences were caused by a lot of factors, one being that I didn't have many boundaries. 

NOW I do.

And I refuse to allow a man to try and manipulate me into doing something that I obviously don't wish to do, by telling me that I SHOULD do 'it' with him just because I did it before. 

Just because a woman says 'yes' to sex with a man doesn't mean she gives up her right to say 'no' to another...

...even if that man eventually becomes her husband.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> ..................................
> 
> 
> I see a lot of women here on TAM and other sites who advocate waiting and a lot of men who don't. I know that when I start dating again, I'll be looking for a _serious_ relationship. And, will let 'him' know right away that I'm not going to have sex with him anytime soon. Separating the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.
> ...


OK we clearly have very different experiences and POVs and that's fine. IME holding off on sex does nothing to separate the wheat from the chaff. 
The key is to be really sure about yourself and what it is that you want, you set your own timetable. I prefer to have sex very early on as my life lesson was about sexual compatibility and I don't have the time or inclination for a lousy lover. Making a man wait won't really prove that much except that he can hold out for longer.
Sex is not something that should be given that much power IMHO, it is something that should be mutually enjoyable. Making someone wait is like being the prize holder and they have to then prove themselves, there are far better ways for a man to prove his character.

In the end though you chose the timetable that suits you but do not expect that simply waiting longer for sex means he is a good man.

A good man will value a woman that values herself, this is far more important than how long they can hold out for. You determine what your worth is, don't get back out there until you have a healthy level of self worth. A piece of **** man will focus in on a woman that has low self worth. Bullies chose victims.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> OK we clearly have very different experiences and POVs and that's fine. IME holding off on sex does nothing to separate the wheat from the chaff.


Holding off on sex can determine whether a man is interested in YOU or interested in sex. If he tries to get you into bed pretty quickly, he pretty much has sex on the brain. 



> Making a man wait won't really prove that much except that he can hold out for longer.
> 
> Making someone wait is like being the prize holder and they have to then prove themselves, there are far better ways for a man to prove his character


I wouldn't be "making" him wait. *I* am the one who would be waiting. My reason for waiting is to get to know his character before jumping into bed with him. If HE wants to wait, he's free to do so. If he doesn't, he's also free NOT to. 

But just imagine if I met someone, immediately hit it off, jumped into bed a week later and a month after that, I find out he's married. I would REGRET not waiting. Not getting to know him a little better. I'll be asking a LOT of questions, listening to his answers and observing if his actions match his words. And that takes at least _some_ amount of time. If at any point he becomes anxious, he's free to end the relationship, as am I.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> I think it should be the responsibility of BOTH genders.
> 
> Just trying to be FAIR.


Ok, but what you said was: 

"Perhaps if men actually abstained from having sex with women BEFORE marriage, it would be easier for a woman to believe that the man equates sex with love. "

which doesn't sound like you think it should be the responsibility of both genders.

Thanks for clarifying your opinion that it should be.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

OliviaG said:


> I'm curious as to why you think you have experienced it if you don't even know what it is...lol..
> 
> Actually, not what *I've* experienced. Have you ever lost sexual desire? Not just for a day or for a person, but has your T been low enough that you just didn't care about sex anymore?


Many times, yes. I wouldn't say it's due to low T levels, but just circumstances, where my head's at, the relationship status, etc.

Only just recently I've been sick with a bad cold which turned into asthma (puffer and all). Didn't miss a day of work, but had no interest in sex for about a month. All in all, about 5 weeks of no sex. Wife didn't notice, or say anything, or do anything.

A few years ago, she and I were in a bad spot, sexually. I had a solid 3 month spell where my desire for sex was low - non-existent. It still happened, just less frequently, and my interest was almost solely on the physical when it did happen. Basically going through the motions, get her off, get myself off, carry on. I didn't like that feeling of disconnect very much.

The last 2 years I spent with my ex wife, I could take or leave sex. She had "normal" desire, despite our lack of compatibility, so she initiated. I rejected her a number of times (one in which I recall she was absolutely furious with me for...) Otherwise, when I wasn't at all in the mood, and I thought she might be, I generally made myself unavailable. Otherwise, I just went through the motions, which was what our sex life really had been for far longer, anyway. I don't think she noticed any change, TBH.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Buddy400 said:


> I think this is a relatively new concept, part of the "you shouldn't ever have sex if you don't want to" message directed at women.
> 
> While exceptionally good advice for women not in a relationship, it's not exactly helpful in a marriage. Especially if "want to" is defined as "spontaneously aroused" instead of "willing to give yourself the opportunity to be aroused (responsive desire)".
> 
> I think this is the primary reason that sex is set apart from satisfying any other needs or desires of your spouse. I think anyone who didn't spend quality time with their spouse because they "just weren't in the mood" might be considered selfish and uncaring.


I think this is spot-on. Also, it's nobody's fault, least of all women, so there's really no blame to be cast.

But yes, there's a severe disconnect in the messages being sent to women (and men) in regards to this subject.

On one hand, the so-called sexual revolution has enabled women to no longer be shamed for wanting, or even seeking out, sex, especially while single. There's an empowerment of sorts that came with that ability to no longer feel like one has to hide their sexuality or their desire to have sex. There was a movement to equalize genders when it came to pre-marital sex. Where once, men were studs and women were ****s for having multiple sex partners, that is no longer the case (or not supposed to be, anyway).

When it comes to marriage, or LTR's, this doesn't seem to carry through in many cases, though. It's as though the woman is expected to put that behind her and almost become a new person. The stereotypes of no longer having to do this, that or the other thing after marriage, for one.

I live this, and many, many others live this, as evidenced by many posts on TAM. There are many of us husbands (good husbands) who have wives who have had interesting and varied pasts, yet who have put that behind them (often under the guise of "the past is the past" or "that was the old me") and now no longer equate their past sexual desires, interests and curiosities with married life.

And more often than not, we husbands aren't talking about weird or crazy things, like 3-somes. We're quite literally talking about so-called basic things, like oral sex, or even just variety in the bedroom.

For me, it's hard to rectify in my own brain, for example, relegating my sex life to Saturday nights, in the bedroom. No other day, no other location. With a woman who has had her fair share of casual sex and ONS's (neither of which bother me at all). But to know that she was once willing to sleep with somebody she just met and would never see again after that night, yet she rejects the person she loves dearly is a difficult thing to reconcile.

I think the irony is that, for many men, pre-marital sex has always been rather inconsequential, it means nothing. It's sowing one's oats. But once we meet the woman we want to spend our lives with, most men no longer view sex in that way. It suddenly becomes meaningful, and we "get it". It's certainly still about fulfilling one's physical desires, but hey, it's with someone we actually love, and it means something, perhaps for the first time in our lives.

With the message given to women over the past 40-50 years that they, too, can enjoy sex and release their sexual desires, I think the opposite effect has taken hold in some cases. For eons, sex with one's spouse WAS an obligation, for the woman. I'm pretty sure the bible even speaks to that, among other places. Because attitudes have changed, and women are much more free to express their sexual desires, I think it may have caused an inadvertent shift in thinking with marital sex.

As many women do have responsive desire, it's understandable that if a charming and good looking enough guy hits on them in a bar one night, their sexual radar may go off. It's fun and exciting.

When the same guy (your husband) hits on you for the thousandth time, that responsive desire is lacking, and the brain, rather than saying "go for it, this is fun and exciting!" starts to look for reasons NOT to, instead. I have to be up early. I'm tired. I had a long day. So rather than find reasons to get in the mood, one finds reasons not to.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

And when you know some of this about your partner before getting married, you take it in as part of who she is and what she is like. Which means the man expects her to remain like that. When she then goes into matronly mode and only shows occasional interest in plain vanilla Saturday night sex every few weeks, it does not compute.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> I live this, and many, many others live this, as evidenced by many posts on TAM. There are many of us husbands (good husbands) who have wives who have had interesting and varied pasts, yet who have put that behind them (often under the guise of "the past is the past" or "that was the old me") and now no longer equate their past sexual desires, interests and curiosities with married life.
> 
> And more often than not, we husbands aren't talking about weird or crazy things, like 3-somes. We're quite literally talking about so-called basic things, like oral sex, or even just variety in the bedroom.
> 
> For me, it's hard to rectify in my own brain, for example, relegating my sex life to Saturday nights, in the bedroom. No other day, no other location. With a woman who has had her fair share of casual sex and ONS's (neither of which bother me at all). But to know that she was once willing to sleep with somebody she just met and would never see again after that night, yet she rejects the person she loves dearly is a difficult thing to reconcile.


Some women have sex because they want to. Because they are genuinely sexual, because sex is important to them. But some women have sex because it gives them the attention they crave, because they want him to like her, because they feel they have to in order to be accepted or popular. Some women even use sex as a way to rebel.

These women, the ones who are doing it for reasons other than really enjoying and wanting it are, IMHO, the ones most likely to later say "enough". Ultimately they want to be true to themselves, and true to a healthy self who gets to have her own boundaries, her own desires, her own timetable. And no doubt their husbands are upset that she seemed one way in the beginning and is no longer that way. But as @Vega was saying it isn't necessarily a reflection on him. Just where she is at.

And IME at any rate, it is not the case a @Holland said that good men value a woman who values herself. My experience was very much that men prefer the women who are giving them what they want, whether it is rooted in healthy self-esteem or not.

I mean, when I got with my SO, he was totally into sex. Now he isn't. Do you think he bait and switched me? Wants other women more than me? Used to give it away freely (he's done lots of things with other women that he's never done with me), so loves them more than me?

Maybe. But maybe it is just where he is at.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Thor said:


> And when you know some of this about your partner before getting married, you take it in as part of who she is and what she is like. Which means the man expects her to remain like that. When she then goes into matronly mode and only shows occasional interest in plain vanilla Saturday night sex every few weeks, it does not compute.


I think that is the bigger issue, the "bait and switch" we have talked about, if the person (let's make it gender neutral) acts a certain way with you sexually at the onset of the relationship, but slowly after the wedding bells have gone off, changes how they act sexually. Of course there could be a myriad of reason for this (issues in the marriage, hormones, etc...), but I also believe that there are cases where one feels they need to act a certain way sexually in order to attain their goal (marriage).


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> Holding off on sex can determine whether a man is interested in YOU or interested in sex. If he tries to get you into bed pretty quickly, he pretty much has sex on the brain.


I'm sorry you've have such a string of bad experiences. You should definitely try a different approach so I'm not trying to argue with you here, just point out some truth perhaps. Substantially ALL men have "sex on the brain" as you say. It's a feature not a bug. 



Vega said:


> I wouldn't be "making" him wait. *I* am the one who would be waiting. My reason for waiting is to get to know his character before jumping into bed with him. If HE wants to wait, he's free to do so. If he doesn't, he's also free NOT to.
> 
> But just imagine if I met someone, immediately hit it off, jumped into bed a week later and a month after that, I find out he's married. I would REGRET not waiting. Not getting to know him a little better. I'll be asking a LOT of questions, listening to his answers and observing if his actions match his words. And that takes at least _some_ amount of time. If at any point he becomes anxious, he's free to end the relationship, as am I.


As an adult, not a 16 year old, and one who would consider myself a reasonably desirable catch if I was single - a good guy, considerate of others, very well employed for 30+ years, etc. etc. NOT perfect but who is? I'd offer the following feedback on the waiting question:

1st date, no sex, no problem. 

5th date, say a month in, still not a problem but beginning to wonder a bit. 

A couple months or more in one it is a big problem. I started to write more which began to sound a bit like a personal attack which I do not want to do so I'll leave it here. After two months of waiting no sex is a problem, highly likely to walk. If that is "sex on the brain" then guilty as charged and not ashamed of it...:smile2:


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> It's suspicious when it seems that you (you generally; ;not YOU, Ellis!) ONLY want that emotional connection when you're _horny_ and at no other time...
> 
> ...and that it's not HER you love but SEX you love.
> 
> Just telling you how some women think.


First off, both men AND women get horny lol. There are plenty of times where I want to tear my Ws clothes off purely on hormones, and likewise she wants to do the same to me.

Second, who says it is purely horniness that has us wanting sex as part of the emotional connection. You ever think that maybe, just maybe, some of us want to have sex with our wives b/c we want to please them, we want to make them feel good, look into their eyes, love feeling their skin against ours, etc... You make it seem like it is all a selfish act just for some guy to bust a nut. 

If what you mention is how some women think, then clearly they have been with the wrong guy(s).


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> but I also believe that there are cases where one feels they need to act a certain way *sexually* in order to attain their goal (marriage).


Not just sexually. They can also bait and switch personality-wise, too!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> You make it seem like it is all a selfish act just for some guy to bust a nut.
> 
> If what you mention is how some women think, then clearly they have been with the wrong guy(s).


This is more or less how I see it. When we first got together, my SO was into sex, and wanted it often. It wasn't about me, any woman would've done, but I was who was there. Now he is not so horny and so he doesn't want sex so much. 

I dunno, maybe that's the wrong guy. But I've never know different and if I've learned anything on TAM it's that the "right" guys don't have use for women like me.

Of course that applies only to me, not to the other fine women around.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Vega said:


> That wasn't the half of it. I've been re-evaluating my life over the past few months, and when I looked at my LTR's with men I realized that the man lied to me EARLY in the relationship. Every. Single. One.
> 
> First husband- Lied about being married. When we first started seeing each other, he told me that he was already divorced. And that was only ONE of his lies.
> 
> ...


Alright. With a track record like this, you have to look a bit inward and realize that there is a problem somewhere with you.

You are attracting and accepting pathetic mates. I had the same problem but learned to avoid bad choices around the age of 17.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

anonmd said:


> I'd offer the following feedback on the waiting question:
> 
> 1st date, no sex, no problem.
> 
> 5th date, say a month in, still not a problem but beginning to wonder a bit.


Umm...I would mention sex on the *FIRST* DATE. I'm not about to waste HIS time if sex is what he's after and wouldn't want him to waste MINE. 

But I would also let him know WHY also. If he bolts, GREAT! If he doesn't, GREAT!


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Sounds entertaining, oh to be a fly on the wall...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

anonmd said:


> Sounds entertaining, oh to be a fly on the wall...


Why?


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> Thor, there ARE husbands out there who could GIVE A DAMM about what their wives did BEFORE them, with WHOM and whether or not they liked it. The reason WHY she doesn't want to do "it" NOW is irrelevant; what matters is that _she doesn't want to do it. Period_.
> 
> It's like you're in _competition _with her past which will prevent you from focusing on the future.
> 
> ...


No doubt there are some people, men and women alike, who do focus on specific acts, but I think more often than not, and frequently misunderstood is that it has nothing to do with the specific act at all. It has to do with what the act represents...enthusiasm, desire, an ability to let go with the person they are with.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I hope that love happens long before marriage.

But yes, many people enjoy sex without love. For many sex helps them fall in love. 

I can't imagine having a romantic relationship with another man because there would be no sexual attraction. At the same time, were I not married, I could imagine enjoying sex with an enthusiastic partner even if we were not in love - in fact I did so long ago. No love - just mutually enjoyable sex. 

I don't it simplifies to sex == love or sex != love. 



Vega said:


> And why do you suppose that is?
> 
> snip
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
there are certainly men who are just out for sex, and will do anythign to get it. If you can recognize them, they are best avoided but some can be very persuasive. 

Long before we were married, my wife fell for someone like that. 



Vega said:


> Or...maybe there are _that many _ men out there who have their 'game' down to a science.
> 
> So tell me Holland...how _DO_ you tell if a man is using you or if a man is loving you...especially since sex is involved in BOTH cases?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
absolutely true - up to a point. Fro some people thought the "lull" can turn into years. 

Sometimes it is due to his actions, sometimes is is not. 



Vega said:


> snip
> 
> If there's a lull in married sex won't a man who loves his wife also 'wait' for her to be more comfortable enough to resume sex with him? Could her lack of interest be because of his (in)actions OUTSIDE of the bedroom?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
That is really sad and you have my sympathy. 

It probably deserves its own thread, but I've seen before that some women see to have extremely poor "luck" with men. It isn't anything obvious that they do or do not do, they just end up with horrible partners.

Is it possible that after a couple of bad experiences they seem to become normal? Rather than instantly dumping a new partner who behaves badly, women start to think that men are often like this?






Vega said:


> That wasn't the half of it. I've been re-evaluating my life over the past few months, and when I looked at my LTR's with men I realized that the man lied to me EARLY in the relationship. Every. Single. One.
> 
> First husband- Lied about being married. When we first started seeing each other, he told me that he was already divorced. And that was only ONE of his lies.
> 
> ...


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> Why?


That is a very delicate conversation for a FIRST date. 

Every male who wants to date you wants to get in your pants at SOME point. 

#1 Some will WANT in on date one and be prepared to go after it, encourage you etc. 

#2 Some will not be looking for it and not expect it, but wouldn't turn you down if offered. 

#1's will either be scared away by the conversation which is fine as that is what you want. Other's will view it as a challenge, they will lie . 

Some (a lot) of #2's will be offended / taken aback by your assumptions of ill will on their part unless this conversation is very skillfully done. I may be wrong, but I think the good guy you really want is in this group and would be easily turned away at this point. 

By all means do not have sex for as long as you want. Have that conversation early, just saying date 2 or 3 might be better.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Oh for heaven's sake. Are you serious - that's what you took from what I've been saying? I've spent so much time trying to articulate what I mean and not only that have poured out a bunch of painful stuff here to try to reinforce the point. It's really disheartening to find that I've been completely unsuccessful.


Yes, that is what I took from that particular post.

Of course some of your other posts have been about other issues, and I appreciate your willingness to discuss painful issues, but that is what I got from that post.

I don't really see how that is misreading what you said, but perhaps you can explain.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
While waiting for sex will separate men who are only looking for sex, it won't catch a wide range of other problems from addiction to abuse. 

I think the biggest downside to waiting too long is the compatibly issue. The risk that you will fall deeply in love and then discover that you simply are unable to have a mutually enjoyable sex life.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

alexm said:


> So rather than find reasons to get in the mood, one finds reasons not to.


This is the crux of the problem.

A mental shift to look for reasons to get in the mood would solve a lot of problems at no one's expense.

How to prompt that mental shift is the trick. Many times it takes "I am unwilling to spend the rest of my life....."


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> But as Vega was saying it isn't necessarily a reflection on him. Just where she is at.


In the end, it doesn't really matter much if it's "about me" or not.

If I get fired and my boss assures me that it's "not about me", that doesn't really make me feel much better. I still don't have a job.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> In the end, it doesn't really matter much if it's "about me" or not.
> 
> If I get fired and my boss assures me that it's "not about me", that doesn't really make me feel much better. I still don't have a job.


But maybe you can still get a good reference.... 

Meaning, basically, that I was addressing the posts that were all hand-wringing about what she did in the past vs what she is willing to do now, and what that says about her.

Yes you are still out of a job or are not having sex, or whatever analogy you want here. But when you are spending so much time chastising her for not being loving enough or giving enough, or not fulfilling her obligations, all you're really doing is driving her even further away.

Please note that when I say "you" here, I am speaking generically, not saying this is you personally.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> Thank you for agreeing that the reason that a wife doesn't want to do these things for her husband when she did them happily for a former boyfriend is that she doesn't desire her husband as she did the former boyfriend.
> 
> That's precisely why it bothers the husband.


at this point I'm coming around to the belief that it really shouldn't bother the husband unless the wife is deceitful about this.

she can't help it that she doesn't find her husband hot.

she can be honest about it though.

I realize this would put many women in an awkward position of saying, look honey, I'm with you because you're stable, good father material, etc, not because I really like you in the other way. And yes, I've like other guys in that way more.

but what's really unfair is that she's given herself an opportunity to decide whether this type of compromise is acceptable but has not given her husband the same opportunity.

basically, as long as you're honest about it, I don't think there's really any blame to be identified.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Please note that when I say "you" here, I am speaking generically, not saying this is you personally.


I think you (meaning "you") should join me in using "one" in these situations. I know it seems pretentious, but I think it's worth it for the sake of clarity and brevity :smile2:


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Vega, it's been an awfully long time since I dated. If I try to imagine a first date scenario where I sit him down and explain to him that he will *not* be getting sex from me for a while, and here's why - I just can't imagine it leading to anything good. I really think a good man would be scared off by that. He would get the impression that your default thoughts about men are that they are @ssholes until proven otherwise. I can't imagine him warming to that thought.
> 
> Don't lay bare your soul on a first date. Don't give ultimatums. Just have some fun and try to get to know him. If he presses hard for sex on a first date, he's not for you. NEXT! If he doesn't, and you seem to have a good rapport, agree to a second date, and take it from there.
> 
> ...


I agree with all of this except the last part.

A good guy - i.e., one who is desirable to other women too -- is unlikely to be cool with waiting too long.

A guy who has no other options WILL wait, but he's likely got other major flaws.

At the end of the day, establishing intimacy requires taking a risk. You have to be willing to expose yourself. If you're uncomfortable with that, you will find fewer opportunities for intimacy.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> This is the crux of the problem.
> 
> A mental shift to look for reasons to get in the mood would solve a lot of problems at no one's expense.
> 
> How to prompt that mental shift is the trick. Many times it takes "I am unwilling to spend the rest of my life....."


I'm obviously skeptical that this kind of mental shift can happen long term.

the only way I can really see it working is as you described earlier-- the actual experience proves pleasurable enough that actual desire is created. But if that happens, there really does not need to be a conscious effort anymore because desire occurs spontaneously

I don't really see how threat can compel this type of mental shift long term.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Anon1111 said:


> I agree with all of this except the last part.
> 
> A good guy - i.e., one who is desirable to other women too -- is unlikely to be cool with waiting too long.


I guess the issue, everyone's definition of long will vary. Some may consider a month or so ok while others expect to get laid by the 3rd date.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> In the end, it doesn't really matter much if it's "about me" or not.
> 
> If I get fired and my boss assures me that it's "not about me", that doesn't really make me feel much better. I still don't have a job.



this type of statement is total nonsense, but I do believe that many LD people subjectively feel it is true, so there is no point in arguing about it because you will never convince them.

all you need to ask yourself though to reveal the actual truth is whether your spouse would still be uninterested if they were out on the dating market.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

alexm said:


> That feeling of rejection sucks. . . it's not something people can or should ever get used to.


You can. No one should. But some can. And yes, it sucks. Even after you get used to it, it still sucks.



Vega said:


> But a woman might think the same thing. Again, it has nothing to do with YOU, and everything to do with her marital status. Sex in the back seat of a car? Ha! Married people don't do THAT. They have to be more "mature" and "refined". Sex in a tree in broad daylight? HA! Married people don't do that either! They have to be more 'respectable'.


You say that as if the guy should not be upset by this particular truth, and should not let it affect his marriage, and should be OK with never knowing this truth about his wife. But in fact, to me, and I imagine to many guys, he would want to know this about his wife. And it would affect his marriage. And his wife should tell him. Even if it means he is marginally more likely to leave her. Because it is relevant to her view of marriage and to what he can expect to happen (and not happen) if he remains married to her. And it would be the same if the guy were the one withholding the truth that he feels "married people don't do THAT".

You seem to think the fact that she wouldn't do it with any husband, not just him, but anyone who was her husband, means that he should not mind that she refuses to do it. Or not care why. I disagree with this conclusion. The person who is withholding the truth knows for sure the aversion has nothing to do with their spouse. The spouse has no such certainty. This lack of certainty erodes the trust in the relationship. As Thor said, if you don't trust your spouse to be able to handle the truth about you, you shouldn't be married to them. If you withhold truth to avoid your spouse making an informed decision, that is very manipulative. I know. I do it myself. But I realize that it is wrong and a sub-optimal strategy if you want a mutually fulfilling marriage.



> The good guys will wait.


Maybe, but in part the guys with relatively low drive are more likely to tolerate waiting. One side effect of "making him wait" is that you increase the odds of ending up with a guy who has low drive and you being frustrated that he isn't highly interested in having sex with you after you have decided he is a "keeper" and you are ready to allow yourself to have sex with him. That might be a risk that you are willing to tolerate to weed out the "players". But good to keep that possibility in mind so you don't waste lots of time on a guy who is too LD you you.


----------



## turnera (Jan 22, 2010)

ConanHub said:


> Sex is absolutely a brain thing.
> 
> Training your thoughts delivers results.
> 
> ...


Very much so.

This is why I tell men who come here moaning about lack of sex to take a good hard look at what they are offering. Women don't just 'turn on' like men do and not nearly as easily or quickly, so it's more in the brain. Thus, if the guy wants more, he needs to put himself in the mind of the woman and figure out what would make HER want more. In most cases I've seen, that amounts to dating, trying new things, bonding over stuff, and the man being generally more adventurous (aka sweeping her off her feet) - whether because it makes it more interesting or because it helps her not feel...guilty? As in the old double standard about 'good girls' and 'bad girls.'

Of course there will always be women who have issues with it and no amount of cajoling by the man will make her want it. As Hold knows, such men are often told to consider a life apart from such women.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Like I said, it's been a while for me. My experience was that a guy is willing to wait a while *for someone he is really into*. If he's not really into you, no, he won't wait if he has other options (never, ever date a guy without options). But you want the guy who's really into you.
> 
> And how long would I wait? No prescribed time: I'd wait long enough to be sure that *I* was what he wanted and the *he* was what I wanted. Might not take long. Might take a while.
> 
> There is risk involved no matter how you slice it though.


"Waiting" is not intended to make the other person "suffer". It's not a "control" move designed to test anyone.

The purpose of waiting is to reduce potential turmoil in your own life. 

TAM isn't the only forum I read. I look at other forums geared toward relationships as well a read articles on this subject, plus drawing from my own experiences. 

I read/hear about so many women who have regretted NOT waiting to have sex with someone. The scenarios are similar: Boy meets girl. They hit it off. They sleep together within the first few days, dates or weeks of meeting. By the time the second months rolls around, they have already exchanged "I love you's" either shortly before or shortly after having sex. By the time the third to the 7th month (the 5th month appearing to be the most common) they're starting to have problems.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I totally understand, and I think it's better to wait.


Where you get an interesting circle (my dating knowledge is oh so rusty so I may have no clue what I am talking about, at least moreso than usual lol), I have heard females complain about sleeping with a guy on the first/second date and then he goes ghost, or feeling like they have to sleep with a guy by X date to keep him interested. So (and in no way making excuses for these a$shat guys) if these females are willing to sleep with these guys so soon (not talking ONS) what incentive is there for these guys to change their behavior?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Well I come from a particular perspective. If I happened to be on the dating market again, I would really have no interest in passing some arbitrary test. There's either a mutual attraction or there's not. 

I realize different people may be looking for different types of interactions, but my personal view is that if you're both adults and you're on a date, you've basically already acknowledged that there is an attraction. Otherwise, why even be there? At that point, unless the date is a disaster, I think it's reasonable to expect the relationship to pretty quickly move to something physical. Otherwise, why even continue with it? If it doesn't that's totally fine, you just move on.

Basically, if you know you are into someone, why waste time trying to make him prove he's worthy or to try to establish that you're not too easy? Seems kind of pointless to me, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I'm rusty too, but taking a stab at it anyway.
> 
> The incentive to wait is if they want *you* more than they want someone else. If they're really into you, they'll wait. You think not?


nothing personal to you, but think of this from the opposite perspective.

you ask a woman out, you overtly indicate you're into her and she shuts you down.

that is pretty much a signal that maybe she's NOT as into you as you are for her.

so why would you expect the guy to continue to pursue her?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

To be clear, at this point in my life I'm actually somewhat skeeved out about the idea of being naked with a total stranger. Which is kind of shocking to me, to be honest. I guess I'm really grown up now!

At the same time, it's not my cup of tea to have to demonstrate I'm up to some amorphous standard. 

If a woman likes me, that's cool. If not, also cool, because number 1, I enjoy my alone time a lot and number 2, it's actually not too hard to meet really great women who are up front about it if they're attracted to a guy. 

Again, just my perspective.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Not to beat a dead horse, but a lady's standards are rarely universal. How often do you hear the story of, I never really do this, I just got carried away. 

Well, a little secret. Unless you are the type of guy to make her get carried away, you're probably better off finding someone else.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> Where you get an interesting circle (my dating knowledge is oh so rusty so I may have no clue what I am talking about, at least moreso than usual lol), I have heard females complain about sleeping with a guy on the first/second date and then he goes ghost, or feeling like they have to sleep with a guy by X date to keep him interested. So (and in no way making excuses for these a$shat guys) if these females are willing to sleep with these guys so soon (not talking ONS) what incentive is there for these guys to change their behavior?


Exactly.

In modern society, women are the gatekeepers of sex. Men will do whatever it takes (and pretty much only whatever it takes) to get laid.

So if women want men to wait, then women (in general) have to change their behavior so that men are more likely to get laid more if they wait.

It's not rocket surgery.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

You are ok being one of several targets? 

I was never one to date multiple women at the same time but I suppose I could adjust.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> at this point I'm coming around to the belief that it really shouldn't bother the husband unless the wife is deceitful about this.
> 
> she can't help it that she doesn't find her husband hot.
> 
> ...


Sure.

But unfortunately there is absolutely no likelihood that women in general are going to be so honest, especially before marriage, when all the incentives are in the direction of their lying. If you don't believe me, read all the posts (and threads) on TAM where women propose either dodging the question or lying outright, on the basis that it is "none of his business".

Yes, there are a few women who will be honest even though it hurts their chances of landing a good provider. But finding one of those is like winning the lottery... with a prize that you don't get taken for a ride by *that *woman. It doesn't protect you from harm by the next woman who isn't so honest.

The only "solution" for men is not to get married in a culture where the incentives are the way they are in the US.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> To be clear, at this point in my life I'm actually somewhat skeeved out about the idea of being naked with a total stranger. Which is kind of shocking to me, to be honest. I guess I'm really grown up now!
> 
> At the same time, it's not my cup of tea to have to demonstrate I'm up to some amorphous standard.
> 
> ...


How do you define "attracted"?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> Sure.
> 
> But unfortunately there is absolutely no likelihood that women in general are going to be so honest, especially before marriage, when all the incentives are in the direction of their lying. If you don't believe me, read all the posts (and threads) on TAM where women propose either dodging the question or lying outright, on the basis that it is "none of his business".
> 
> ...


Only reason for a man to be married is if you want kids. I'm talking about U.S.-- in some other western countries it doesn't seem to have much of any cultural stigma anymore to not be married. 

Even then, ideally you would go in with eyes open about what a huge risk you are taking. This rarely happens of course. 

I expect marriage rates will continue to decline over time. 

That said, it's kind of nonsense to blame women for all of this. You can easily look at it as a failure of guys to do proper due diligence.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Only reason for a man to be married is if you want kids. I'm talking about U.S.-- in some other western countries it doesn't seem to have much of any cultural stigma anymore to not be married.
> 
> Even then, ideally you would go in with eyes open about what a huge risk you are taking. This rarely happens of course.
> 
> ...


If the penalties were the same for both sexes in dissolution of a marriage, I would agree with you.

Unfortunately, they aren't. Women are generally treated much better than men in family court, and generally have much less to worry about regarding child support as well.

Yes, there are deadbeat dads and abusive husbands.

But there is a reason that divorced men's suicide rate spikes up, whereas divorced women's suicide rate doesn't. And it is not because the women are getting away from abusive husbands whereas the men are tyrants whose "slaves" have abandoned them. It is mostly because of the meat grinder called "family court".


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> Exactly.
> 
> In modern society, women are the gatekeepers of sex.


Ahhh, but men are the gatekeepers of _*relationships*_. 
a man can have sex with a woman and do the bare minimum to keep her interested, stringing her along for YEARS without any intention of "wife-ing her up"! 

And yes, some women will ignorantly sleep with the guy HOPING he'll see how 'wonderful' she is to fall in love with her.



> Men will do whatever it takes (and pretty much only whatever it takes) to get laid.


And you all wonder WHY women think that men just want sex??????????????


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> How do you define "attracted"?


I don't think there's a one size fits all definition

I do personally think if you're going on a date with a guy you're signalling that he is at least sufficiently attractive to pique your interest. 

Doesn't mean anybody has to immediately sleep with anybody, of course. 

However different people wil reasonably have different perceptions about what amount of time/effort to invest. 

Generally speaking, I think a more enthusiastic reaction from the other person will result in a greater enthusiam to invest more. 

It's a mutually reinforcing cycle. The burden should not be on one person or the other to prove worth.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I'm rusty too, but taking a stab at it anyway.
> 
> The incentive to wait is if they want *you* more than they want someone else. If they're really into you, they'll wait. You think not?



Well, speaking for myself, if I was with someone I was genuinely interested in (keeping in mind I am not a ONS type of person) I would have no issues waiting, but, then again, how long, I have no idea? I don't believe in the whole "wait until marriage" concept, and for me to preach that would be hypocritical anyhow. The issue would be, as I mentioned before, sex is part of the equation for me with being emotionally connected to someone, so at some point I will lose interest if it keeps getting dragged out. I guess the best you can do is try to keep the line of communication open, and after a certain point (may be dependent on how in to the person you really are) if things just aren't happening then maybe he/she is just not the right person? I just never liked the idea of setting a deadline (i.e. we need to have sex by the 3rd date or I move on, etc...).

As far as the other part of my post, I just never understood how a female (only using females for this example simply because I have only heard this from them, I am sure t his happens to guys too but I would bet for fear of being mocked they would keep to themselves) could sleep with a guy she barely knows on the first/second date and then get upset when he bails. Just chalk it up to a bad decision, learn for it, and move on, if something like that is going to upset you so much keep your pants on until you get to know the guy a little better. IDK, maybe I just have old fashioned views on sex....


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Well, speaking for myself, if I was with someone I was genuinely interested in (keeping in mind I am not a ONS type of person) I would have no issues waiting, but, then again, how long, I have no idea? I don't believe in the whole "wait until marriage" concept, and for me to preach that would be hypocritical anyhow. The issue would be, as I mentioned before, sex is part of the equation for me with being emotionally connected to someone, so at some point I will lose interest if it keeps getting dragged out. I guess the best you can do is try to keep the line of communication open, and after a certain point if things just aren't happening then maybe he/she is just not the right person?
> 
> As far as the other part of my post, I just never understood how a female (only using females for this example simply because I have only heard this from them, I am sure t his happens to guys too but I would bet for fear of being mocked they would keep to themselves) could sleep with a guy she barely knows on the first/second date and then get upset when he bails. Just chalk it up to a bad decision, learn for it, and move on, if something like that is going to upset you so much keep your pants on until you get to know the guy a little better. IDK, maybe I just have old fashioned views on sex....


I wonder how much responsive desire has to do with this second paragraph?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I do personally think if you're going on a date with a guy you're signalling that he is at least sufficiently attractive to pique your interest.
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree. I DO compare the dating process to be similar that that of looking for a job. 

You send in a resume. You "look good" enough on paper. (attraction) You're called for an interview (first date). During the interview, you can talk more in depth about what's on the resume. But we already have some potential problems:

1. The resume writer can LIE on his/her resume.
2. The resume writer can LIE during the interview. 

What's the purpose of you going on a date in the first place? Is it to find someone to have an LTR with, leading to marriage? Or is it to find someone JUST to have sex with? Most of the time in *my* experience, I have found that many men have LIED about their intentions. 

And then several months later, they wonder WHY they have so much drama in their lives...

And yes, women do the same thing, but I've noticed that it seems to be that it's because they don't WAIT to get to know what his intentions truly are.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> I just never understood how a female could sleep with a guy she barely knows on the first/second date and then get upset when he bails. Just chalk it up to a bad decision, learn for it, and move on, if something like that is going to upset you so much keep your pants on until you get to know the guy a little better. IDK, _maybe I just have old fashioned views on sex_....


You views aren't "old fashioned". That would be like saying TRUTH and HONESTY and KINDNESS are "old fashioned" and have no place in our 'modern' society. 

What you speak of is _practical wisdom_ and it applies to women AND men! 

Think of how many problems we could avoid if BOTH genders practiced this...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

EllisRedding said:


> Second, who says it is purely horniness that has us wanting sex as part of the emotional connection. You ever think that maybe, just maybe, some of us want to have sex with our wives b/c we want to please them, we want to make them feel good, look into their eyes, love feeling their skin against ours, etc... You make it seem like it is all a selfish act just for some guy to bust a nut.
> 
> If what you mention is how some women think, then clearly they have been with the wrong guy(s).


This is a conversation I had with my wife a few years back. She, too, was convinced men just want to get laid, and I was no different. It took some convincing on my part, but I don't believe she sees it that way any more.

Yes, we get horny and require sex, but 99% of the time (for me, any way) I want the experience of being with my wife, pleasing her, having FUN, and just sharing it with her. It's rarely, if ever, strictly about getting off. If it's about that for me, there are other ways to achieve that.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> at this point I'm coming around to the belief that it really shouldn't bother the husband unless the wife is deceitful about this.
> 
> she can't help it that she doesn't find her husband hot.
> 
> ...


That's a real Sophie's Choice, isn't it?

Anybody, man or woman, who tells their spouse I love you because you're stable, a good parent, etc. but I'm just not attracted to you the way I've been attracted to other people, is going to find themselves single in quite a hurry.

I really don't think one CAN be honest in that situation, as it'll end that marriage, and quick. Unless that's the point of telling them that.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

alexm said:


> That's a real Sophie's Choice, isn't it?
> 
> Anybody, man or woman, who tells their spouse I love you because you're stable, a good parent, etc. but I'm just not attracted to you the way I've been attracted to other people, is going to find themselves single in quite a hurry.
> 
> I really don't think one CAN be honest in that situation, as it'll end that marriage, and quick. Unless that's the point of telling them that.


Reminds me of when I asked my mother why she married my father (they had been separated since I was 10 months old). 

She said, "I married your father because he was _available_." 

Sometimes I wonder if men have been with me because I, too, was "available".


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> Reminds me of when I asked my mother why she married my father (they had been separated since I was 10 months old).
> 
> She said, "I married your father because he was _available_."
> 
> Sometimes I wonder if men have been with me because I, too, was "available".


I've heard this expression. I took it as a facetious comment. Unfortunately, I also took it to mean that the person was the best choice out of the few available that was serious about getting married. 

That's not all that bad in a sense, and also hurtful because of the impression of settling. 

Though, sometimes a follow-up comment was made to the effect that (fill in hot male actor of the present) wasn't available. A teasing comment for sure that can also be hurtful.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> I've heard this expression. I took it as a facetious comment. Unfortunately, I also took it to mean that the person was the best choice out of the few available that was serious about getting married.
> 
> That's not all that bad in a sense, and also hurtful because of the impression of settling.
> 
> Though, sometimes a follow-up comment was made to the effect that (fill in hot male actor of the present) wasn't available. A teasing comment for sure that can also be hurtful.


I think in my mom's case, she wanted to get out of the house away from her parents (awful people). 

Ironically, she claimed my father was abusive and didn't pay child support (which I later found out was a lie), plus she moved right back into her parents house with me and my brother in tow and stayed there for the next 21 years. She never re-married or even DATED again after that.

Go figure.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Sorry you went through that. 

I bet you didn't get to see your dad much? So sad.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> Sorry you went through that.
> 
> I bet you didn't get to see your dad much?


No. I saw him 3 times between a year and 10 years old. I got in touch with him a few years before he passed away and we used to communicate by letter/phone. But I didn't actually see him again until a month before he died. :frown2:


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> No. I saw him 3 times between a year and 10 years old. I got in touch with him a few years before he passed away and we used to communicate by letter/phone. But I didn't actually see him again until a month before he died. :frown2:


That's a long time to wait and then no real time to talk and get to know each other face to face. 

Why didn't he come to see you? Why didn't you go see him?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

alexm said:


> This is a conversation I had with my wife a few years back. She, too, was convinced men just want to get laid, and I was no different. It took some convincing on my part, but I don't believe she sees it that way any more.
> 
> Yes, we get horny and require sex, but 99% of the time (for me, any way) I want the experience of being with my wife, pleasing her, having FUN, and just sharing it with her. It's rarely, if ever, strictly about getting off. If it's about that for me, there are other ways to achieve that.


I remember a while back (maybe a good 5yrs ago) I was messing around with my wife playfully during the day. I don't remember exactly what it was (either she was having skin issues, still had baby weight left, etc...) but she made a comment to the effect that she felt gross and the fact that I was messing with her was just pretty much acting like a guy who would have sex with anyone/anything lol. Obviously that wasn't the case for me, I didn't see her as gross or a sock to stick my junk in, but at the time (looking back at it now) I didn't quite understand the importance of sex for me as part of the emotional bond with my W. Over time as I started to understand this more, that is where my W and I seemed to have more of a disconnect regarding sex in our marriage (she was more of the belief that sex for me was just for the sake of having sex). After several discussions about I think she finally understood how I viewed it, and it helped getting us on the same page to make having a healthy sex life a priority in our marriage and not just something married people are supposed to do every once in a while.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> but she made a comment to the effect that she felt gross and the fact that I was messing with her was just pretty much acting like a guy who would have sex with anyone/anything lol. ...
> 
> (she was more of the belief that sex for me was just for the sake of having sex).


And WHY do you think she thought this?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> And WHY do you think she thought this?


She was down on herself about her appearance and the only rational reason (in her mind) why I would want to be intimate with her was just purely for a booty call.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> She was down on herself about her appearance and the only rational reason (in her mind) why I would want to be intimate with her was just purely for a booty call.


Alternate view, post pregnancy / children, she realizes she's changed, libido has crashed, etc. etc. The damn husband is still the same!! How can he still want what I've turned into? Bonding sweety, do YOU still love your child when it turns into a monstrous teenager?


----------



## WorkingWife (May 15, 2015)

Vega said:


> First of all, I'm CERTAIN that my late husband did things with other women that he didn't do with me. For instance, he once told me that he got oral sex from a woman while they were in a DJ booth.
> 
> Am I supposed to feel 'bad' that he didn't do that with ME?
> 
> ...


I understand what you're saying - there are things I did, or let men do to me, in prior relationships that I will never do again.

But there is a big difference between:

"you went skinny dipping one time and even though you enjoyed it you won't do it now because you feel the cons of it outweigh the pros"

or

"You had unprotected sex with someone new before you were aware of the dangers"

and

"you used to give BJs and Back rubs all day long to your then current lovers, some of whom were very casual sex partners that you didn't even really care about that much. But now that you're married to the person who you have vowed to cherish over all others, who really wants the BJ and back rub, you won't do that any more."

You have every right to refuse to do anything you don't want to do. But it is obvious that you were willing to extend time, energy, and sexual generosity to prior lovers that you are not willing to extend to your current partner. And it's a perfectly rational for your current partner to feel hurt and disappointed and come to the conclusion that you are not as attracted to him/her as much as you were prior lovers, and/or that you take him/her for granted and don't value him/her as much as you did others.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

WorkingWife said:


> "you used to give BJs and Back rubs *all day long *to your then current lovers, some of whom were very casual sex partners that you didn't even really care about that much. But now that you're married to the person who you have vowed to cherish over all others, who really wants the BJ and back rub, you won't do that any more."
> .


Now c'mon. It probably wasn't even CLOSE to "all day long". Let's not exaggerate, k?

And who said that it was something pretty common such as BJ's and back rubs? Might be something out of the ordinary.



> You have every right to refuse to do anything you don't want to do. But it is obvious that you were willing to extend time, energy, and sexual generosity to prior lovers that you are not willing to extend to your current partner.


Again, this smacks of, "You did it for him. You SHOULD do it for me!" If a woman has a 'right' to refuse, at what point does she get to exercise that 'right' without being criticized for it? Seems that we're paying lip service to her "right of refusal". 



> And it's a perfectly rational for your current partner to feel hurt and disappointed and come to the conclusion that you are not as attracted to him/her as much as you were prior lovers, and/or that you take him/her for granted and *don't value him/her as much as you did others*



Could be other reasons, yet it seems the current partner likes to manipulate and guilt her into doing something that she obviously doesn't want to do. Maybe she just values herself MORE than she used to...

I get the feeling that no matter WHAT reason she has won't even be 'good enough' for her partner to accept. 

So, I put it to you: What reason(s) would be good enough for you accept that would cause you to back off?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> And you all wonder WHY women think that men just want sex??????????????


For some reason, a lot of men seem to think that women are responsible for their sex drives. So they go after whatever they can get their hands on and turn women into the "gate-keepers". That way they can avoid all responsibility--it's always the woman who are accountable.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

WorkingWife said:


> I understand what you're saying - there are things I did, or let men do to me, in prior relationships that I will never do again.
> 
> But there is a big difference between:
> 
> ...


As I typed my last post I thought of something: 

My late husband was about 5'7" and weighed about 230 lbs, all in his gut. Bear that in mind when I tell the story.

He was very into sex. Probably an addict, if I had to guess. We had a mutual male friend who called late husband's facebook page "disgusting", you all get the idea. 

Anyway, late husband requested a Love Swing for his birthday one year. I obliged. He hooked it up to the ceiling, etc. The kind he wanted was kind of cumbersome so it wasn't that easy to use. But we managed to use it the first time. I wouldn't say that I had a barrel of laughs, but it was fun. It was different. 

When we tried the second time, we were about 10 minutes into "it" when the dam thing came CRASHING to the ground. Of course, he blamed ME for that (the one *I* ordered was 'defective'). He put it away and we never used it again. 

If I met a new partner, I would NEVER want to use it. It was something that I did with my ex-husband and even though it was ok at the time, I have no desire to do it again. 

Even though the swing was 'fun', I associate it with my late husband...who was HORRIBLE. I have no interest in doing things with someone else that I did with HIM. I have no desire to be REMINDED of him. I don't want to think about HIM!!!! 

Could it be that some of these women feel the same way that *I* feel?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> A guy who has no other options WILL wait, but he's likely got other major flaws.


I think this can be very true.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm obviously skeptical that this kind of mental shift can happen long term.
> 
> the only way I can really see it working is as you described earlier-- the actual experience proves pleasurable enough that actual desire is created. But if that happens, there really does not need to be a conscious effort anymore because desire occurs spontaneously
> 
> I don't really see how threat can compel this type of mental shift long term.


If there's responsive desire, then learning to give it a chance can be done, although it may take some motivation to focus on it.

"I don't intend to spec the rest of my life......" isn't a threat, it's informing the other person of what YOU intend to do. Your partner can use this as motivation if they're interested in staying with you. If they're not, there's nothing you can do.

I'm talking in general, not about your situation, I think you're doing better than could be expected.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> I guess the issue, everyone's definition of long will vary. Some may consider a month or so ok while others expect to get laid by the 3rd date.


Any guy "expecting it" by the 3rd date is a problem.

A willingness to wait months probably means that he doesn't have many options.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I think this can be very true.


Or maybe he's THAT MUCH of a true gentleman...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Any guy "expecting it" by the 3rd date is a problem.


Do you have any idea HOW MANY men don't even want to wait until the 3rd date?! 

And I'm sorry...but I have a problem with ANY man (or woman) "expecting" sex AT ALL. 



> A willingness to wait months probably means that he doesn't have many options


Or, he's having sex with other women while waiting for THIS one to "come around".


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

turnera said:


> Thus, if the guy wants more, he needs to put himself in the mind of the woman and figure out what would make HER want more.


There are another options beside jumping through all the hoops to "awaken her desire" .

One is deciding it's not worth it. I've made that decision before. I'll be the man I want to be and if that's what gets her going, that's fine. But I'm not going to be someone I don't want to be just to get laid.

I'd also say "find a woman who has spontaneous desire for you or has responsive desire and cares enough about you to work with it". But I suspect that there aren't enough of those to go around.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> "Waiting" is not intended to make the other person "suffer". It's not a "control" move designed to test anyone.
> 
> The purpose of waiting is to reduce potential turmoil in your own life.
> 
> ...


Having the guy "wait" worked better when that was what all "respectable" women did. 

It's a lot tougher to make it work when it's a minority that's trying to implement the strategy.

Avoiding sex on the first date is good. Dumping guys that insist on it because it's the "3rd date" is good. But, I don't think a guy with options is going to wait months. If some guy waited a year, there's something wrong with him (in the current environment).


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> Well, speaking for myself, if I was with someone I was genuinely interested in (keeping in mind I am not a ONS type of person) I would have no issues waiting, but, then again, how long, I have no idea? I don't believe in the whole "wait until marriage" concept, and for me to preach that would be hypocritical anyhow. The issue would be, as I mentioned before, sex is part of the equation for me with being emotionally connected to someone, so at some point I will lose interest if it keeps getting dragged out. I guess the best you can do is try to keep the line of communication open, and after a certain point (may be dependent on how in to the person you really are) if things just aren't happening then maybe he/she is just not the right person? I just never liked the idea of setting a deadline (i.e. we need to have sex by the 3rd date or I move on, etc...).
> 
> As far as the other part of my post, I just never understood how a female (only using females for this example simply because I have only heard this from them, I am sure t his happens to guys too but I would bet for fear of being mocked they would keep to themselves) could sleep with a guy she barely knows on the first/second date and then get upset when he bails. Just chalk it up to a bad decision, learn for it, and move on, if something like that is going to upset you so much keep your pants on until you get to know the guy a little better. IDK, maybe I just have old fashioned views on sex....


Given the spectrum of: Tech, Anon, Ellis, Olivia, Vega....

I think you've found the sweet spot.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Given the spectrum of: Tech, Anon, Ellis, Olivia, Vega....
> 
> I think you've found the sweet spot.


And one more thing,

These "standards" better have been applied to everyone before me.

If they weren't then either she's not into me or she doesn't really have the standards that she claims to have.

Now, if she'd decided that she'd been wrong and changed the rules, I *might* understand.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> If some guy waited a year, there's something wrong with him (in the current environment).


Why does there have to be something "wrong" with him?


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Sadly there really is no way to experience / understand what any sort of sex is like to the other gender.
> 
> That said, is it the physical action of doing a BJ that you fine unpleasant, or the the psychological issues. Would doing the same actions on a dildo be as unpleasant?
> ...


I posted about the physical effects of giving bj but actually, when I'm aroused, I don't notice the state of my lips, neck or tongue really. It's only occasionally that something is sore afterwards but it does not bother me. I like to remember how much fun I had getting sore. 

Studies show that in the state of arousal, the perception of pain and squeamishness decreases. It makes sense, sex can be messy, if we were too sensitive, we would not have it. 

That's why I think it is so important that both partners are aroused before having sex of any type and rarely should one person be left wanting while the other is satisfied. 

If I had a stiff neck after too many bj's cold with no reciprocation, I'd associate discomfort with bj.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

WorkingWife said:


> I understand what you're saying - there are things I did, or let men do to me, in prior relationships that I will never do again.
> 
> But there is a big difference between:
> 
> ...


One!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> If a woman has a 'right' to refuse, at what point does she get to exercise that 'right' without being criticized for it? Seems that we're paying lip service to her "right of refusal".


You have the right to do whatever you please as long as you don't hurt other people.

You don't have the right to insist that other people be happy with what you chose.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> Even though the swing was 'fun', I associate it with my late husband...who was HORRIBLE. I have no interest in doing things with someone else that I did with HIM. I have no desire to be REMINDED of him. I don't want to think about HIM!!!!


That would be a good enough reason for me. It's a whole lot better than "because I don't feel like it".

Now, if we'd been enjoying the sex swing together before we were married and you stopped doing it afterwards and told be this story to explain why and sex swings were something I REALLY enjoyed, I probably wouldn't accept it as well.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> Or maybe he's THAT MUCH of a true gentleman...


Unfortunately, that's probably not it.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> You have the right to do whatever you please as long as you don't hurt other people.
> 
> .


And how many men would tell a woman that by NOT having sex with him that she "hurt" him? We hear it here on TAM often!



> You don't have the right to insist that other people be happy with what you chose


And if I refuse to give him a blow job, does that give HIM the right to criticize, insult, call me names, scream at me, yell at me, threaten to 'find it elsewhere' or threaten to divorce me all because he's not "happy" with my RIGHT to say 'no'?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> And I'm sorry...but I have a problem with ANY man (or woman) "expecting" sex AT ALL.


I should not expect sex to be a part of a romantic relationship?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Unfortunately, that's probably not it.


Yeeeeah. Probably a shot in the dark. 

Hey! I can _dream_, can't I?! :rofl:


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> And how many men would tell a woman that by NOT having sex with him that she "hurt" him? We hear it here on TAM often!


We're not college student needing safe spaces are we?



Vega said:


> And if I refuse to give him a blow job, does that give HIM the right to criticize, insult, call me names, scream at me, yell at me, threaten to 'find it elsewhere' or threaten to divorce me all because he's not "happy" with my RIGHT to say 'no'?


Sure, he has the right to do all those things.

And you have the right to leave him.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Vega said:


> And how many men would tell a woman that by NOT having sex with him that she "hurt" him? We hear it here on TAM often!
> 
> 
> 
> And if I refuse to give him a blow job, does that give HIM the right to criticize, insult, call me names, scream at me, yell at me, threaten to 'find it elsewhere' or threaten to divorce me all because he's not "happy" with my RIGHT to say 'no'?


It's interesting that you ask this using a crazy selfish man as a reference point. 

Who cares if he thinks he has a right to a bj. As soon as he uttered the insults and threatened to D you over a bj, you should have visited your lawyer. Yet, here you are still questioning your right to be treated like a living feeling human being. 

It does not matter what subject is being discussed or how heated it gets, stop as soon as there is screaming and disrespect of any type. Say what you need to be able to continue the discussion, and take a break. That works with normal people after a few try's but crazy people won't stop. Dump crazy.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> That would be a good enough reason for me. It's a whole lot better than "because I don't feel like it".
> .


And if THIS was the attitude you had, I would feel _relief_. But I would also know that it was something that you really wanted to do, and I'd be inclined to try to "get over it"...in MY time...for YOU...for US. Not saying it would happen, but I MIGHT be willing to revisit at a later date. 

Coming out of an abusive relationship can cause an enormous amount of trauma that people don't realize, and the after effects can last for YEARS. (side bar--today is my late husband's birthday, so I've been a bit triggered while writing these posts. The reason I continue is that it's therapeutic for me to do so. In other words, I'm _trying_ to 'get over it'!) 



> Now, if we'd been enjoying the sex swing together before we were married and you stopped doing it afterwards and told be this story to explain why and sex swings were something I REALLY enjoyed, I probably wouldn't accept it as well


See, I don't think that would be fair. If you know very little about the psychological effects of abuse, you might understand it better. So I wouldn't draw any conclusions until exploring the situation more deeply.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> It's interesting that you ask this using a crazy selfish man as a reference point.
> 
> Who cares if he thinks he has a right to a bj. As soon as he uttered the insults and threatened to D you over a bj, you should have visited your lawyer. Yet, here you are still questioning your right to be treated like a living feeling human being.
> 
> It does not matter what subject is being discussed or how heated it gets, stop as soon as there is screaming and disrespect of any type. Say what you need to be able to continue the discussion, and take a break. That works with normal people after a few try's but crazy people won't stop. Dump crazy.


No, I'm not questioning my right to be treated like a human being. I'm simply relating the experience(s) I've had. After all, I DID leave the SOB.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> That's why I think it is so important that both partners are aroused before having sex of any type and
> 
> 
> > rarely should one person be left wanting while the other is satisfied.


Seriously. If this happens often enough, you get to the point where you don't even ALLOW yourself to become aroused because you already KNOW that you're going to end up frustrated. 

Again.

Could be another reason why some women become LD.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

EllisRedding said:


> I remember a while back (maybe a good 5yrs ago) I was messing around with my wife playfully during the day. I don't remember exactly what it was (either she was having skin issues, still had baby weight left, etc...) but she made a comment to the effect that she felt gross and the fact that I was messing with her was just pretty much acting like a guy who would have sex with anyone/anything lol. Obviously that wasn't the case for me, I didn't see her as gross or a sock to stick my junk in, but at the time (looking back at it now) I didn't quite understand the importance of sex for me as part of the emotional bond with my W. Over time as I started to understand this more, that is where my W and I seemed to have more of a disconnect regarding sex in our marriage (she was more of the belief that sex for me was just for the sake of having sex). After several discussions about I think she finally understood how I viewed it, and it helped getting us on the same page to make having a healthy sex life a priority in our marriage and not just something married people are supposed to do every once in a while.


It's quite common in women, I think, and that's unfortunate. Mind you, many of us guys don't do a great job of making women feel valuable PRIOR to marriage (and some afterwards, as well). Like I said, I think men look at sex very differently pre- and post- marriage, whereas women may have a slight tendency to view it the same way these days, whether single or married.

My wife has come around somewhat in the time we've been together, but she does still think sex is "just sex", including between us. That's her issue to deal with, but it's likely a result of one too many men treating it as such with her and one one too many relationship that she considered casual.

What I do know is that I am the first man she's ever been with who's communicated with her about sex and relationships. She wasn't used to a man actually talking about these things. That speaks volumes to her mindset about the subject. An example I've used here before was that she never used to use the word "sex" (let alone "making love" - she still doesn't use that one), but always said "getting laid", "f***ing", "getting lucky" and other such terms - often ones men use.

While I don't dislike those terms on their own, and I'm sure I've used them in the past, it's disconcerting when your spouse refers to sex with you as "getting lucky"...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> Reminds me of when I asked my mother why she married my father (they had been separated since I was 10 months old).
> 
> She said, "I married your father because he was _available_."
> 
> Sometimes I wonder if men have been with me because I, too, was "available".


I can tell you this isn't all that uncommon, including for men. My first marriage was most definitely because I was available and safe.

I met my ex wife when I was 18 and she was 17. She had been dating and sexually active for a few years at that point. The last couple of guys she was with before me had girlfriends they neglected to tell her about. She was date raped by a co-worker (who also had a girlfriend) when she got a ride home from him late one night. Drove the car to a secluded spot and pulled out a condom and gave it to her. Then she had a fling with a guy in his early-mid 20's who was married, but allegedly separated and going to be divorced. I suppose she didn't know better, and needed the attention. Then she met me, a respectable guy, not a player, upper middle class like her, shared the same interests, etc. Her parents approved, older siblings liked me, and I didn't jerk her around.

She most definitely settled for me, there's no doubt about it. We were great for many many years, but in hindsight, it's because I was safe, and I was good for her, and we were more like best friends than lovers. I didn't realize that at the time, but it became more and more apparent over the years. By the time she hit 30, she resented me. She even told me that I "stole her 20's" from her. In the end, she left (for somebody else, a bad boy, no less) and announced she was never (never!) in love with me, and that she finally realized she only viewed me as a friend all those years. She left hating me, even though I did nothing to earn that hatred. She just flipped a switch at some point, probably when she met the OM. From that point on, everything was my fault, and all this latent anger turned towards me - the one guy who was good to her, and for a long time at that. She's never spoken to me again.

But I came into her life at the right time, and I was safe and didn't jerk her around. At the time we met, she had only known what it was like to be used by men.

It happens more than you'd think, and it definitely happens to us men, too.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

WorkingWife said:


> You have every right to refuse to do anything you don't want to do. But it is obvious that you were willing to extend time, energy, and sexual generosity to prior lovers that you are not willing to extend to your current partner. And it's a perfectly rational for your current partner to feel hurt and disappointed and come to the conclusion that you are not as attracted to him/her as much as you were prior lovers, and/or that you take him/her for granted and don't value him/her as much as you did others.


That's it in a nutshell.

Nobody wants to be the person at which whom the other draws that line for and says "ah f*** it, I'm done with THAT."

If somebody's partner did something with all of their previous partners but stopped doing it for, say, their last 4 or 5 relationships before you, that's one thing. It's difficult for them to say "but you did this for all those people", because the response would be "yeah, but not for all of THESE people."

However, if YOU are where they suddenly draw this line (ie. you're the first partner they've decided they will no longer do whatever-it-is for), that's an entirely different can of worms, isn't it?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> As I typed my last post I thought of something:
> 
> My late husband was about 5'7" and weighed about 230 lbs, all in his gut. Bear that in mind when I tell the story.
> 
> ...



I agree with this, to a point, I really do.

I think what some of us feel, however, is that experiences like this shouldn't be associated with that person - that's on you. That person is no longer there, and that experience will never be shared with that person again. Instead, it's a new experience, with a new person. The only thing similar, in this case for example, is an inanimate object.

What I'm trying to say, and it's not easy, because I can actually emphasize about this, is that EXPERIENCES will always be different. Sometimes the situation, or the location, or the object (in this case, a sex swing) can be the same, but the actual experience is not. It's a disservice to ourselves to equate one, specific item or memory with every future encounter that's similar. I'm not saying it's ridiculous or stupid, honestly, I actually get it, but at the same time, it's a mental limitation we put on ourselves based around one specific moment in time, and that prevents us from a) getting past it and b) experience new, better things in life.

So in your case, the sex swing itself isn't a bad thing. You enjoyed IT, the object. It was the person you shared that with that is the cause of your current mindset. As that person is no longer in your life, then it's only limiting your own experiences in your choice to associate this inanimate object with negative feelings.

Again, I emphasize for the third time that it's not that easy to wrap ones mind around these sorts of things. Objects and situations become intertwined with the people we experienced them with. It's easier said than done. But getting past negative experiences like this often require one to do just that. People have a tendency to limit themselves in this manner, and the more often they do it, the easier it gets to keep doing it, and eventually the limitations become so severe that innumerable things are now "off the table".

My wife had a serious relationship 20+ years ago. I know very little about it, but I DO know that it was a turning point in her life. She was young (late teens, early 20's). This was the first "adult" relationship she had, the first person she lived with, etc. A monumental relationship. Unfortunately, it became the benchmark for all future relationships, including ours. From what I can tell, this was the first time she truly let herself go in a relationship, gave everything she had, saw a future, etc. It didn't end well, he turned out to be a lying, cheating jerk, and therefore she has protected herself from repeating this ever since. This has, and she admits it fully, put limitations on any relationship she's had since. To this day, she's incapable of putting herself 100% into relationships, due to the pain she felt when it ended. He hurt her, badly, and she said "never again". Less investment = less pain when it ends. So that has affected me, directly. Not indirectly - directly.

It's along the same lines of building walls. Walls are built by people to prevent negative or perhaps traumatic events from occurring again, but they also prevent positive and happy ones from happening, as well. Walls keep everything out, not just the bad. Build up a high enough wall, and you likely won't experience much of anything any more.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> As I typed my last post I thought of something:
> 
> My late husband was about 5'7" and weighed about 230 lbs, all in his gut. Bear that in mind when I tell the story.
> 
> ...


See my earlier post on this...you are pointing to a specific act.

Granted, sometimes it is about specific acts for both men and women, but more often than not it is about what those acts actually represent...enthusiasm, desire, letting go...things normally associated with being into your partner. I suspect this becomes much less of an issue the more desired the partner feels.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Vega said:


> Or maybe he's THAT MUCH of a true gentleman...


Here's the thing - I don't think you're totally alone in your thinking, however... I don't imagine there are too many women out there who wouldn't think there's something "off" about a man waiting a year, or even months, for sex.

Everybody's different, but I think every woman out there would have a point at which they're wondering why the hell this guy isn't putting the moves on her.

Hell, my wife, who can go weeks without sex (probably months) would question me if I didn't show any interest in her in x-amount of time. At some point, it becomes personal. Even though it's not necessarily something my wife requires (sex, I mean), even she, after 3 or 4 weeks, would be like "what the hell, dude?".


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> And how many men would tell a woman that by NOT having sex with him that she "hurt" him? We hear it here on TAM often!
> 
> 
> 
> And if I refuse to give him a blow job, does that give HIM the right to criticize, insult, call me names, scream at me, yell at me, threaten to 'find it elsewhere' or threaten to divorce me all because he's not "happy" with my RIGHT to say 'no'?


Absolutely, he has every right to behave like that, just as you have every right to refuse the bj, followed by have every right not to tolerate that behavior from him. Though, if he behaves like that, chances are there are a lot of other problems and issues, and the actual blowjob is the least of your worries.

That said, one can not control how another responds, only ourselves. Exercising one's right to refuse, to say no, to set and enforce boundaries, does not include any obligation or requirement that they will be accepted or respected. If they are...great. If they aren't, the one setting the boundary has to make a decision to keep or change the boundary, and regardless of the choice they make, it is solely their responsibility, not the other persons.

There are always consequences to our decisions.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

alexm said:


> That's a real Sophie's Choice, isn't it?
> 
> Anybody, man or woman, who tells their spouse I love you because you're stable, a good parent, etc. but I'm just not attracted to you the way I've been attracted to other people, is going to find themselves single in quite a hurry.
> 
> I really don't think one CAN be honest in that situation, as it'll end that marriage, and quick. Unless that's the point of telling them that.


The solution is to be honest *before *getting married. It's not a Sophie's Choice at all in that case.

Then it is just a way to avoid causing terrible pain in the future when the unattracted spouse stops playing the game and either cheats, bails out or stops having sex with the other spouse other than the absolute minimum to keep them on the string.

In other words, don't marry someone to whom you are not highly attracted, and this problem won't arise.

Of course I don't expect most women to follow this rule, as it would prevent them from getting resources from a man to whom they aren't very attracted. I know personally of numerous cases of this issue, none of which have worked out well.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> And I'm sorry...but I have a problem with ANY man (or woman) "expecting" sex AT ALL.


Sorry, just getting caught up here, can you maybe clarify this statement as I don't understand it. Are you saying a man/woman shouldn't expect sex on the first few dates (I can see that, but if both people are expecting sex early on then sounds like a good match), or that they shouldn't expect sex at any point in a relationship (that would be silly but like I said, just trying to understand what you are saying)?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> Ahhh, but men are the gatekeepers of _*relationships*_.


No they aren't. Women are the gatekeepers of relationships as well.

Men are the gatekeepers of *resources*.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

tech-novelist said:


> No they aren't. Women are the gatekeepers of relationships as well.
> 
> Men are the gatekeepers of *resources*.


Just to put this gatekeeper stuff to rest, here is conclusive proof:

Gatekeeper (female):










Keymaster (male):


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

WorkingWife said:


> I understand what you're saying - there are things I did, or let men do to me, in prior relationships that I will never do again.
> 
> But there is a big difference between:
> 
> ...


When a man says this, he is called a misogynistic pig (or words to that effect), but obviously it's a lot harder to claim that when a woman says it. Thank you!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

alexm said:


> Here's the thing -
> Everybody's different, but I think every woman out there would have a point at which they're wondering why the hell this guy isn't putting the moves on her.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> And one more thing,
> 
> These "standards" better have been applied to everyone before me.
> 
> ...


How dare you assume that, just because a woman had wild sex with other men before and now wants *you *to wait indefinitely, that she might not be that into you? Don't you know that is "junior high-school" thinking? >


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> I should not expect sex to be a part of a romantic relationship?


Of course not! Do unicorns have sex with rainbows?

Don't answer that...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> Sorry, just getting caught up here, can you maybe clarify this statement as I don't understand it. Are you saying a man/woman shouldn't expect sex on the first few dates (I can see that, but if both people are expecting sex early on then sounds like a good match), or that they shouldn't expect sex at any point in a relationship (that would be silly but like I said, just trying to understand what you are saying)?


I don't like the idea of making sex an "expectation" any more than I would make spending money on fancy dinners every night an "expectation". 

I don't believe that we're _entitled_ to sex outside of marriage. 

I think that by having these expectations is what sets up so many relationships/marriages to fail.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

alexm said:


> That's it in a nutshell.
> 
> Nobody wants to be the person at which whom the other draws that line for and says "ah f*** it, I'm done with THAT."
> 
> ...


No, that is exactly the same, or you are a misogynist! Obviously you haven't been following the discussion very well. >


----------



## Capster (Jun 10, 2014)

Vega said:


> alexm said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the thing -
> ...


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> I don't like the idea of making sex an "expectation" any more than I would make spending money on fancy dinners every night an "expectation".
> 
> I don't believe that we're _entitled_ to sex outside of marriage.
> 
> I think that by having these expectations is what sets up so many relationships/marriages to fail.


I guess we just have different POVs. If you are going to be in a relationship with someone (I don't believe in waiting until marriage unless that is truly what both people want) I think you have every right to expect sex at some point in the relationship (now exactly what point that is is obviously up for debate). You could argue that waiting until marriage to find out you are sexually incompatible with someone is just as detrimental to a marriage/relationship.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> Looks as though you and I have the same take on this, ER.












Mind blown (this gif always cracks me up lol)


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> alexm said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the thing -
> > Everybody's different, but I think every woman out there would have a point at which they're wondering why the hell this guy isn't putting the moves on her.





> I'd be wondering the same thing too, especially given *my* history.
> 
> But I wouldn't be thinking about it because it was something *I* wanted but because I was so used to "them" wanting it from me!
> 
> If however, he explained to me that he wanted to wait to get to know me better, I'd think that I found a 'match'!


Men and women aren't all that different here, especially among adults who have been at least reasonably sexually active through out their lives.

Let's suppose he didn't provide the "Let's wait" explanation, rather just didn't make any moves or really even acknowledge the physical side of relationships...how would you feel with that?

How important is sexual activity to you in a relationship?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> How dare you assume that, just because a woman had wild sex with other men before and now wants *you *to wait indefinitely, that she might not be that into you? Don't you know that is "junior high-school" thinking? >


Why do some of you men keep making her desire to wait _all about *YOU*? _

Just the same as I wouldn't share my bank account information on a first date...or even a 5th date...or even a 12th date...I also don't want to share my BODY on a 1st, 5th or maybe even 12th date! 

I want to get to know his character first and that takes TIME. I want to observe how he interacts with other people, see if he's patient, see if he's generous, hear how he treats the waitstaff, see how he drives during rush hour (is he patient?), listen to what he worries about, hear if he has a negative or positive attitude about other men, women, children, his ex, his OTHER ex, his girlfriends, his friends in general, how he gets along with his family, etc., etc., etc. 

I want to hear what he expects/wants sexually. If he tells me he wants "it" every day with NO EXCEPTIONS, then guess what? 

I. AM. OUTTA. THERE! 

And didn't have to sleep with him in order to find that out!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> And one more thing,
> 
> These "standards" better have been applied to everyone before me.
> 
> ...


That's the thing-- the "standards" are totally situation specific.

If you're attractive enough, she will be coming after you, not making you wait.

Guaranteed that the girl with "standards" is not making George Clooney wait.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> No they aren't. Women are the gatekeepers of relationships as well.
> 
> Men are the gatekeepers of *resources*.


What kind of resources are you talking about?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> That's the thing-- the "standards" are totally situation specific.
> 
> If you're attractive enough, she will be coming after you, not making you wait.
> 
> Guaranteed that the girl with "standards" is not making George Clooney wait.


Yes, again that is exactly the problem.

Not that I expect most women to acknowledge it, as it is against the optimized female sexual strategy to do so, and they may not even be aware of it consciously. Evolution has a way of getting what it wants, even though it doesn't know about birth control. >


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Capster said:


> Vega said:
> 
> 
> > alexm said:
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> There is something to this, IMO. But getting "carried away" on a first date, if it is a "getting to know you" date is not wise, and not happening (with me). I need to interact with a guy more than that and have a good feel for *who he is* before I can feel comfortable sleeping with him.
> 
> What do I need to have a feel of? I need to feel like I have a good sense of his personal integrity, what his relationships are like with other people (ideally to interact with him within a group of friends setting and see how they warm to him and vice versa, maybe several times - I've found that tells me a lot about a person), a bit about his family of origin; basically to understand what kind of a guy he is and figure out how "in to me" he is.
> 
> ...


I think you pretty much proved my point. For the guy you found really attractive (and knowledge of his personality and reputation factored into this), you relaxed your standards.

Everyone does this. It is normal. The point is, if youre on the receiving end of a "standards" roadblock, you can infer she is not that into you.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> lol.....


Seriously, wtf is up with that guy haha!

Update: I found out more about him (yes, procrastinating right now):



> The man wearing the Steve Jobs turtleneck comes from Adult Swim's sketch comedy series, Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! His name is Dr. Jimes Tooper, and space does actually blow his mind.


Here is the actual video with original sound effects

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CS7j5I6aOc


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> What kind of resources are you talking about?


In modern society, primarily money.

I personally know of a number of cases where a woman married a man to support her, even though she wasn't terribly into him.

I don't personally know of any cases where the resources flowed the other way. Of course it does occur, but 90+% of the time resources flow from the man to the woman.

This is not a new phenomenon, obviously; it has been true throughout history.

But until recently (the last 50 years or so), the man got something in return: exclusive access to her sexuality, which she was bound to provide even if she didn't feel like it. Divorce was highly frowned-upon even though legal, and child support was not nearly as onerous as it is today, so the man could be reasonably certain that she would hold up her end of the deal.

These days, however, a woman has no legal (or even customary) obligation to have sex with her husband, while he still has to support her (and especially any children she has, in many cases even if he can prove that he is not the father). Thus, the old bargain has been overturned, and a man has to be crazy to agree to the new one, in which he has all the obligations and none of the benefits.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Vega said:


> Ha! Only a "few" dates?
> 
> More like a few _MONTHS_ of dates!


And of course you will be paying half the cost of those dates, right?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

If someone is interviewing you for a job and makes you do interview after interview for months and months, eventually you are just going to find another job, even if initially the first job looked pretty good. In reality, it's a mutual interview, and the indecisiveness and inclination to string someone along will reveal something about what it would be like to actually "work there."


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

I think Vega is so broken that she is willing to risk losing the right one to maintain being in a safe zone. That works for her, but as @OliviaG posted above, may leave her single for longer than she may want.

I think that at some point in a relationship, the expectation of sex is there, it can be at marriage or sooner, depending.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I really think the problem we are having agreeing about this is with the definition of "first date". Lots of first dates nowadays are facilitated by online dating sites and people don't know each other at all before their first date.
> 
> I didn't really relax my standards for my husband: he was a guy who had already met my standards *before* the first date. I knew him well enough to feel that - even if the relationship didn't ultimately work out, he had marriage potential, was a good guy, was not seeing anyone else, was very, very into me, and would not "use" me. That was why it happened.


I totally agree if youre perfect strangers the need to vet someone.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I really think the problem we are having agreeing about this is with the definition of "first date". Lots of first dates nowadays are facilitated by online dating sites and people don't know each other at all before their first date.
> 
> I didn't really relax my standards for my husband: he was a guy who had already met my standards *before* the first date. I knew him well enough to feel that - even if the relationship didn't ultimately work out, he had marriage potential, was a good guy, was not seeing anyone else, was very, very into me, and would not "use" me. That was why it happened.


Ya know, this got me thinking, my wife and I never really went on a first date. We met in college (same circle of friends, she was the dorm next to me) so when we suddenly got in to each other (I honestly can't even say when or why that happened since we had known each other for a bit but never even really talked or paid attention to the other) much of the time flirting / getting to know each other was still in the group environment with friends. Booze may have played a "slight" role into taking things to the next level lol, but at that point we both knew it was going there.

Now I feel jipped, after all these years she still owes me a first date!!!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> I personally know of a number of cases where a woman married a man to support her, even though she wasn't terribly into him.
> 
> I don't personally know of any cases where the resources flowed the other way. Of course it does occur, but 90+% of the time resources flow from the man to the woman.
> In modern society, primarily money.


*raises hand* Ummm....in one of my marriages and several of my LTR's, *I* was the breadwinner. In the other 2, my salary was pretty _equal_ to his. 



> But until recently (the last 50 years or so), the man got something in return: exclusive access to her sexuality, which she was bound to provide even if she didn't feel like it


.

Kinda makes you wonder if marriage wasn't created for this reason, doesn't it?



> These days, however, a woman has no legal (or even customary) obligation to have sex with her husband, *
> *(and especially any children she has, in many cases even if he can prove that he is not the father).





> Thus, the old bargain has been overturned, and a man has to be crazy to agree to the new one, in which he has all the obligations and none of the benefits


It's obvious that you don't know a whole lot about how custody, child support and the courts work these days. If you did, you wouldn't have written what you wrote. 

It's unfortunate that you take a few cases that you 'hear' about and turn them into the 'norm"


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tech-novelist said:


> And of course you will be paying half the cost of those dates, right?


Are you kidding me? The last man I dated, I paid for MOST of the dates!


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> Are you kidding me? The last man I dated, I paid for MOST of the dates!


This would be red flag #1. Pick differently!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

naiveonedave said:


> I think Vega is so broken that she is willing to risk losing the right one to maintain being in a safe zone. .


There's no such thing as _one_ "right one" for everyone. I'm not looking for the "right" one: I'm looking for the *BEST*. 




> That works for her, but as @OliviaG posted above, may leave her single for longer than she may want.


Uhh....first of all, I have NO PROBLEM being single and/or alone. Been single now for almost 4 years and I don't have a problem with it. I am willing to wait, and if I get to the end of my life and I'm still alone, so be it!



> I think that at some point in a relationship, the expectation of sex is there, it can be at marriage or sooner, depending


Like I wrote earlier, I have a problem with the word "expectation", however, I'm FINE with the world "want".


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

Vega said:


> Like I wrote earlier, I have a problem with the word "expectation", however, I'm FINE with the world "want".


Most marriage vows contain something like 'to have and to hold' and 'to forsake all others'. these imply to me 100% sex is an expectation that is given, as neither of the couple will get it anywhere else. I would bail if this is not treated as an expectation. There are situations like one of the partners stops showering and brushing teeth, has affairs, is abusive, etc., but at that time the contract is broken....


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

At the end of the day in my experience, there are plenty of women who are great relationship material who have no sexual hang ups or effectively no sexual hang ups.

All that follows presumes that sexually experienced adults are involved.

I can see waiting for a few weeks at the most, anything more than that in the competitive sport of finding sexual partners (which includes marital partners) I would let them go because there's no point hanging around interminably on the off chance they might be attracted to you and that they're not sexually stunted in some way. Why waste time with anyone man or woman who evidently has sexual hang ups, when you can find a great sexually healthy romantic partner instead?

So back in the day because it was a long time ago (18-20 years) for me, sex was often offered by great women anywhere between an hour of meeting through to the 2nd or 3rd date. I never asked for it or tried to persuade any of them. The lust and attraction was there so it happened very easily and very naturally. If one wasn't feeling it early there was no point in pursuing a romantic relationship with someone if one or more parties didn't have an overwhelming desire to consume the other sexually.

My first wife had sex with me a few hours after we met (she offered), my second and current wife (our 17th anniversary is just over a week away) had sex with me on our third date (she offered) just shy of 20 years ago.

Now as someone who has been off the market for effectively 20 years, on occasion I still get asked out or explicitly offered sex by some women. So I'm pretty sure it's still very easy in the Western world to find willing sexual partners who are perfectly fine relationship material who aren't interested in wasting time playing waiting games.

For me and lots of other highly sexual people, romantic relationships are all about sex. So if the sparks aren't there or you don't fit once you've given it a bit of a go, there's no point in taking that relationship any further romantically. All of the things about integrity, personally, character, getting on well and all of the rest that is important in any great relationship also matter as well. The thing is though, sex is what separates a platonic relationship from a romantic one. If one wants to have the best romantic relationship, they'll need to have a great sexual relationship as well.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Personal said:


> At the end of the day in my experience, there are plenty of women who are great relationship material who have no sexual hang ups or effectively no sexual hang ups.
> 
> All that follows presumes that sexually experienced adults are involved.
> 
> ...


This is pretty much my experience as well. First woman I had sex with...first date, her initiation. We were together for over two years until she died. Second woman I had sex with, a few hours into our first date, hr initiation. We were together for 20 years, married for 17. Turned out she was NPD, so the demise of the relationship had nothing to do with early sex. The third woman I had sex with...second date, her initiation. We've been together four years now.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

naiveonedave said:


> Most marriage vows contain something like 'to have and to hold' and 'to forsake all others'. these imply to me 100% sex is an expectation that is given, as neither of the couple will get it anywhere else. I would bail if this is not treated as an expectation. There are situations like one of the partners stops showering and brushing teeth, has affairs, is abusive, etc., but at that time the contract is broken....


"To have and to hold" is not about SEX; it's about _RIGHTS_. It's called the Habendum Clause. 

Don't forget that marriage used to be about _property_; not "love".


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> "To have and to hold" is not about SEX; it's about _RIGHTS_. It's called the Habendum Clause.
> 
> Don't forget that marriage used to be about _property_; not "love".


Fortunately, many of the past marital ideal don't apply any longer, so it really is kind of pointless to bring them up.

With rapidly advancing material equality between the genders, and social support structures, I do think there is a modern expectation that marriage is primarily a sexual relationship.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
that may sometimes be true but it is far from universal. There are certainly women who actively go looking for sex and men who are not so interested.

There are nearly as many threads here from women complaining about a lack of sex as there are from men. 



tech-novelist said:


> Exactly.
> 
> In modern society, women are the gatekeepers of sex. Men will do whatever it takes (and pretty much only whatever it takes) to get laid.
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
IMHO. If you don't want to give him a BJ
He does NOT have the right to criticize, insult, call names or yell. 

He does have the right to ask for an open marriage or to divorce. 

I believe in sexual AND relationship freedom. No one should ever feel forced to engage in a sexual activity that they do not want, AND no one should ever feel forced to remain in a relationship where they are unhappy.





Vega said:


> And how many men would tell a woman that by NOT having sex with him that she "hurt" him? We hear it here on TAM often!
> 
> 
> 
> And if I refuse to give him a blow job, does that give HIM the right to criticize, insult, call me names, scream at me, yell at me, threaten to 'find it elsewhere' or threaten to divorce me all because he's not "happy" with my RIGHT to say 'no'?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Isn't all this really up to people to decide what they want?

If someone wants to wait in a relationship before having sex, that is fine. If someone doesn't want to be in a relationship without sex, that is fine too. Those two people shouldn't date. 

To me the key is honesty. Telling someone you love them to get them in the sack is dishonest. Engaging in sexual acts to "catch" someone, then stopping those when you are married is dishonest.

Of course these actions have natural consequences. Someone who has sex early in a relationship may find themselves used and dumped. Someone who waits a long time for sex may end up turning away partners who otherwise might have been a great match, or may later find that there is a terrible sexual incompatibility. 


Vega is acting on her experience and that is fine. (her experience isn't fine, her acting as she wishes is).

Someone who has been in a relationship with a bad sexual mismatch may look for sex early in their next relationship to avoid the problems that THEY encountered.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

Vega said:


> "To have and to hold" is not about SEX; it's about _RIGHTS_. It's called the Habendum Clause.
> 
> Don't forget that marriage used to be about _property_; not "love".


sorry, you are wrong.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Isn't all this really up to people to decide what they want?
> 
> If someone wants to wait in a relationship before having sex, that is fine. If someone doesn't want to be in a relationship without sex, that is fine too. Those two people shouldn't date.
> ...


This is so very true .. we speak from our personal experiences...these have a way of shaping us, influencing us, also what we hope for... 

I met my husband very young.. too young to be jumping in the sack...we were both innocent, we awakened each other in that innocence... I was definitely longing for something real... we took it slow...we were both shy... he made me feel so comfortable, God I loved him for that !...he made me feel special from day one...

For who were were.. I feel we did it the right way... it took us a couple months to start touching each other, but yeah.. our hormones were on fire.... 

He understood me, what I needed emotionally, given where I came from.. my struggles at home...physically he just seemed to know how to touch me, what to do.. but never pushing too far...all was heavenly... We "got" each other.. He made it so easy to share what sex meant to me/ what it represented ...but yeah.. it was HARD (no pun intended) to not go all the way early on...

34 yrs later... both of us still have a very romantic way of viewing sex..


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

SimplyAmorous said:


> This is so very true .. we speak from our personal experiences...these have a way of shaping us, influencing us, also what we hope for...
> 
> I met my husband very young.. too young to be jumping in the sack...we were both innocent, we awakened each other in that innocence... I was definitely longing for something real... we took it slow...we were both shy... he made me feel so comfortable, God I loved him for that !...he made me feel special from day one...
> 
> ...


You, as someone who waited until marriage, show one HUGE difference between how you describe your feelings on the issue, and others...you openly focus on how difficult it was for you to resist, how your will power was tested, that there was a lot of mutual release to help take the edge off of the almost tangible sexual tension and desire.

See, I just do not see that in other posters who are facing this dilemma, rather, I see quite the contrary...the only sexual tension they describe is feeling pressured by the other.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Just remember, that if the guy is capable of waiting months before he has sex for the first time in a new relationship, that is a red flag for him not being all that into sex after the woman gives him the "green light". All life is risk.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

tech-novelist said:


> And of course you will be paying half the cost of those dates, right?





anonmd said:


> This would be red flag #1. Pick differently!


Interesting mixed messages here. One guy implies that it is unjust and undesirable that men typically pay for dates, and the other guy says it's a serious red flag if he isn't paying for the dates.

Which, I wonder, is true :scratchhead:


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

She said she paid for most of the dates. Nothing wrong with going dutch.


----------



## WorkingWife (May 15, 2015)

Vega said:


> Now c'mon. It probably wasn't even CLOSE to "all day long". Let's not exaggerate, k?


Good grief. "All day long" is a turn of phrase. It mean's "frequently." Do you really think anyone on here read my comment and thought I was being literal? When would you eat? When would you sleep? 




Vega said:


> And who said that it was something pretty common such as BJ's and back rubs? Might be something out of the ordinary.


The people talking in this thread. Weren't you specifically replying to someone who used back rubs as her example? Maybe I got threads mixed up but I thought early on in this thread a specific example given was someone who said their wife used to give BJs to exes and them before marriage but once they married she won't do it.




Vega said:


> Again, this smacks of, "You did it for him. You SHOULD do it for me!"


And...?

Don't most people take into consideration the things the other person will and won't do before deciding to marry them? Would it be unreasonable for me to marry a massage therapist and then be hurt if he would never give me a massage?



Vega said:


> If a woman has a 'right' to refuse, at what point does she get to exercise that 'right' without being criticized for it? Seems that we're paying lip service to her "right of refusal".


Maybe never. Why should she? 

Just because you have the RIGHT to do something does not make it RIGHT to do, nor does it mean no one else has the RIGHT to criticize you for it. 

Criticizing your spouse is usually not the most productive way to get them to do something they don't want to do. But if you're hurt and disappointed by their actions - or lack thereof - why should you never say so? I don't like cleaning house and I certainly have the RIGHT as an adult to not clean my house if I don't want to. But if I refused to ever help clean, my husband would have the RIGHT to criticize me and let me know how he felt about that.

Since when is anyone immune to criticism just because they have a "right" to do something?



Vega said:


> Could be other reasons, yet it seems the current partner likes to manipulate and guilt her into doing something that she obviously doesn't want to do. Maybe she just values herself MORE than she used to...
> 
> I get the feeling that no matter WHAT reason she has won't even be 'good enough' for her partner to accept.


That may very well be the case. Maybe he's a total control freak A-hole and wants her to do something painful or degrading. 

But that was not what was described, certainly not by me when I said it's perfectly normal to feel hurt and like your spouse doesn't care about you as much if they won't do things for you that they've done for everyone else. 



Vega said:


> So, I put it to you: What reason(s) would be good enough for you accept that would cause you to back off?


Back off of what? What do you mean?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Just remember, that if the guy is capable of waiting months before he has sex for the first time in a new relationship, that is a red flag for him not being all that into sex after the woman gives him the "green light". All life is risk.


Your missing something.

I am quite hd.

If I were to find myself single again, I would wait for marriage before having sex again.

My hand and imagination are just fine until consummation.

There is no doubt about my ability or intentions concerning women.

Soon after I kiss the bride, she is going to be a well used orgasmic mess, not fit for anything but being covered up to snore for twelve or more hours.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> Your missing something.
> 
> I am quite hd.
> 
> ...


Conan, I really want to 'hear' your rationale for waiting...


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Vega said:


> Conan, I really want to 'hear' your rationale for waiting...


Simply put, I'm Christian.

I wasn't a Christian until I was married a little over a year so my value system wasn't what it is now.

I had pretty extensive experience before I met my wife but it actually just got in the way with her.

Her body wasn't like all the others so I had to take my time and learn it. Just like any individual.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

This might be too simplistic, but I think there are two types of people out there (and one can also change from one to the other over time)

Those that want to have sex with somebody, regardless of whether you know them well enough or not (or at all), and those that want to have sex with somebody they know enough to be comfortable with.

The former is self-explanatory. The latter is more complex. Sometimes you feel a connection with, or feel that you know somebody enough, after a few dates. Some people take weeks or months to feel like they're ready to be intimate with someone.

I don't think there's a right or wrong, or even an ideal amount of time, or even a way to gauge this sense of "being ready".

If two peoples time frames don't match up, then oh well. But on the flip side, I don't think it's quite fair that if one is wanting to have sex after the 3rd date, and the other isn't, then that person only wants sex.

I think many women FEEL that men only want sex from them, because that's what they've been brought up to think, as well as individual experiences may have swayed that way. I truly don't think there's any more men who want sex from women, than women who want sex from men. It's just that stereotypical gender roles force us to act that way while going through the dating/mating process.

A good example of this was with me and my wife. As some of you may know, she and I dated in our mid-teens, and were each others "firsts". We were apart for 14-15 years, and we rekindled a friendship about a year before we started dating. I asked her out after being single for 4 months or so (no dating for me during that period), and she said yes. After a great "first" date (first after 15 years!) I put the moves on her, and she declined. I was not at all upset, of course. We continued to date, and eventually we became intimate 4 or 5 weeks after that first date.

Here's the thing - she won't let me live that down. How I tried to sleep with her on our first date! Meanwhile, here I am thinking how we've known each other for 20 years, we've actually DATED BEFORE, and we didn't just meet for the first time on our first date. I'm like "But we know each other, we dated, we've already slept together hundreds of times (years ago, but still) and we've gotten to know each other again over the past year!" But to HER, I tried to take her home on the first date - and she wasn't impressed.

Point is, it's all in the eye of the beholder. For some people, they feel a connection after the second, third, fourth date, and they want to be with YOU. Sure, it's partly about the sex, but more often than you'd think, it's also about YOU.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> Simply put, I'm Christian.
> 
> I wasn't a Christian until I was married a little over a year so my value system wasn't what it is now.
> 
> ...


 Hi conan I to am a Christian and my husband and I didn't have sex with each other till we married. Its well worth waiting for, and if a man I was dating wanted sex before marriage then I wouldn't interested in him. 
I just don't get it that some couples have sex on the 1st or 2nd or 3rd date, you don't even know the other person then at all.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> Hi conan I to am a Christian and my husband and I didn't have sex with each other till we married. Its well worth waiting for, and if a man I was dating wanted sex before marriage then I wouldn't interested in him.
> I just don't get it that some couples have sex on the 1st or 2nd or 3rd date, you don't even know the other person then at all.


Hi Diana,

Just curious...

How long did you wait?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> Hi conan I to am a Christian and my husband and I didn't have sex with each other till we married. Its well worth waiting for, and if a man I was dating wanted sex before marriage then I wouldn't interested in him.
> I just don't get it that some couples have sex on the 1st or 2nd or 3rd date, you don't even know the other person then at all.


It is a mindset that many don't understand. Ours that is.

There are also a lot of bad stories about people waiting and having really bad sex. I believe it is a lack of education.

Christians need to talk about sex but it is still taboo with many of our brothers and sisters.

LOL! I had sex within 8 hours of meeting my wife. Not something I would advise to anyone.

But God had grace and we worked out well.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

alexm said:


> This might be too simplistic, but I think there are two types of people out there (and one can also change from one to the other over time)
> 
> Those that want to have sex with somebody, regardless of whether you know them well enough or not (or at all), and those that want to have sex with somebody they know enough to be comfortable with.
> 
> ...


In modern dating culture, I've learned that just because a man feels a "connection" to you doesn't necessarily mean anything. He might feel a 'connection' to you...and the other three women he's dating. Or he feels a connection with you, but he feels a STRONGER connection with his ex-girlfriend, and if she came back on the scene--even if you were dating him for a year--he would DUMP you in a heartbeat, if she came back to him. Basically, he used you as the "filler girl" until something he thought was BETTER came along. BTDT and the man who did this to me was CHRISTIAN!!! 

Even if a man tells you he has "strong feelings" for you, it doesn't mean SQUAT!


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Holdingontoit said:


> Just remember, that if the guy is capable of waiting months before he has sex for the first time in a new relationship, that is a red flag for him not being all that into sex after the woman gives him the "green light". All life is risk.


Ha ha.. you don't know my husband... You can't box any of us... I don't fit the "prude virgin" profile either.. even if I had some inhibitions back then. ... (Appreciate @ConanHub 's reply too)...

Although he may not have as high of Test levels as some other men his age (in his 50's now), he's never been the aggressive type... but he sure LOVES SEX [email protected]#.....always has..







...

Even when he couldn't keep up , when my drive surpassed his 8 yrs ago...He never turned me down.. telling me to put my toys away & always come to him... I was pushing his limits.. I wanted 3 times a day ...he couldn't do that.... but still he wanted to work it up...to please me.. that was his pleasure, never a burden...he laughed at me when I suggested that ! 

And for the 1st 19 years married, there wasn't a time when I was wanting it - that I didn't get it.. I was terribly SPOILED...so spoiled... I never realized what men go through or how hard it was for him.. wanting me as often as he did...we had years of infertility after our 1st son that stole my thunder.. I was too focused on conceiving ... "just give me the sperm deposit please". 

He told me in his youth.. he whacked it sometimes 5 times a day ! so yeah.. he really loves Pleasure & orgasms..nothing better!

But true.. he's one of those older fashioned gentleman that believe in Marriage, more traditionally minded.. I was the christian, or tried to be... he was smitten with me, very much in love.. this allowed him to honor my boundaries.. he never worried I'd be a cold fish..not with the way we were together.. 

He's told me when we met.. he wasn't even thinking of sex.. just getting to know me... I asked when that changed - "wasn't I hot enough?"...he replied " when you stuck your hands down my pants"...... I laughed so hard...









I knew well enough..I'd never find another guy like THAT in my lifetime... he was a gift from above.. I still feel this way..


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Vega said:


> Hi Diana,
> 
> Just curious...
> 
> How long did you wait?


In our case it was nearly a year.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> It is a mindset that many don't understand. Ours that is.
> 
> There are also a lot of bad stories about people waiting and having really bad sex. I believe it is a lack of education.
> 
> ...


Bad sex isnt dependant on whether people wait or not in my experience. Sex is something that grows and develops between the two of you as you know each other more. 
Christians do talk about sex far more than in the past, there are countless good books and teachings about it now, and after all a whole book in the Bible is devoted to sex. :smile2:


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

OliviaG said:


> I wouldn't wait until marriage to have sex either. If either of us *could* wait that long I'd think it was a bad sign. And it's too risky - wouldn't want to be bound together for the rest of my life with someone I came to find out that I didn't enjoy having sex with.
> 
> But Vega is in a unique situation: she's been very, very hurt (many times) and she doesn't trust her own instincts around men. What is best for her may not be best for the average woman; she may need to take a whole lot of time and be a whole lot more cautious than say I would, because she doesn't trust her instincts. Maybe she'd need to be so cautious that a few good guys got away. So what? That's the price she might have to pay to learn how to handle finding the right guy. Eventually, she'll learn to distinguish the signals that lead to the wrong guy from the signals that lead to a healthy relationship, and she'll be able to relax and trust herself and him. But I don't see how she can get from where she is right now to that place unless she takes her time and treads very carefully.


If either could wait that long it definitely doesnt mean they arent interested in sex, it means they have strong values and self discipline and self control. I know many couples who waited, all happily married now.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> Bad sex isnt dependant on whether people wait or not in my experience. Sex is something that grows and develops between the two of you as you know each other more.
> Christians do talk about sex far more than in the past, there are countless good books and teachings about it now, and after all a whole book in the Bible is devoted to sex. :smile2:


Definitely agree with you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Diana7 said:


> If either could wait that long it definitely doesnt mean they arent interested in sex, it means they have strong values and self discipline and self control. I know many couples who waited, all happily married now.


Likewise if either chose not to wait it definitely doesnt mean they don't have strong values, self discipline and self control. It means they are interested in sex, I know many couples who didn't wait, all happily married now.

I have strong values, self discipline and immense self control, yet I don't see any point in waiting for sex.

Choosing not to have sex is no guarantee that the person abstaining has strong values, self discipline and self control. Just like choosing to have sex is also no guarantee that the person partaking doesn't have strong values, self discipline and self control.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Personal said:


> Likewise if either chose not to wait it definitely doesnt mean they don't have strong values, self discipline and self control. It means they are interested in sex, I know many couples who didn't wait, all happily married now.
> 
> I have strong values, self discipline and immense self control, yet I don't see any point in waiting for sex.
> 
> Choosing not to have sex is no guarantee that the person abstaining has strong values, self discipline and self control. Just like choosing to have sex is also no guarantee that the person partaking doesn't have strong values, self discipline and self control.


 Those who wait are of course just as interested in sex but they know that the best thing is to wait till there is a full commitment to each other in marriage. Its not easy to do that in todays world, partly because its very hard to find a partner who will do the same. and also its not easy to go against the flow of what the majority do. Someone, a man especially, who is prepared to wait, is definitely one with good self control and strong moral standards and is worth waiting for.Those who do this need to put their values and self discipline and control before their desire for sex now. Not easy but well worth it in the end. I know several couples who waited and none regret it. 
One of the main things that attracted me to my husband was his integrity and moral values, and his determination never to have sex outside marriage. I love that about him.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Diana7 said:


> Those who wait are of course just as interested in sex but they know that the best thing is to wait till there is a full commitment to each other in marriage. Its not easy to do that in todays world, partly because its very hard to find a partner who will do the same. and also its not easy to go against the flow of what the majority do. Someone, a man especially, who is prepared to wait, is definitely one with good self control and strong moral standards and is worth waiting for.Those who do this need to put their values and self discipline and control before their desire for sex now. Not easy but well worth it in the end. I know several couples who waited and none regret it.
> One of the main things that attracted me to my husband was his integrity and moral values, and his determination never to have sex outside marriage. I love that about him.


That's okay, in reading your response it appear you lack the comprehension to understand that integrity, high moral standards and values (which are in any case always subjective) discipline, plus self control also apply to many who don't wait and also don't apply to many who do.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Personal said:


> That's okay, in reading your response it appear you lack the comprehension to understand that integrity, high moral standards and values (which are in any case always subjective) discipline, plus self control also apply to many who don't wait and also don't apply to many who do.


I can understand what you're saying here. But I tend to agree more with Diana's post. 

I just don't want sex to be the MAIN 'attraction' of any serious relationship/marriage I have. 

To me, it's like getting a job MAINLY for the _benefits_. If I was a potential employer and I interviewed someone who asked questions about how many sick days he got, how much paid vacation I offered, whether I offered stock options, medical, dental vision care, yadda, yadda, yadda *BEFORE* he wanted to know much of _anything_ about the job, or only asked a handful of questions about the job, I _definitely_ would NOT hire him. 

And likewise, if *I* am the one looking for a job, I'm not gong to be focusing on the benefits. Even if I'm hired for the job, there might be a 'probation' period of a few months, just to see if I'm a good 'fit' for the company and if the company is a good fit for me. Quite often, companies will delay those benefits until AFTER the probation period is over. I think this is a good policy.

I would rather spend some time asking questions getting answers and observing behavior BEFORE giving by body to someone who I might not even like in 2 weeks.


----------



## Capster (Jun 10, 2014)

Vega said:


> Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...
> 
> If your wife gave your a bj or hj to completion, did you ever look into her eyes lovingly and say, "Thank you"?
> 
> I don't mean in some flippant way like, "Thanks!" I mean a sincere heart-felt, slow, deliberate "Thank you. I really appreciate what you did for me, and I love you all the more for it."


Yes. We just added this to our repertoire a year or so ago maybe? This after 25 years of saying "never." So after the first one she said, "There, I'll bet it wasn't as great as you thought it would be." I said "It was awesome!" She keeps getting better and better at them. More often, too. :wink2:


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

> Originally Posted by Vega
> 
> Hey Conan, I want to ask you (and any other man who wants to answer) something...
> 
> ...


Not a man but yes my partner often thanks me in a very loving way.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

I somehow don't think it fits to say "Thank You" in those words for a bj or other sex act. I do every time say something very positive. I never get a stand alone bj or hj, so perhaps that is why it feels weird to thank her. A bj or other act is always part of the larger encounter which includes me doing things to her, including almost always oral on her.

I can't actually recall a single time having her thank me for doing something sexual. She does sometimes give some kind of positive comment.


----------

