# "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Read this comment on Mumsnet... in a thread where a wife complained that her husband wanted sex once a week... and would "throw himself around in a huff" if she turned him down... this is very similar to my past situation, only that I would get sex twice a month... any thoughts?

Here's the link, as requested... 

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/2238150-Husband-gets-annoyed-if-I-dont-want-sex


----------



## Luminous (Jan 14, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Read this comment on Mumsnet... in a thread where a wife complained that her husband wanted sex once a week... and would "throw himself around in a huff" if she turned him down... this is very similar to my past situation, only that I would get sex twice a month... any thoughts?


Then one could also say, that should someone have that particular outlook, then as long as they're prepared to have hugs/kisses, insightful conversation, oh and bills paid for once a week or less, then sure thing!


----------



## OnTheFly (Mar 12, 2015)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> ...any thoughts?


Ja, I have one. If sex is denied unilaterally, it's wrong.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Actually marriage does entitle a person to a steady stream of sex. I mean, that's kind of the point. Or at least it used to be.

Most of our needs for all sorts of support from one another can be satisfied through friends and family and the variety of contact with others on a daily basis.

Historically speaking, what used to make marriage unique was having sex.

Not so much anymore though.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



OnTheFly said:


> Ja, I have one. If sex is denied unilaterally, it's wrong.


The man on the thread doesn't want sex 3 times a day, but once a week... most women on the thread say that he's been unreasonable because of the small kids and that he shouldn't expect his wife to have regular sex with him... he is childish for getting in a huff and that he should just put up with it. The wife is obviously annoyed because he wants sex so often and she is even less inclined to want sex with him. There is no understanding whatsoever for the man and for what it means being a man... the gap is frightening...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



minimalME said:


> Historically speaking, what used to make marriage unique was having sex.
> 
> Not so much anymore though.


Looks like it... but I was shocked by the attitude of most women there... it shows a total lack of understanding of what it means to be a man...


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> There is no understanding whatsoever for the man and for what it means being a man... the gap is frightening...


Well, my opinion isn't going to be a popular one, but I think women (and men) should view sex as more of an obligation and a responsibility. Kind of like taking out the trash and paying your taxes. You just do it because you know it's part of life. Feeling like it doesn't necessarily come into play.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Read this comment on Mumsnet... in a thread where a wife complained that her husband wanted sex once a week... and would "throw himself around in a huff" if she turned him down... this is very similar to my past situation, only that I would get sex twice a month... any thoughts?


They have problems that extend beyond the bedroom.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> The man on the thread doesn't want sex 3 times a day, but once a week... most women on the thread say that he's been unreasonable because of the small kids and that he shouldn't expect his wife to have regular sex with him... he is childish for getting in a huff and that he should just put up with it. The wife is obviously annoyed because he wants sex so often and she is even less inclined to want sex with him. There is no understanding whatsoever for the man and for what it means being a man... the gap is frightening...


I REALLY want to f a petulant child. That makes MY motor run!


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I REALLY want to f a petulant child. That makes MY motor run!


I get that... but why didn't she address the problem when he got a bit petulant the first time around? Like talking to him? Instead of treating him like an inconvenience or another chore? You are married and he is your husband... is desiring sex with your wife once a week "pestering"?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I get that... but why didn't she address the problem when he got a bit petulant the first time around? Like talking to him? Instead of treating him like an inconvenience or another chore? You are married and he is your husband... is desiring sex with your wife once a week "pestering"?


You know you did not post a link to her story. One can only guess. But I can guess how I would feel. If there was a timeline like "once a week" that was oblivious to life going on around us, any feelings, communication, and really FUN in our relationship, I would think of it as a chore as well. And if all I had to be was "willing" my heart and soul would be crushed. I can just picture writing sex with husband on Fridays after cleaning the kitchen and putting the kids to bed. I can feel the resentment and resistance building in me as I type.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> You know you did not post a link to her story. One can only guess. But I can guess how I would feel. If there was a timeline like "once a week" that was oblivious to life going on around us, any feelings, communication, and really FUN in our relationship, I would think of it as a chore as well. And if all I had to be was "willing" my heart and soul would be crushed. I can just picture writing sex with husband on Fridays after cleaning the kitchen and putting the kids to bed. I can feel the resentment and resistance building in me as I type.



The once a week wasn't "fixed"... the wife said they were having sex once a week... I'll try and find the thread and I will post the link...

EDIT: posted the link...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I am not sure what you want from her for the sake of example. Why didn't see address it? Who knows about "the first time around". But she DID address it. His response was to (I imagine petulantly) say he can't help his reaction. She explained it is a passion killer. They are having sex once or twice a week. And SHE wants to know how to deal with his petulance when she is not up for it. I don't know your past situation. But I feel for her.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I am not sure what you want from her for the sake of example. Why didn't see address it? Who knows about "the first time around". But she DID address it. His response was to (I imagine petulantly) say he can't help his reaction. She explained it is a passion killer. They are having sex once or twice a week. And SHE wants to know how to deal with his petulance when she is not up for it. I don't know your past situation. But I feel for her.


I guess he is resenting the fact that he has to "pester" her for sex, whilst it should be a normal act between between two people that love each other. It's a catch 22 situation. He doesn't feel wanted and becomes grumpy and that's a turn off for the wife... it's happened to me. But my point was the title of this thread... marriage doesn't entitle you to a steady stream of sex... why get married then? If I want sex once in a blue moon, I can use my hand...


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

It's not that hard to understand why he's behaving this way. Of course he wants sex with his wife and pouts when he doesn't get it.


----------



## 247769 (May 18, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Doesn't it say in Corinthians 7 to not deny your spouse except for praying and fasting and then only for a short while? If we all loved by the Bible think how great things would be. 

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



peterrabbit said:


> Doesn't it say in Corinthians 7 to not deny your spouse except for praying and fasting and then only for a short while? If we all loved by the Bible think how great things would be.


The problem is that there's this modern fantasy where both parties are hot for each other each and every time they have sex.

Men don't want pity sex, women don't want to be pestered for sex. 

So, it just becomes a power struggle.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

In the same way he wants his sexual needs met, I wonder how much he does for her. 
Working and paying bills do not meet a woman's needs. Wonder does he woo her, make her feel special and meet her emotional needs. Marriage is not just about sex, (although some in this forum seem to think so). I don't feel inclined to get sexual or **** my H brains out if he ignores me all day and then expects his conjugal needs to be met when we go to bed, **** that, if my needs are not taken care off. 
I think there are many men on here who thinks that it is their right to **** their wives, well it is not. When courting the wife, then they pulled out the stops, once married, nothing........ remember it works both ways.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



peterrabbit said:


> Doesn't it say in Corinthians 7 to not deny your spouse except for praying and fasting and then only for a short while? If we all loved by the Bible think how great things would be.
> 
> Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


Doesn't it also say "For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her." 
How many husbands actually have that kind of self sacrificing love for their wives? Many can't be bothered. How easy it would be to submit to and love such a man. 
Stop cherry picking verses from the bible to suit your argument. Frankly this is a misogynist use of the bible.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> Working and paying bills do not meet a woman's needs.


This is a recent attitude and expectation.

In the past when life was more of a struggle, working and providing absolutely met a woman's needs.

So part of the problem is simply a lack of thankfulness.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I've just read the first page and a fraction of the 3 at that link. While I have some empathy for the general theme of the responses there, and here by the females, I'm appalled by the total onesidedness of them in general. Abuse? Assault? Hopefully someone in the remainder of the thread sneaks in the fact that she ought to maybe sneak in some compromise and mutual understanding if she does not want a divorce .


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I guess he is resenting the fact that he has to "pester" her for sex, whilst it should be a normal act between between two people that love each other. It's a catch 22 situation. He doesn't feel wanted and becomes grumpy and that's a turn off for the wife... it's happened to me. But my point was the title of this thread... marriage doesn't entitle you to a steady stream of sex... why get married then? If I want sex once in a blue moon, I can use my hand...


That is a very interesting question. You pick an odd example of a woman who very much wants sex with her husband, fantasizes about away trips for it, and has sex once or twice a week. So maybe it is the word entitled that has you tweaked. Since they are not having sex once in a blue moon, that word has to be the only reason to cite this particular post that I can see. I know I did not get married to supply my husband with sex whenever he wanted. 

There are a lot of reasons to get married, both personally and, consciously or not, as a means of fitting with society. Family, domestic bliss. My husband gets teary when he says how he thinks about us being old and grey together, holding hands and smiling at the life we have built.

Neither my husband nor I would want a marriage without a strong sexual component. But also we don't feel entitled to anything other than what we promised, to be committed to building our life together including the strong sexual bond. We enjoy the frisky times together. We get through the dry times together. 

I would be truly done if my husband thought that entitlement to sex was the reason he got married. Yah I will do a bunch of other bull**** for you (and presumably our kids) to get laid on a regular basis. That is not a life building, love affirming sense for me at all.

A few years ago (oy more than a few now) we had a few conversations about how rejection makes him feel unloved and unvalued. This was done in calm moments, not in the immediate aftermath of a specific rejection. I thought it weird at the time since lack of sex is not one of our issues on balance. It was enlightening to me to learn that the feeling of hurt can happen with ONE instance of rejection. We had a series of really good conversations over the course of quite a few days. The thing that was different about what I think I read on here is that what we concluded seems quite different than what I think people on this board seem to want. He concluded that what he was looking for was Not for me to give it up regardless of what I was feeling. That I do have to feel safe to say no when I want to without fearing crushing his feelings. That freed me up so much to not just have sex when I was not really feeling it, but to initiate gleefully for him knowing I will at least feel close and warm if not filled with passion.


----------



## Luminous (Jan 14, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> In the same way he wants his sexual needs met, I wonder how much he does for her.
> Working and paying bills do not meet a woman's needs. Wonder does he woo her, make her feel special and meet her emotional needs. Marriage is not just about sex, (although some in this forum seem to think so). I don't feel inclined to get sexual or **** my H brains out if he ignores me all day and then expects his conjugal needs to be met when we go to bed, **** that, if my needs are not taken care off.
> I think there are many men on here who thinks that it is their right to **** their wives, well it is not. When courting the wife, then they pulled out the stops, once married, nothing........ remember it works both ways.


So working to supply a wife with a roof over her head, and work to pay the bills so they have power, water, shelter, transport, and clothing, is not a need?

You then go on to accuse someone of 'cherry picking', then pull out the 'misogynist' card...

Impressive... Most impressive...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



minimalME said:


> This is a recent attitude and expectation.
> 
> In the past when life was more of a struggle, working and providing absolutely met a woman's needs.
> 
> So part of the problem is simply a lack of thankfulness.


We don't live in the past. I don't feel thankful that my husband does the basics of living as I do. There is a lot to be thankful for. That is not one of them.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



anonmd said:


> I've just read the first page and a fraction of the 3 at that link. While I have some empathy for the general theme of the responses there, and here by the females, I'm appalled by the total onesidedness of them in general. Abuse? Assault? Hopefully someone in the remainder of the thread sneaks in the fact that she ought to maybe sneak in some compromise and mutual understanding if she does not want a divorce .


Any different than the usual bull**** suggestions in TAM where men are supposed to try harder, hit the gym, dress like GQ, and all that?

In both cases very superficial arguments to rationalize engrained behaviors without understanding root causes.

I.e. what I said when I came to TAM..


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Luminous said:


> So working to supply a wife with a roof over her head, and work to pay the bills so they have power, water, shelter, transport, and clothing, is not a need?
> 
> You then go on to accuse someone of 'cherry picking', then pull out the 'misogynist' card...
> 
> Impressive... Most impressive...


I wonder about this. How is this attitude working? Has it ever worked to achieve the desired goal. Ever?

When I was a SAHM, DH did not view himself as "providing for me". WE were doing what we felt was the best for our family. THAT was an attitude that has served him well in achieving a loving and highly sexual marriage.

I wonder how many of these wives entered marriage knowing their husbands viewed it as a quid pro quo, a simple I give you money so that you give me sex? I wonder if they would have signed up for it? Some certainly would. I had a friend like that. I wanted to punch her in the face. I think no one winds up happy in such an arrangement.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> We don't live in the past. I don't feel thankful that my husband does the basics of living as I do. There is a lot to be thankful for. That is not one of them.


Regardless of time period, there's always room to be thankful when someone puts forth effort that you benefit from.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> That is a very interesting question. You pick an odd example of a woman who very much wants sex with her husband, fantasizes about away trips for it, and has sex once or twice a week. So maybe it is the word entitled that has you tweaked. Since they are not having sex once in a blue moon, that word has to be the only reason to cite this particular post that I can see. I know I did not get married to supply my husband with sex whenever he wanted.
> 
> There are a lot of reasons to get married, both personally and, consciously or not, as a means of fitting with society. Family, domestic bliss. My husband gets teary when he says how he thinks about us being old and grey together, holding hands and smiling at the life we have built.
> 
> ...


It's a matter of balance and understanding isn't it? In the thread I cited, *the husband is considered a jerk and almost a rapist for wanting to have sex once a week with his wife* and for getting annoyed if he got rejected... of course sulking is not attractive, but in a loving marriage the onus is on both... man and wife. Once a week is not pestering anybody and the reaction in the thread is appalling and it's all coming from women on a board for women... I bet she was happy having sex when they were trying to conceive... if you get married, you should take into consideration that having sex with your husband once in a while is normal... and not think he is some kind of rapist because he wants to be intimate with you. He is the father of your children, not a monster.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> It's a matter of balance and understanding isn't it? In the thread I cited, *the husband is considered a jerk and almost a rapist for wanting to have sex once a week with his wife* and for getting annoyed if he got rejected... of course sulking is not attractive, but in a loving marriage the onus is on both... man and wife. Once a week is not pestering anybody and the reaction in the thread is appalling and it's all coming from women on a board for women... I bet she was happy having sex when they were trying to conceive... if you get married, you should take into consideration that having sex with your husband once in a while is normal... and not think he is some kind of rapist because he wants to be intimate with you. He is the father of your children, not a monster.


I did not read the replies, as I thought they were irrelevant. She IS having sex with her husband. 

You totally lose me with the word intimate. If one equates sex with intimacy regardless of the disposition of his or her partner, one has no idea what intimacy is.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

For the record... I agree with the notion that being a petulant, sulking child when not getting sex on his terms makes him a jerk.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> If one equates sex with intimacy regardless of the disposition of his or her partner, one has no idea what intimacy is.


And this confirms to me that the chasm between how the sexes view relationships and sex is enormous and will never be filled...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> For the record... I agree with the notion that being a petulant, sulking child when not getting sex on his terms makes him a jerk.


We agree on that... :laugh:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> And this confirms to me that the chasm between how the sexes view relationships and sex is enormous and will never be filled...


How so? My husband agrees with me. HE is married to a woman who will cheerfully bang him silly or make slow love to him whenever he wants. A woman who initiates because it makes him feel desirable even when she would rather go to bed. I suppose there is nothing there. That he might be an example of a mindset that engenders exactly what people claim to seek.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> How so? My husband agrees with me. HE is married to a woman who will cheerfully bang him silly or make slow love to him *whenever he wants*. A woman who initiates because it makes him feel desirable even when she would rather go to bed. I suppose there is nothing there. That he might be an example of a mindset that engenders exactly what people claim to seek.


Your husband had to tell you, though, and you listened... good on you. That other husband is not so lucky... he gets the "get on with it" treatment... so, I don't get it... are you different from the wife in that thread? Is her husband "entitled" to complain? He's not being listened to...


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> How so? My husband agrees with me. HE is married to a woman who will cheerfully bang him silly or make slow love to him whenever he wants. *A woman who initiates because it makes him feel desirable even when she would rather go to bed.* I suppose there is nothing there. That he might be an example of a mindset that engenders exactly what people claim to seek.


This is the difference. You'd rather go to bed but make the effort instead. You give even if you don't feel like it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Your husband had to tell you, though, and you listened... good on you. That other husband is not so lucky... he gets the "get on with it" treatment... so, I don't get it... are you different from the wife in that thread? Is her husband "entitled" to complain? He's not being listened to...


I would venture that my husband is different. That the best thing he did for us was not talk but LISTEN. That part about my being safe to say no without wrecking him. Did you skip that? He listened when I said I did not want to be responsible for his self esteem by simply putting out. His hearing that, though I will say it did not make sense to him, his hearing it ANYWAY engendered a very strong feeling of love, connection, and enthusiasm that mere putting out would never have engendered.

YMMV.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



minimalME said:


> This is the difference. You'd rather go to bed but make the effort instead. You give even if you don't feel like it.


Yah. Why?


----------



## Mr.Married (Feb 21, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

"Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...

the (...) at the end of the title is because it was cut short. 

The title should read:

Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex when they marry the wrong partner.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Yah. Why?


I have no idea. Please tell!


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> A few years ago (oy more than a few now) we had a few conversations about how rejection makes him feel unloved and unvalued. This was done in calm moments, not in the immediate aftermath of a specific rejection. I thought it weird at the time since lack of sex is not one of our issues on balance. It was enlightening to me to learn that the feeling of hurt can happen with ONE instance of rejection. We had a series of really good conversations over the course of quite a few days. The thing that was different about what I think I read on here is that what we concluded seems quite different than what I think people on this board seem to want. He concluded that what he was looking for was Not for me to give it up regardless of what I was feeling. That I do have to feel safe to say no when I want to without fearing crushing his feelings. That freed me up so much to not just have sex when I was not really feeling it, but to initiate gleefully for him knowing I will at least feel close and warm if not filled with passion.


Menopause messed with the sex big time, well mainly the path to the bedroom. I carried on as usual for the past 20 years (I’ll call entitled for this discussion only) and came across as jerk. Sigh, coming access as a jerk is not conducive to getting laid.

We had a similar set of discussions. We could always talk about sex, but those were freaking difficult discussions. Glad we had them, we figured out our new normal.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> That the best thing he did for us was not talk but LISTEN.


Yup, that’s it, that what was the hard part. I’m guessing you also did a lot of listening.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I would venture that my husband is different. That the best thing he did for us was not talk but LISTEN. That part about my being safe to say no without wrecking him. Did you skip that? He listened when I said I did not want to be responsible for his self esteem by simply putting out. His hearing that, though I will say it did not make sense to him, his hearing it ANYWAY engendered a very strong feeling of love, connection, and enthusiasm that mere putting out would never have engendered.
> 
> YMMV.


I remember your story... so, it's a two way system... good. But it seems to me that the _other_ husband is not listened to. You say your husband can have sex whenever he wants because you feel safe. He has understood. But the wife in that thread is even resenting once a week... but maybe her husband hasn't understood and he is a jerk indeed. Unfortunately, we don't know his side of the story...

so, according to you - and to recap - marriage DOES NOT entitle to a steady stream of willing sex.... *if you are a jerk*... :laugh:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



CharlieParker said:


> Yup, that’s it, that what was the hard part. I’m guessing you also did a lot of listening.


For us, I have always been able to listen to understand. The thing that was best was that for him, he has a tendency to listen to counter argue. That he took the time to really listen was very, very good.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I remember your story... so, it's a two way system... good. But it seems to me that the _other_ husband is not listened to. You say your husband can have sex whenever he wants because you feel safe. He has understood. But the wife in that thread is even resenting once a week... but maybe her husband hasn't understood and he is a jerk indeed. Unfortunately, we don't know his side of the story...
> 
> so, according to you - and to recap - marriage DOES NOT entitle to a steady stream of willing sex.... *if you are a jerk*... :laugh:


If that is what you read me to say, then I guess I wasted my time. Cheers.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> If that is what you read me to say, then I guess I wasted my time. Cheers.



no, it was a joke... sorry. I get what you are saying. But your husband is lucky because you were prepared to listen to him. Or, as you probably would say, he created his own luck by listening and behaving like a considerate man.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> no, it was a joke... sorry. I get what you are saying. But your husband is lucky because you were prepared to listen to him. Or, as you probably would say, he created his own luck by listening and behaving like a considerate man.


I wonder if it is common, as we like to talk about genders on this board, for men to NOT listen to hear. I have observed over the years that the men on this board (many, many fewer women) when asked what their wives say list excuses. Hardly listening to understand when one categorizes what they are saying as excuses. Who knows, maybe they have decades to decide talking honestly is not good, safe and productive. Maybe they listen to counter argue. Just wondering.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Maybe they listen to counter argue.


This. I did this. I didn't listen. If I listened properly, I wouldn't be half divorced. I'm not saying it was all my fault, but I played a big part in it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> This. I did this. I didn't listen. If I listened properly, I wouldn't be half divorced. I'm not saying it was all my fault, but I played a big part in it.


Maybe that wisdom will help you in the future. I hope so. For my part, I think the blame and fault discussion is a complete waste of time.


----------



## Rejectedliver (Jan 1, 2019)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Once a week ?? Hell he must be a a complete deviant according to her - I think she is an arse
telling him she doesnt really want to have sex with him I dont predict a happy outcome gor this marriage. I wonder if she wants to swap ???


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

In the article I got the impression her main beef wasn't really about having sex per se but rather his pissy and whiney attitude when she wasn't up for it. 

I can't say that I disagree with her on that at all. If someone is going to stomp off in a huff and act like a spoiled little brat, I understand why that is a big turn off. 

One of the main things that Athol Kay recommends in his "Married Man Sex Life" is that if one does get turned down to not whine and pout but to just walk away and go do something productive and manly. 

In regards to entitlement, No, I do not believe that anyone is entitled to sex in marriage in marriage at all. 

But neither do I think that anyone is entitled to be married either. If someone does not want to have sex with their spouse, that is their prerogative and their right. However that rejected spouse is also perfectly in their right to pack up and leave and go find someone who does want to be with them. 


People have a right to not want to have sex, but they do not have a right to hold someone in endentured servitude in marriage if that other person's wants and needs are not being met.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> In the article I got the impression her main beef wasn't really about having sex per se but rather his pissy and whiney attitude when she wasn't up for it.
> 
> I can't say that I disagree with her on that at all. If someone is going to stomp off in a huff and act like a spoiled little brat, I understand why that is a big turn off.
> 
> ...


Divorce is available these days. It is a beautiful thing.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> In the article I got the impression her main beef wasn't really about having sex per se but rather his pissy and whiney attitude when she wasn't up for it.
> 
> I can't say that I disagree with her on that at all. If someone is going to stomp off in a huff and act like a spoiled little brat, I understand why that is a big turn off.
> 
> ...



Very balanced view...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Maybe that wisdom will help you in the future. I hope so.



I doubt there will be a future with me in another relationship. After 20 years of suffering - regardless of blame and faults - I'm not very keen... I want a peaceful life. It's been a nightmare... :smile2:


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Divorce is available these days. It is a beautiful thing.


Yeah, exactly. 

I really think some of these people (both rejecters and rejectees) see marriage as some kind of indentured servitude and that the rejectee is just going to have to continue fulfilling their duties of the marriage even though they are dissatisfied and they are just going to have to live with it (or live without it as the case may be)


The sense of entitlement that I often see in these cases is the rejecter continually rejects the other but yet expects the other to just suck it up and live with it. Noone is entitled to the other's servitude if their needs aren't being met. 

In the free world, no employer would expect an employee to keep coming to work if they decided they no longer wanted to pay them one day. And conversely no sane employee would expect checks to keep coming if they decided to stop going to work. 

So why do spouses think the other will just keep spousing if they themselves aren't willing to lift a finger to meet the others wants and needs??

I don't get it.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> I don't get it.


Children, in my case, as you know... and don't start your usual tirade about children been better off without squabbling parents... :laugh:


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

OnTheFly said:


> In Absentia said:
> 
> 
> > ...any thoughts?
> ...


Dingdingdung! Winner!

This. Period.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

In Absentia said:


> NobodySpecial said:
> 
> 
> > If one equates sex with intimacy regardless of the disposition of his or her partner, one has no idea what intimacy is.
> ...


Hey hey there! Generalize much? I absolutely understand intimacy AND , with my spouse, I absolutely equate it, at least in part, with sex.

Not all of us women are "THAT woman" who thinks refusing sex is some badge of "feminism"


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> Hey hey there! Generalize much? I absolutely understand intimacy AND , with my spouse, I absolutely equate it, at least in part, with sex.
> 
> Not all of us women are "THAT woman" who *thinks refusing sex is some badge of "feminism"*


Jeez. Where did that come from?


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> And this confirms to me that the chasm between how the sexes view relationships and sex is enormous and will never be filled...


It will be filled in 20 year with tech. Most men will satisfy this urge with technology (whatever that is) more then a live women. You watch. If the choice is being compared to a rapist for wanting to have intimacy with your wife or having sex with something that feels just as real as real sex and call look and feel like anything you want I don't think that will be much of a choice for many. 

The thing that is most striking about the thread in this link is the lack of common empathy in it. Which follows a general lack of understand of how men work. Most men experience intimacy through sex. So to put your husband down for wanting that is pretty much the same as the guy who puts his wife down because she wants to talk about her feelings. Sure you can do it but I doubt your marriage will survive. 

It's true they have more problems then the sex, but her attitude is one of them. I should also say that whining is also his problem as well. Lots of men do this and it just compounds the problem. 

I wonder what would happen if he said, "Hey we need to have sex soon, I am feeling disconnected from you." Would that help her understand. I am not saying that would lead into sex, no he should then "put the moves on her at another time." But it may help her understand what he is really talking about when he is telling her he wants to have sex with her. 

I also think women who take this attitude "well I am raising your child" are not different then the men whose attitude is "well I am working hard to put a roof on your head". That is not marriage or a relationship, it's commerce. Just like if she divorced him he would still be working to pay for his kids (assuming he is not a louse) she would still be raising his kids. She doesn't deserve any points for that. Raising one's kids is not sacrificial love. It helps him but it's not do FOR him so she doesn't deserve any more credit then he does for working hard. Both of these are to be expected. 

Lack of empathy for your partner is probably the worst quality you can have in a marriage. Now maybe she doesn't understand what sex is for a man, and he is most likely doesn't have the skills to impress this upon her. The whining shows this and certainly doesn't help, but I think being a good spouse means having empathy. I know if my spouse continued to ask me for the same thing I would at least try to figure out why and if it was reasonable which this seems to be then work on it. But then I think there seems to be many wives that have no aspiration to support there husband in any way, just like there are some husbands who are the same with their wives. She is just the female version of the guy who works real hard and thinks he is a great husband. Yeah no. 

I also think that often times this is really about the wives poor feelings about herself, or her body or maybe she is afraid the intimacy of sex in general. It's just easier to say "all he does is think about sex". Lazy too. Then again depending on her damage the right man could probably help with that, and it's often why when you do see women cheat it's the AP strong expression of desire for her in an unentitled way that seems to bring out the sexuality in them. Frankly both of them have a real problem communicating and the dynamic is toxic.

No matter what anyone says marriage without sex with some frequency is not marriage and in most cases is unsustainable. But the same could be said of marriage without empathy or grace. 

He may be a lousy husband but she is also a lousy wife. His mistake is to sulk, but he should NOT put up with it.

I am tempted to join just to say such. That would be funny.


----------



## southbound (Oct 31, 2010)

minimalME said:


> Actually marriage does entitle a person to a steady stream of sex. I mean, that's kind of the point. Or at least it used to be.
> 
> Most of our needs for all sorts of support from one another can be satisfied through friends and family and the variety of contact with others on a daily basis.
> 
> ...


I always thought this way too. People may say you don’t get married to have sex, but who gets married to “not” have sex? It doesn’t make any sense. As you wrote, all other support can be given from family and friends. Sure, those things become even more special when one is with someone they love, but still, I could have moved in with a friend if all I needed was those things and no sex.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Children, in my case, as you know... and don't start your usual tirade about children been better off without squabbling parents... :laugh:


Children or not, marriage is still optional and not indentured servitude. One does not need to be married to someone who doesn't want them in order to parent.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11 (Feb 14, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> Divorce is available these days. It is a beautiful thing.


Yea, its beautiful...get 50% custody of your kids (if you are lucky), lose your house, your retirement, a large chunk of your income each month. Or continue to live an INCEL lifestyle because your spouse is too selfish to understand sex is paramount to a healthy marriage... Hell its almost worth it to stay miserable!

Meanwhile his single buddies are getting poontang by the truckload.

On the other hand, probably this guys only hope of getting the desire back in his woman is finding the right resources (MMSLP is a good start). He probably got waaay too beta in marriage. He thought he would just get married and get all the sex he wanted. Very common, but very wrong.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I think these situations are tricky. 

At a very basic level, no one should be compelled to have sex that they don't want, and no one should be compelled to stay in a relationship where they are unhappy (including unhappy due to lack of sex). The problem is the devil in all the details. 

Once a couple has been married for a while, separation can be harmful to one or both - financially, due to children etc. There are laws to deal with this, but they are imperfect. 

I believe it is dishonest to knowingly give an false impression of what your sex life will be like in order to "entrap" someone into marriage. 


Laws aside: I'd say that someone who's partner refuses them sex, and who is unable to leave the marriage due to large external costs (children, property etc) is morally clear to have affairs. I don't believe it is reasonable to require one's spouse to be celibate, while at the same time not giving them a reasonable option to leave. There are of course a lot of grey areas around this.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



uhtred said:


> Laws aside: I'd say that someone who's partner refuses them sex, and who is unable to leave the marriage due to large external costs (children, property etc) is morally clear to have affairs. I don't believe it is reasonable to require one's spouse to be celibate, while at the same time not giving them a reasonable option to leave. .


This is probably a topic worth it's own thread.

It's a controversial issue but the way I see it is if someone does not want to have sex with you, it really isn't infidelity to get it elsewhere.

If someone does not want a sex life with you but doesn't want to end the marriage, that means they want your servitude for other things. 

IMHO if someone does not want to have sex with you, it is unethical to pressure, cajole, manipulate or threaten them to do so.

The moralists and church ladies may say it is immoral and unethical to get it elsewhere, but where is that moral/ethical line drawn???

If it's wrong for me to pressure my spouse to do something she/he does not want to do but they aren't willing to amicably divorce, what truly is the moral high ground???


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I wonder about this. How is this attitude working? Has it ever worked to achieve the desired goal. Ever?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You haven't specifically mentioned it, but others have in this thread...the quid pro quo arrangement.

When women and men first get together, they are in the process of meeting each other's needs. Those that don't meet needs don't tend to last. often, the arrangement is not discussed until well after marriage. We see this here every day.

To deny here is a quid pro quo within our relationships is to deny reality.

That said, whiny petulance should automatically equal va-clang.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Your husband had to tell you, though, and you listened... good on you. That other husband is not so lucky... he gets the "get on with it" treatment... so, I don't get it... are you different from the wife in that thread? Is her husband "entitled" to complain? He's not being listened to...


Wrong. He doesn't "get" the 'get on with it', he tolerates it.

See how easy it is to get out of the victim chair?

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> You haven't specifically mentioned it, but others have in this thread...the quid pro quo arrangement.
> 
> When women and men first get together, they are in the process of meeting each other's needs. Those that don't meet needs don't tend to last. often, the arrangement is not discussed until well after marriage. We see this here every day.


It certainly did not look and feel that way in the early days of our marriage, nor really now 25 years later. It looked an awful lot like 2 people who were crazy about each other and still are most of the time.



> To deny here is a quid pro quo within our relationships is to deny reality.


I don't see how that follows from what you said. Are you willing to explain further?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Your husband had to tell you, though, and you listened... good on you. That other husband is not so lucky... he gets the "get on with it" treatment... so, I don't get it... are you different from the wife in that thread? Is her husband "entitled" to complain? He's not being listened to...


You have no idea if this wife attempted to have this type of conversation with her husband. You have no idea about the rest of their relationship.

Maybe she did try to have a conversation with him about all this and he did not listen to him. So then she posted on that forum out of frustration because he will not discuss things with her. Instead he just gets all pissy when he does not get sex.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> It certainly did not look and feel that way in the early days of our marriage, nor really now 25 years later. It looked an awful lot like 2 people who were crazy about each other and still are most of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In other words, if my wife did not set about to do things that bring joy to my life, we would not be married.

I am sure she feels the same way. 

It is a quid pro quo without an arrangement, unless HNHN or something similar has been applied. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I eventually got tired of being denied (and, no, I wasn't petulant, begging, etc.), so I divorced her. If your needs aren't being met, you can leave. If you stay, you're either accepting the status quo because there are other compensations, or perhaps you lack confidence, or are codependent (etc.).

No, marriage doesn't entitle you to sex, but denying it doesn't entitle your spouse to stay married.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Married but Happy said:


> I eventually got tired of being denied (and, no, I wasn't petulant, begging, etc.), so I divorced her. If your needs aren't being met, you can leave. If you stay, you're either accepting the status quo because there are other compensations, or perhaps you lack confidence, or are codependent (etc.).
> 
> No, marriage doesn't entitle you to sex, but denying it doesn't entitle your spouse to stay married.


Yea, that's exactly how I felt when I finally filed for divorce.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> You have no idea if this wife attempted to have this type of conversation with her husband. You have no idea about the rest of their relationship.
> 
> Maybe she did try to have a conversation with him about all this and he did not listen to him. So then she posted on that forum out of frustration because he will not discuss things with her. Instead he just gets all pissy when he does not get sex.


We actually do know that she did try to have a conversation. She said it in her first post (the only one I read). He said he can't help his reaction.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> You have no idea if this wife attempted to have this type of conversation with her husband. You have no idea about the rest of their relationship.
> 
> Maybe she did try to have a conversation with him about all this and he did not listen to him. So then she posted on that forum out of frustration because he will not discuss things with her. Instead he just gets all pissy when he does not get sex.


OK but neither do some of the toxic posters on that site. They are not trying to help they are just cheering her on with the typical "you go girl" response, and in the process not doing her or her marriage any favors.

This is the equivalent to when the guys post on here and some say "divorce her" without even trying to work on it. 

What's most striking about the whole thread is how dismissive everyone seems to be about a primary responsibility in marriage. Yes responsibility (within reason). It's fundamentally wrong to ask for and accept ones fidelity and then not provide some sexual outlet for your spouse. It's like asking to be the only one who cooks for yours spouse and then serving them hotdogs and TV dinners for the rest of their lives, or worse not feed them at all, assuming they are a reasonably good partner. If you do that you are a lousy spouse and deserve to be divorced. Quality of your parenting or not.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> OK but neither do some of the toxic posters on that site. They are not trying to help they are just cheering her on with the typical "you go girl" response, and in the process not doing her or her marriage any favors.
> 
> This is the equivalent to when the guys post on here and some say "divorce her" without even trying to work on it.
> 
> What's most striking about the whole thread is how dismissive everyone seems to be about a primary responsibility in marriage. Yes responsibility (within reason). It's fundamentally wrong to ask for and accept ones fidelity and then not provide some sexual outlet for your spouse. It's like asking to be the only one who cooks for yours spouse and then serving them hotdogs and TV dinners for the rest of their lives, or worse not feed them at all, assuming they are a reasonably good partner. If you do that you are a lousy spouse and deserve to be divorced. Quality of your parenting or not.



I wonder how that site is moderated because the only 2 or 3 responses that didn’t imply that the guy was a whiny jerk or potentially a rapist for wanting sex with his wife were deleted.

It’s funny how these threads evolve as everyone is reading their own stuff into it. There is no way to tell if he was actually whiny or pressuring her in any way. The only question one can reasonably discuss without projection or speculation is how often is reasonable and that’s such an individual thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> I wonder how that site is moderated because the only 2 or 3 responses that didn’t imply that the guy was a whiny jerk or potentially a rapist for wanting sex with his wife were deleted.
> 
> It’s funny how these threads evolve as everyone is reading their own stuff into it. There is no way to tell if he was actually whiny or pressuring her in any way. The only question one can reasonably discuss without projection or speculation is how often is reasonable and that’s such an individual thing.
> 
> ...


You don't think you can take her at her word in the original post that he stomps in a huff or some such thing?


----------



## Bluesclues (Mar 30, 2016)

Luminous said:


> aine said:
> 
> 
> > In the same way he wants his sexual needs met, I wonder how much he does for her.
> ...


If the wife works and the husband is a SAHD, he isn’t meeting her needs - is it okay for her not to have sex with him?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> You don't think you can take her at her word in the original post that he stomps in a huff or some such thing?



No, because her post makes no sense. She complains about ‘his behaviour’ and the fact that she doesn’t feel like having sex with him because he gets ‘into a huff’ whenever she rejects him sexually.

There is an obvious fix: if you want him to stop huffing, maybe try not rejecting him next time.

Somehow I don’t think this will work. Why? Because she doesn’t want to have sex with him and huffing has nothing to do with her lack of interest.

I can’t stand it when people make **** up to justify whatever it is they are feeling or not feeling. Just ‘man up’ and say that you don’t feel like having sex with him instead of trying to blame it on him. It’s her choice not to want it and i for one wouldn’t judge her for it. But she obviously came for sympathy and validation that’s why she quite obviously made it into his issue.

What is annoying is the chorus with all the same responses. Their situation is otherwise so very typical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## red oak (Oct 26, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

In the same idea. Being married doesn't entitle anyone to a steady stream of money or support from a spouse either.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



red oak said:


> In the same idea. Being married doesn't entitle anyone to a steady stream of money or support from a spouse either.


Marriage also does no entitle one to a stay at home spouse who does all the domestic chores and takes care of your children.

The 'not one is entitled' game go on and on. The idea of marriage is to behave is such a manner that one's spouse wants to have sex and live whatever lifestyle that the couple has decided upon.

It's not just about financial support and sex.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Divorce is available these days. It is a beautiful thing.


And expensive... Even with no legal battles we're still spending a fair amount of money in this "beautiful thing"...


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> No, because her post makes no sense. She complains about ‘his behaviour’ and the fact that she doesn’t feel like having sex with him because he gets ‘into a huff’ whenever she rejects him sexually.
> 
> There is an obvious fix: if you want him to stop huffing, maybe try not rejecting him next time.
> 
> ...


So what you are saying is that a woman (or husband) must have sex with their spouse every single time that their spouse initiates... hence no one has the right to not have sex, even if there are problems in the marriage, or life, etc.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> So what you are saying is that a woman (or husband) must have sex with their spouse every single time that their spouse initiates... hence no one has the right to not have sex, even if there are problems in the marriage, or life, etc.



I wasn’t saying any of that. Like at all. Did you mean to quote someone else’s post?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> No, because her post makes no sense. She complains about ‘his behaviour’ and the fact that she doesn’t feel like having sex with him because he gets ‘into a huff’ whenever she rejects him sexually.
> 
> There is an obvious fix: if you want him to stop huffing, maybe try not rejecting him next time.
> 
> ...


Yah people making stuff up can be irritating. Like pretending to read what someone else has said then making up your own story. If she were here, I'd bet she would be mighty irritated.

Cuz yah having gotten married means STFU and have sex with your petulant husband. Check.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



john117 said:


> And expensive... Even with no legal battles we're still spending a fair amount of money in this "beautiful thing"...


Yah. It is pretty sucky. No doubt. But I would take its availability over its lack any day.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> I wasn’t saying any of that. Like at all. Did you mean to quote someone else’s post?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Otherwise it does not seem much like you read the post which was quoted which is the topic of this thread.


----------



## Luminous (Jan 14, 2018)

*Re: &quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*



EleGirl said:


> It's not just about financial support and sex.


Not at a social level, but at a basic evolutionary level it is.

Society may has shifted in recent decades, but both sexes are hard wired to want certain things from the other.

Women traditionally wanted access to resources and security for child rearing, and men wanted access to regular sex. Societies 'progress' in the past century may have muddied the waters, but those instincts are still there.

It is interesting that should one side take away security or resources, they are scum, but when it comes to sex, there is such a divide whether it is right or wrong when one or the other decide that they'll no longer want to participate at the level they have previously.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Yah. It is pretty sucky. No doubt. But I would take its availability over its lack any day.


In my birth country we've fixed this via rampant and accepted adultery... We borrowed the French word for garconere to mean - literally - a love nest...


----------



## Luminous (Jan 14, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Bluesclues said:


> If the wife works and the husband is a SAHD, he isn’t meeting her needs - is it okay for her not to have sex with him?


We don't have both sides of the story, but on that note, if both were meeting each other's needs prior to marriage/kids, then they really need to sit down and have a talk about what is going on, preferably whilst both are calm and able to be reasonable.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Luminous said:


> Not at a social level, but at a basic evolutionary level it is.
> 
> Society may has shifted in recent decades, but both sexes are hard *wired *to want certain things from the other.
> 
> Women *traditionally *wanted access to resources and security for child rearing, and men wanted access to regular sex. Societies 'progress' in the past century may have muddied the waters, but those instincts are still there.


Is it wiring or tradition? Is it instinct? Are those drives the same in their root cause? I ask because I feel no desire for external resources for ... really anything. I can readily imagine sex drive being a primal wiring since it is connected to procreation... and women's interest is not necessary for that.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



john117 said:


> In my birth country we've fixed this via rampant and accepted adultery... We borrowed the French word for garconere to mean - literally - a love nest...


I have very unpopular views on adultery. It is not the end of the world, or would not be the end of a marriage, for me. I hate the idea of dishonesty though. So I don't know how that would play. I do sometimes think we put waaaaaaaaaay to much into one human relationship. What pressure!


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*



EleGirl said:


> So what you are saying is that a woman (or husband) must have sex with their spouse every single time that their spouse initiates... hence no one has the right to not have sex, even if there are problems in the marriage, or life, etc.



I was saying that her story made no sense (given that she is complaining about his huffing which is the result of her rejection) and it just reads like typical blame shifting. I have absolutely nothing against her not wanting to have sex with her husband but find it annoying that she doesn’t just come out and say so but instead finds it necessary to paint him into this villain while everyone on the thread is ripping him to pieces (and whoever doesn’t, gets their posts deleted) when he doesn’t even get a chance to offer his side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> I was saying that her story made no sense (given that she is complaining about his huffing which is the result of her rejection) and it just reads like typical blame shifting. I have absolutely nothing against her not wanting to have sex with her husband but find it annoying that she doesn’t just come out and say so but instead finds it necessary to paint him into this villain while everyone on the thread is ripping him to pieces (and whoever doesn’t, gets their posts deleted) when he doesn’t even get a chance to offer his side.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Where do you get the notion that she does not want to have sex with her husband when they are having it once or twice a week and she fantasizes about being away so they can do it more? Original post. Not the reactions in the thread.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Where do you get the notion that she does not want to have sex with her husband when they are having it once or twice a week and she fantasizes about being away so they can do it more? Original post. Not the reactions in the thread.



She is fantasising about BEING someone who enjoys having sex with her husband. The ‘real her’, quite clearly doesn’t, given the tone of her post (and she says so herself). How’s this not obvious. And how’s this her husband’s problem?
Anyway, it’s a completely pointless discussion. None of us know or cannot know what’s really going on. 
However calling him a ‘nearly rapist’ is completely out of line. I don’t know what is wrong with these people.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> She is fantasising about BEING someone who enjoys having sex with her husband. The ‘real her’, quite clearly doesn’t, given the tone of her post (and she says so herself). How’s this not obvious. And how’s this her husband’s problem?
> Anyway, it’s a completely pointless discussion. None of us know or cannot know what’s really going on.
> However calling him a ‘nearly rapist’ is completely out of line. I don’t know what is wrong with these people.
> 
> ...


As I said, I did not read the replies. I think it is amazing that you can tell the real her from her post! Does she say herself that the real her clearly doesn't? I certainly did not see that.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I think it is amazing that you can tell the real her from her post!



Thanks very much  I knew you would appreciate it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

My problem is more the tone of the whole post.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



john117 said:


> And expensive... Even with no legal battles we're still spending a fair amount of money in this "beautiful thing"...


Yes, divorces are very expensive. The fact that about half of all marriages are ending in divorce today tells me that people are finding it worth it.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I REALLY want to f a petulant child. That makes MY motor run!


I agree. It is similar to staying married to a dried up , passionless housekeeper.

Their problem is common but the advice she was receiving is divorce worthy.

She should have been encouraged to work with her husband on their sexuality and marriage health.

Mrs. Conan was getting laid 4-6 times a week at the least when we had little kids running around.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> Yes, divorces are very expensive. The fact that about half of all marriages are ending in divorce today tells me that people are finding it worth it.


Or that they have been conditioned to find it worth it.

In my birth country, we have a lot fewer divorces. Mostly from the very wealthy. The lower income folk won't get much in terms of child support... The state helps but up to a point. And while women there are very "liberated" compared to, say, the rust belt or the south here, people don't play games. 

My cousin who looked like the girl in "these boots are made for walking" video instantly divorced her cheater husband - but only because OW looked like the wicked witch of the west... Others simply shrugged it off. 

In America, the cost of failure is strange. And asymmetric in many cases. One partner has all the reasons to stay, the other the opposite. 

That doesn't mean we don't have crappy marriages. My brother was in one. It's just that tolerance is high and ignoring your spouse is quite effective .


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



minimalME said:


> This is a recent attitude and expectation.
> 
> In the past when life was more of a struggle, working and providing absolutely met a woman's needs.
> 
> So part of the problem is simply a lack of thankfulness.


Not necessarily. In many households the wives also work, take care of the home, cook meals, take care of the kids, and research shows although wives work they carry 85-90% of the household chores too. So who ought to be the thankful one? Come on, we are not living in the 1940-1950s!


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> I agree. It is similar to staying married to a dried up , passionless housekeeper.
> 
> Their problem is common but the advice she was receiving is divorce worthy.
> 
> ...


THAT sentence there says it all!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Most of this seems like nonsense to me.

Mrs. C was ravaged at least 30 times the first week I met her.

I have constantly had my hands on her shapely rear for over 27 years.

She knew she was marrying a horny s.o.b. way before the proposal.

She also knew I would fight for her, protect and provide for her and generally love her senseless every waking minute.

Too many legalities and terms get thrown around.

"Entitled"?

My wife will get plowed by me as often as health allows, just the same as our love and consideration for each other is a daily requirement.

My wife GETS to have sex with me BTW. 

She copped that dumb ass attitude exactly once in our relationship when a couple of dried up church ladies bent her ear for too long.

I rapidly made her aware of her error by letting her know she wasn't doing me any favors and cutting her off until she pulled her head out of her butt.

I then had a conversation with her, letting her know that I loved her but I will be pouring my physical passions into a woman. I chose her to be that woman but if she chooses not to be her anymore, there would be no shortage of women who would gladly apply for the position.

I emphasized that I wanted no one else but I refused to be denied.

She got a tear in her eye, took me by the hand and led me to our sanctuary where she left no doubt who my wife was or was ever going to be.

She has never let us down in that area again.

I give my all in my marriage and I expect no less in return.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



uhtred said:


> I think these situations are tricky.
> 
> At a very basic level, no one should be compelled to have sex that they don't want, and no one should be compelled to stay in a relationship where they are unhappy (including unhappy due to lack of sex). The problem is the devil in all the details.
> 
> ...


I think we can agree that women's needs are different from mens. Men need both sex for emotional closeness and companionship (doing things side by side) whereas women need affection (not only in the bedroom) and conversation (time). 
Now if a husband is too busy working to earn a living and has no time to give his wife attention or spend time in conversation with her, does that mean she too can find that attention/affection/conversation elsewhere? IMO what is good for the gander is good for the goose. 
Too many men think that by earning money, spending 80 hours a week in the office should be their contribution to the marriage and the wife is a **** if she seeks attention elsewhere. She should be thankful for his contributions and hard work but these are not meeting her needs. 

In the same way many women work and slave in the housekeeping, cooking, etc and think their husbands should be equally thankful but it is not meeting his needs.

Therefore coming back to your comment above, in your opinion its ok for a man to have his sexual needs met elsewhere. So likewise if a husband does not meet a wife's needs she can get her needs for affection, time, conversation met elsewhere? Right?


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> Not necessarily. In many households the wives also work, take care of the home, cook meals, take care of the kids, and research shows although wives work they carry 85-90% of the household chores too. So who ought to be the thankful one? Come on, we are not living in the 1940-1950s!


While Joan Cleaver ironed really well, I kinda doubt her blow job skills were... never mind.

But more seriously, it’s never going to be good when one partner views the other as an ATM, whether that be for chores, sex or money. It’s a two way street.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> This is probably a topic worth it's own thread.
> 
> It's a controversial issue but the way I see it is if someone does not want to have sex with you, it really isn't infidelity to get it elsewhere.
> 
> ...


Likewise if my husband has no time for me (due to hobbies, golf, friends, etc), gives me no affection (except in the bedroom when he wants sex), barely has time to speak to me for 5 minutes in the day, then I too can get my need for affection/conversation/attention elsewhere. It works both ways.
Honestly to all the men on this thread, do you put in the effort to spend time with your wife, find out about her day, go out with her for coffee, dinners, etc. 

If you don't then why should she have sex with you She is not your **** buddy. It is not an entitlement, you are not holding up your end of the bargain either. 

The only one on this thread so far that makes sense to me is @Conan. He is very explicit about his love for his wife and what he does for her. When a woman knows she is loved, adored, treated with love and affection, then sex is a wonderful thing between husband and wife. She knows she is not being used for someones sexual gratification. Can your wife say that? (just speaking to all in general here).

If you feel that you cannot do that for your wife then stop whinging and end it.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> I think we can agree that women's needs are different from mens. Men need both sex for emotional closeness and companionship (doing things side by side) whereas women need affection (not only in the bedroom) and conversation (time).
> Now if a husband is too busy working to earn a living and has no time to give his wife attention or spend time in conversation with her, does that mean she too can find that attention/affection/conversation elsewhere? IMO what is good for the gander is good for the goose.
> Too many men think that by earning money, spending 80 hours a week in the office should be their contribution to the marriage and the wife is a **** if she seeks attention elsewhere. She should be thankful for his contributions and hard work but these are not meeting her needs.
> 
> ...


Makes sense to me. EA's for the women, which often leads to PA's and PA's for men, which often lead to emotional attachment as well.

Seems the end result of his statement, no?


----------



## red oak (Oct 26, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



CharlieParker said:


> While Joan Cleaver ironed really well, I kinda doubt her blow job skills were... never mind.
> 
> But more seriously, it’s never going to be good when one partner views the *other as an ATM, *whether that be for chores, sex or money. It’s a two way street.


Therein lies the rub. (backwardness of our culture)
Each should view the other as a bank in which to make deposits of consideration, love, sex etc. Every time we do something for our spouse we a making a deposit which accrues with interest. At least it should.

Too many see it as withdrawals instead of making a deposit. No puns intended either.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Yah people making stuff up can be irritating. Like pretending to read what someone else has said then making up your own story. If she were here, I'd bet she would be mighty irritated.
> 
> Cuz yah having gotten married means STFU and have sex with your petulant husband. Check.


I think the OP has to sit down with her husband and discuss their respective needs. 
When we were younger my H used to get really angsty when he went without sex for two days. I think the couple have to be very very honest with each other. She is not his **** buddy, nor is she supposed to neglect that side of the marriage.

A good discussion on respective needs is what is needed. I believe many younger women do not realize the deep physiological and emotional need men have for sex in their marriages, therein lies the problem


----------



## red oak (Oct 26, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> *Marriage also does no entitle one to a stay at home spouse who does all the domestic chores and takes care of your children.*
> 
> The 'not one is entitled' game go on and on. The idea of marriage is to behave is such a manner that one's spouse wants to have sex and live whatever lifestyle that the couple has decided upon.
> 
> It's not just about financial support and sex.


Ouch!  Never said it did.
Knowing most have no idea what marriage is, and even fewer actually have one; as our culture makes it nigh impossible; the discussion of what is, or isn't goes well beyond the scope of this website let alone this thread. 

I guess no one found it saddening as I, the comment which had the most impact on the OP of mumset was a cartoon, or the fact it was able to piss her off at her husband? :crying:

Also found it irritating all the men in the cartoon were made out to be a bunch of imbecile buffoons while the only capable ones were women.


----------



## red oak (Oct 26, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> I think the OP has to sit down with her husband and discuss their respective needs.
> When we were younger my H used to get really angsty when he went without sex for two days. I think the couple have to be very very honest with each other. She is not his **** buddy, nor is she supposed to neglect that side of the marriage.
> 
> A good discussion on respective needs is what is needed. I believe many younger women do not realize the deep physiological and emotional need men have for sex in their marriages, therein lies the problem


I would also think many don't know there are such things as withdrawals for both men and women. 

It's well known in many circles, bdsm being one, intense sex creates a hormonal rush, which can have actual withdrawal symptoms and lead one to be cranky and testy for a few days while things balance back out.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

WOW 😲!

Are men really dealing with that insanity that was being spouted as advice?

That is some of the most ignorant and destructive crap I have ever heard!

I would advise men to not even talk to brain dead women like the ones responding to the OP on that site.

I would advise any man that was simple enough to have married one of those creatures to have papers drawn up and ready to serve unless intense counseling was agreed upon.

I honestly didn't know women like that existed!

I thought they were the stuff of pulp entertainment.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I don't know that everyone agrees that women's needs are different. On average maybe, but there is a lot of variation in men and women, and I know one woman who is not getting sex she wants from her husband, even though he is affectionate in non-sexual ways.

That aside, its always complicated. There are lots of ways that a person can behave that would make sex with them undesirable. The problem is that these things are not easy to nail down. 

There are men who behave in ways such that very few women would want to have sex with them. There are other cases where there really is nothing to fault with the man's behavior, his wife just doesn't desire sex - at all. 

To answer more specifically though - I think that if a woman (or man) finds that they are not getting the attention, affection, love etc, that should be expected in a marriage, and its impractical for them to leave - I think its OK for them to find it elsewhere. 

Again though the devil is in the details. If the husband is not able to provide affection because he *needs* to work very long hours in order to provide the standard of living that they both want, then that doesn't seem to be his fault to me. Same if a woman is exhausted from raising kids without help, and doesn't want sex. 

Overall I think these situations are just too complicated for simple rules. 



aine said:


> I think we can agree that women's needs are different from mens. Men need both sex for emotional closeness and companionship (doing things side by side) whereas women need affection (not only in the bedroom) and conversation (time).
> Now if a husband is too busy working to earn a living and has no time to give his wife attention or spend time in conversation with her, does that mean she too can find that attention/affection/conversation elsewhere? IMO what is good for the gander is good for the goose.
> Too many men think that by earning money, spending 80 hours a week in the office should be their contribution to the marriage and the wife is a **** if she seeks attention elsewhere. She should be thankful for his contributions and hard work but these are not meeting her needs.
> 
> ...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*



ConanHub said:


> WOW !
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly. Is there a way to serve them even if you are not married to them? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> Most men experience intimacy through sex. So to put your husband down for wanting that is pretty much the same as the guy who puts his wife down because she wants to talk about her feelings. Sure you can do it but I doubt your marriage will survive.



But, as my wife would say, "when we talk about my feelings, you don't have to have a penis inserted inside your body"... :laugh:


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I wonder how many of these wives entered marriage knowing their husbands viewed it as a quid pro quo, a simple I give you money so that you give me sex? I wonder if they would have signed up for it? Some certainly would. I had a friend like that. I wanted to punch her in the face. I think no one winds up happy in such an arrangement.


You remind me of my first marriage, I told my husband once that "marriage is a legal state of prostitution." It's a shame I had to feel that way at the time, and I think a lot of women feel like that sometimes. More than anything, it's too bad that the guys on this board have confirmed it's how they view marriage. This thread being posted in opposition to the title of that woman's post confirms it. Their responses just to this thread alone confirm it with comments about him paying the bills, she should give him sex because he pays the bills, and he should stop paying the bills if she doesn't want to give him sex. I remember reading here a while back one of the guys stated, "Men get married for regular and convenient sex," and every last one get their knickers in a twist when she doesn't feel like it. 

So what is there to argue when someone calls it for what you make it into? Why get mad that women consider your coercion as harassment or abuse since you coerce and harass to get it and become abusive when you don't? Why get mad when a woman calls your abuse abuse? Why always, always, always claim she doesn't understand him, she has no respect for him, she doesn't love him, and all the many other ways you phrase it to make her the terrible villain, while at the same time call their responses onesided? Why are women not to have their own feelings and views on the matter? Why do you have no consideration for women and how we feel? Why do all their sentiments on that thread, being exactly the same, get shot down, minimized, and diminished to nothing of any importance just because they disagree with yours, when your sentiments are exactly the same? Why is it okay for you not to understand and have no respect for her? Why are all those women supposed to under what it's like to be a man, when you have no consideration for them or what it's like to be a woman? Some of you say these same things in lockstep every single time this subject comes up, which it very often does, as if her feelings are not to even be on the table because her feelings are just "spouting insanity."

And while I'm asking why, In Absentia, why did you keep on throughout this thread - numerous times - deliberately misrepresent what that woman stated? She said "we have sex roughly once or twice a week," but over and over you keep quoting her as saying "once a week." She never once said he asks once a week and she turns him down. She said "we have sex roughly once or twice a week." That has nothing to do with how many times a week he asks. He could be asking 3 times a day every single day for all you know. She didn't indicate how many times he asks, nor did she indicate how many times she says no. The only thing she revealed was that they have sex once or twice a week. But you ran here, posted her thread to criticize it, and then repeatedly lied on her making people think she said something she never once stated and never once indicated, and then the whole thread became predicated on her neglect and inconsideration for not wanting to give her husband sex once a week.

I'm saying again, she stated "*we have sex royghly once or twice a week*." That is the one and only definitive statement she offered and the only thing we know for sure. Once or twice a week does not a neglected sex-starved husband make, whose wife doesn't understand him, doesn't respect him, and doesn't care about his needs. He was the one who obviously doesn't care about her by harassing and throwing tantrums to coerce her into having sex with him every time he asks.

And I bet you don't like me pointing that out either.

With the mob mentality of responses to this type of subject matter, the opposition to the #MeToo Movement, the outrage over Gillette's commercial, and so many other subjects and events, so many of you guys are only telling us that you don't want to be called out on anything you do or say, that you want to be able to keep on getting away with everything you do and say, and you just want women to shut the hell up and screw you every time you want sex. Yeah, well screw all of you who obviously think that way. Oh, but I guess we're supposed to thank you for paying the bills in order to get it.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> You have no idea if this wife attempted to have this type of conversation with her husband. You have no idea about the rest of their relationship.
> 
> *Maybe* she did try to have a conversation with him about all this and he did not listen to him. So then she posted on that forum out of frustration because he will not discuss things with her. Instead he just gets all pissy when he does not get sex.


So, you are guessing too... :smile2:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*

.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> I was saying that her story made no sense (given that she is complaining about his huffing which is the result of her rejection) and it just reads like typical blame shifting. I have absolutely nothing against her not wanting to have sex with her husband but find it annoying that she doesn’t just come out and say so but instead finds it necessary to paint him into this villain while everyone on the thread is ripping him to pieces (and whoever doesn’t, gets their posts deleted) when he doesn’t even get a chance to offer his side.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Apparently, she told him... but if he is still doing it (getting in a huff), it probably means he still has to "beg"... it's happened to me in our marriage (and that's probably why I started this thread, unconsciously). My wife told me not to get in a huff, but if I didn't, we would never have sex. Ever. It's matter of honesty. Just tell me you don't want to have sex with me and put an end to it...


----------



## Luminous (Jan 14, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> You remind me of my first marriage, I told my husband once that "marriage is a legal state of prostitution." It's a shame I had to feel that way at the time, and I think a lot of women feel like that sometimes. More than anything, it's too bad that the guys on this board have confirmed it's how they view marriage. This thread being posted in opposition to the title of that woman's post confirms it. Their responses just to this thread alone confirm it with comments about him paying the bills, she should give him sex because he pays the bills, and he should stop paying the bills if she doesn't want to give him sex. I remember reading here a while back one of the guys stated, "Men get married for regular and convenient sex," and every last one get their knickers in a twist when she doesn't feel like it.
> 
> So what is there to argue when someone calls it for what you make it into? Why get mad that women consider your coercion as harassment or abuse since you coerce and harass to get it and become abusive when you don't? Why get mad when a woman calls your abuse abuse? Why always, always, always claim she doesn't understand him, she has no respect for him, she doesn't love him, and all the many other ways you phrase it to make her the terrible villain, while at the same time call their responses onesided? Why are women not to have their own feelings and views on the matter? Why do you have no consideration for women and how we feel? Why do all their sentiments on that thread, being exactly the same, get shot down, minimized, and diminished to nothing of any importance just because they disagree with yours, when your sentiments are exactly the same? Why is it okay for you not to understand and have no respect for her? Why are all those women supposed to under what it's like to be a man, when you have no consideration for them or what it's like to be a woman?
> 
> ...


Are you sure you're not a man? I mean you seem to supposedly know so much about how we think, and how we should think, and that we are wrong on so many counts...

What's the g.o? I know myself I'm a little jaded at this point of my life due to circumstances in the recent past. Hell, I even admitted it in a previous thread, but you lady are on a friggin crusade! 

Would you mind halting your advance for one second...?

From this man's perspective, it is about consideration for your partner. Yes, it goes both ways, I don't believe anyone is denying that.

Generalising here, but many people have already said, that alot of time a man experiences a great deal of intimacy through sex. Their wife should be aware of this, much as the husband should be aware of his wife's need for physical intimacy (without sex), and conversation etc. 

OK, I'm done, I await the


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> And while I'm asking why, In Absentia, why did you keep on throughout this thread - numerous times - *deliberately* misrepresent what that woman stated? She said "we have sex roughly once or twice a week," but over and over you keep quoting her as saying "once a week."


This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice, albeit *roughly*. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...

I think the tone of the replies from the other women is what concerns me. There is no empathy. I'm all for the #MeToo and Gillette adverts, but there must be a bit of balance.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Luminous said:


> Generalising here, but many people have already said, that alot of time a man experiences a great deal of intimacy through sex. Their wife should be aware of this, much as the husband should be aware of his wife's need for physical intimacy (without sex), and conversation etc.


Exactly... more than the original poster's opinion, it's what the other posters are saying... it seems to me that they haven't the faintest idea of how a man's brain works... yes, we use sex to create a connection and intimacy. I did explain this to my wife several times, but she never seemed to understand. When this chasm can't be bridged, the relationship eventually collapses...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...
> 
> I think the tone of the replies from the other women is what concerns me. There is no empathy. I'm all for the #MeToo and Gillette adverts, but there must be a bit of balance.




It’s not actually clear because: 

“We have sex roughly once or twice per week, but *this changes * when he's gone in a huff, because that's just a massive passion-killer.”

You can see how completely unproductive these forums can be by just reading her responses. She originally seems to have wanted to have a conversation with him (which likely would have fixed the issue) but after reading the responses, she now just seems pissed at him! Mob mentality indeed! 

I never understand the dishonesty aspect:
why not just tell him straight how she feels instead of using his ‘huffing’ as the reason to justify her lack of passion to herself? Mature adults should be able to talk these things out and get to a compromise or if no compromise is reachable then find other avenues. 

On balance, I don’t actually think twice a week is all that bad if she feels she has her hands full! Maybe she just wants to vent a bit. I can see both angles here. I am just (slightly) annoyed with the presentation and the responses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice, albeit *roughly*. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...
> 
> I think the tone of the replies from the other women is what concerns me. There is no empathy. I'm all for the #MeToo and Gillette adverts, but there must be a bit of balance.


In Absentia, could this be the cause of the communication gap between the sexes? Or is it just you? I accept you telling me you didn't do it deliberately, and I accept that because you just pointed out to me that you did it again. That makes twice (three times total) in the same thread for the same purpose of the thread. I didn't mean any offense. I genuinely thought it was deliberate but now I see that it wasn't.

So, again, let me show you how you took a statement and neglectfully, if not capriciously, ran away with mistaken inference. You quoted one of her respondents as the title of your thread and made that into something other than was actually stated.

Your quoted title:
_"Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"..._

But you missed the word and the meaning of the word "willing". There is nothing wrong with what the lady said. It is absolutely true. The OP submitted, and I am paraphrasing, that she doesn't always want to but does it anyway, but the game changes when he throws his tantrums. Lots of women, probably most women, don't always feel like it but do it anyway for their husband/boyfriend's sake. She wasn't saying marriage doesn't entitle a person to sex, she said "willing sex". Nobody can make a person WANT something just because they want them to want it or they want them to do it. Yes, she does it willingly, meaning he doesn't have to literally twist her arm (although he tries through his tantrums) nor does he rape her, but she doesn't always do it because she wants it. She does it just for him sometimes. That's all the woman is saying in her response - that marriage doesn't entitle a person to a wife who always WANTS to have sex.

As for all the others, as I said in my first post, I'm again saying that women's concerns are not to be discounted, but so many men - as you are doing right now by posting and defending this thread about your concern for the tone of their replies - discount women's concerns. You don't like what they said to her, and some here have, in so many words, called their concerns rubbish. Do you see what I mean? But how else are coercion, harassment, and abuse supposed to be described except to use the words coercion, harassment, and abuse? Why do you take issue with that? They are calling a spade a spade. And again, their responses were predicated on what she stated. They weren't based on how you mistakenly inferred her statements. So, they "have sex roughly once or twice a week" and he has a tantrum and starts being mean to her AND the kids the other times he asks and she tells him she doesn't feel like it, then yes, they called that coercion, harassment, and abuse because those are the words that describe his behavior.

But the whole thread became predicated on that mistaken inference too. Do you see what I mean now? This whole thread was based on you misunderstanding the particulars. At least three of them.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> So, you are guessing too... :smile2:


I don't get it. Why are we guessing. It is right there in her first post.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I don't get it. Why are we guessing. It is right there in her first post.


I was replying to another poster... she said we didn't know the exact story and then she carried on making assumptions too...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> In Absentia, could this be the cause of the communication gap between the sexes? Or is it just you? I accept you telling me you didn't do it deliberately, and I accept that because you just pointed out to me that you did it again. That makes twice (three times total) in the same thread for the same purpose of the thread. I didn't mean any offense. I genuinely thought it was deliberate but now I see that it wasn't.
> 
> So, again, let me show you how you took a statement and neglectfully, if not capriciously, ran away with mistaken inference. You quoted one of her respondents as the title of your thread and made that into something other than was actually stated.
> 
> ...



You see? You've missed the bit where she says that the gap is longer if he complains... who's being selective now?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

For me, the interesting question is:

- what is a non whiny way to ask for sex when one is rejected more often then not. I’m making an (un)educated guess that he gets rejected because:

1. He has to ask for it
2. She actually says that she often doesn’t feel like it so it’s not illogical to deduce that he needs it more than her

Clearly there is a balance (and we don’t know what it is with this situation). If you get rejected 8 out of 10 times, do you have a right to make an issue out of it? 

If you get rejected 2 out of 10 times, does the wife have the right to make an issue out of her husband’s reactions? 

My personal answer to those questions is both yes.

Don’t ask me about about rejections that happen 5 out of 10 times 
We also don’t know many other things. Maybe she is depressed, maybe he is an ass, maybe...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Okaaayyy, so I'm getting the picture that this really may be the problematic cause of the communication gap between the sexes. In Absentia, maybe it's not just you because here it goes again.



inmyprime said:


> It’s not actually clear because:
> 
> “We have sex roughly once or twice per week, but *this changes * when he's gone in a huff, because that's just a massive passion-killer.”
> 
> You can see how completely unproductive these forums can be by just reading her responses. She originally seems to have wanted to have a conversation with him (which likely would have fixed the issue) but after reading the responses, she now just seems pissed at him! Mob mentality indeed!


Actually, it's very clear . . .

_"His reaction in itself puts me off. *I've been completely honest with him. Even telling him that sometimes I have sex with him when I don't want to."*_

You missed that part? She did have a conversation with him about it. She doesn't state how many times she tried having this conversation, but she does indicate that it does no good because she's to the point of drinking to deal with it, admittedly joking about taking up alcohol but clearly indicating her exhaustion of the subject.

_"What can I say/do to help him realise his behaviour is unfair. Do I need to take up drinking to get through it?"_

And no, the conversation didn't "fix the issue" one bit based on his immature response, which is what drove her to seek advice for some other avenues to make him understand how she feels about his behavior.

_"He just says he can't help his reaction."_
_"What can I say/do to help him realise his behaviour is unfair."_



inmyprime said:


> I never understand the dishonesty aspect:
> why not just tell him straight how she feels instead of using his ‘huffing’ as the reason to justify her lack of passion to herself? Mature adults should be able to talk these things out and get to a compromise or if no compromise is reachable then find other avenues.


So why didn't that show you that she has tried to talk with him and told him how she feels but to no avail? And that her unsuccessful "mature" attempt(s) to discuss it and tell him how she feels leaves her knowing she will continually have to be subjected to his immature behavior and him destroying any possibility that she will want to have sex with him. Why did her concern have to be thrown into the "dishonesty" compartment? Why have you taken it upon yourself, just like he did, to dismiss what she states as something that turns her off?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> Okaaayyy, so I'm getting the picture that this really may be the problematic cause of the communication gap between the sexes. In Absentia, maybe it's not just you because here it goes again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I could quote more bits and pieces to strengthen my argument but let me fast track this quickly and instead say this:

You are a very intelligent and highly empathetic person but our biases and personal experiences do sometimes get in the way of ‘critical thinking’ (yes, I’m also talking about myself) so let’s just say we don’t have enough information to make a final judgement either way of who is the ultimate ass. Deal? 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## manwithnoname (Feb 3, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> WOW 😲!
> 
> Are men really dealing with that insanity that was being spouted as advice?
> 
> ...


It probably started out that way, then they started manufacturing them in a factory located somewhere to the Left.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> Okaaayyy, so I'm getting the picture that this really may be the problematic cause of the communication gap between the sexes. In Absentia, maybe it's not just you because here it goes again.
> 
> Actually, it's very clear . . .
> 
> _"His reaction in itself puts me off. *I've been completely honest with him.Even telling him that sometimes I have sex with him when I don't want to."*_



I think, yes, it shows how differently we see things... for example, I would say this: if you want to destroy a marriage, tell your husband you've had sex with him when you didn't want to... my wife told me this once and I will never have sex with her again.


----------



## manwithnoname (Feb 3, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I think, yes, it shows how differently we see things... for example, I would say this: if you want to destroy a marriage, tell your husband you've had sex with him when you didn't want to... my wife told me this once and I will never have sex with her again.


I think many women have had sex with their husband when they didn't really want to.

I think the marriage is doomed if this happens every time.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice, albeit *roughly*. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...
> 
> I think the tone of the replies from the other women is what concerns me. There is no empathy. I'm all for the #MeToo and Gillette adverts, but there must be a bit of balance.


I had no problem with the woman with the OP. She was experiencing a fairly common issue and wasn't being outrageous but fairly straight forward.

It was the plethora of bizarre and over the top responses that are flipping my lid!


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

ConanHub said:


> In Absentia said:
> 
> 
> > This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice, albeit *roughly*. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...
> ...


Exactly. Read more than her OP and it becomes clear.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I think, yes, it shows how differently we see things... for example, I would say this: if you want to destroy a marriage, tell your husband you've had sex with him when you didn't want to... my wife told me this once and I will never have sex with her again.


I see that statement from her as meaning that she might just love him and has sex occasionally just to please him, out of the love she feels for him.

The couple obviously needed work on both their sides but it didn't seem like they were to far gone at all, though if the OP followed what was mostly offered as advice, they are probably divorced, separated or living like hate filled roommates by now.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> You see? You've missed the bit where she says that the gap is longer if he complains... who's being selective now?


LOL Come one now. Did you think you caught me out on something? I paraphrased her saying "the game changes when he throws his tantrums." Did you visualize him throwing a tantrum while they are having sex? Since you know that isn't likely, I'm wondering if you thought she has tried to talk to him about not wanting to have sex. If you did, please know that wasn't the subject or point of the conversation. She tried talking to him about his behavior when she says no because it turns her off from wanting to do it, yes widening the gap from "roughly once or twice a week" to less often, maybe only once a week or maybe more than a week. So are you really faulting her for asking him to stop acting like a spoiled child who terrorizes the whole household so that she won't want to tell him no? Are you really trying to say that she's a terrible person for asking that he participate in cultivating an environment that will make her more willing to have sex with him, instead of single-handedly casting a pall that only serves to kill his chances?

_Honey, we normally have sex once or twice a week and sometimes I don't really feel like it, but I do it because I love you. And even when I didn't feel up to it, I still enjoy it. But sometimes when you want to and I say no, you get in a huff and a foul mood toward me and the kids. It really puts me off from wanting to at all and that isn't fair. I say no sometimes, but would you please stop reacting that way so we can enjoy each other the next time you feel frisky?_

His response:
_"He just says he can't help his reaction."_

That's how I imagine the course of the conversation based on what she said. So she's asking him to stop acting like a spoiled child because it's unfair to her and turns her off from wanting to have sex with him, and his response to her request was to act like a spoiled child again.

She's actually asking that they be able to maintain that "roughly once or twice a week, and you fault her for that? But made no mention at all of his behavior or his response to her request. Everything is all about her saying no to him - which was not at all the point of her post - and the responses she received. Good grief.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"But sometimes when you want to and I say no, you get in a huff and a foul mood toward me and the kids"

Everyone knows how zero tolerance I am about sex refusal, but if a man did the above to me AND MY KIDS, he'd be using his own hand for awhile.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> Likewise if my husband has no time for me (due to hobbies, golf, friends, etc), gives me no affection (except in the bedroom when he wants sex), barely has time to speak to me for 5 minutes in the day, then I too can get my need for affection/conversation/attention elsewhere. It works both ways.


But that's part of the problem, you CAN get needs for affection, conversation, attention etc etc met elsewhere and it's perfectly ok. You can do those things with other friends, family, coworkers, people you share the same hobbies and interests with, pets etc etc. 

Romance and sexuality are what makes your special someone special and makes that relationship different from all the others. If that is missing, then it is just another person. 

Now I fully get what you are saying in that if someone is neglecting your other needs and ignoring you and has no time for you, then you aren't going to feel all loving and sexy and horny with them. 

But my point is people get nonsexual needs met through other relationships where as sexuality is only supposed to be with your special someone.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> _Honey, we normally have sex once or twice a week and sometimes I don't really feel like it, but I do it because I love you. And even when I didn't feel up to it, I still enjoy it. But sometimes when you want to and I say no, you get in a huff and a foul mood toward me and the kids. It really puts me off from wanting to at all and that isn't fair. I say no sometimes, but would you please stop reacting that way so we can enjoy each other the next time you feel frisky?_



I think it would be amazing if someone actually spoke those words with such clarity. It would make me so...respectful. (and horny at the same time!) Respectfully horny  Is that good or bad? 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL Come one now. Did you think you caught me out on something? I paraphrased her saying "the game changes when he throws his tantrums." Did you visualize him throwing a tantrum while they are having sex? Since you know that isn't likely, I'm wondering if you thought she has tried to talk to him about not wanting to have sex. If you did, please know that wasn't the subject or point of the conversation. She tried talking to him about his behavior when she says no because it turns her off from wanting to do it, yes widening the gap from "roughly once or twice a week" to less often, maybe only once a week or maybe more than a week. So are you really faulting her for asking him to stop acting like a spoiled child who terrorizes the whole household so that she won't want to tell him no? Are you really trying to say that she's a terrible person for asking that he participate in cultivating an environment that will make her more willing to have sex with him, instead of single-handedly casting a pall that only serves to kill his chances?
> 
> _Honey, we normally have sex once or twice a week and sometimes I don't really feel like it, but I do it because I love you. And even when I didn't feel up to it, I still enjoy it. But sometimes when you want to and I say no, you get in a huff and a foul mood toward me and the kids. It really puts me off from wanting to at all and that isn't fair. I say no sometimes, but would you please stop reacting that way so we can enjoy each other the next time you feel frisky?_
> 
> ...



So it's ok to punish your husband by withholding sex.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I think, yes, it shows how differently we see things... for example, I would say this: if you want to destroy a marriage, tell your husband you've had sex with him when you didn't want to... my wife told me this once and I will never have sex with her again.


That's the part our dear partners don't get....


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> I think it would be amazing if someone actually spoke those words with such clarity. It would make me so...respectful. (and horny at the same time!) Respectfully horny  Is that good or bad?



I think StarFires should have a conversation with my wife... ah, wait, too late... :laugh:


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I think, yes, it shows how differently we see things... for example, I would say this: if you want to destroy a marriage, tell your husband you've had sex with him when you didn't want to... my wife told me this once and I will never have sex with her again.


LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.

I've always wondered if guys ever really hear the truth from women.

You're not good in bed.
You don't know how to please a woman.
I don't like your jackrabbit sex.
You think sex is just for you and women don't want to orgasm.
No, it wasn't good for me too.
Please come up from down there, you're just annoying me.
No, I didn't cum.
Yes, I fake the moaning.
Yes, I fake orgasm.

Obviously, those don't apply to everyone, but there have been those times that I wanted to speak my mind, but it wasn't worth hurting a guy's feelings. 

But listen, I'm not really able to imagine that you never knew your wife had sex when she didn't feel like it. Was there never a time that you were friskly, and she said something like "Nooo, I don't feeeeel like it" but then gave in and did it? Hasn't that happened with everyone? It would mean you knew you were having sex even though she didn't want to. So what's the big deal that she confessed it? Was it the context or the way that she said it? Or was it simply that she said it?


----------



## Mr.Married (Feb 21, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Man ..... rough crowd in here on this topic. I'm glad my wife and I have sex for no other reason than we like it. Seems like a simple enough reason without having to assign
a bunch of underlying devious plots and plans to it.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> So it's ok to punish your husband by withholding sex.


Oh geez, In Absentia, you really must be kidding me. Do I need to write you a dictionary or something? That is NOT withholding sex. But I'm going to leave this here because it's gotten too ridiculous for me to bother. I mean it began ridiculously so this is no surprise. You can't be wrong about anything and wanted me out of your thread by posting nonsense, it worked because this one is beneath me. Take care.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> _Honey, we normally have sex once or twice a week and sometimes I don't really feel like it, but I do it because I love you. And even when I didn't feel up to it, I still enjoy it. But sometimes when you want to and I say no, you get in a huff and a foul mood toward me and the kids. It really puts me off from wanting to at all and that isn't fair. I say no sometimes, but would you please stop reacting that way so we can enjoy each other the next time you feel frisky?_.


Simply fantastic communication.

OP and her husband could definitely take some communication advice from you.

It would be helpful to hear his input but I'm betting their communication isn't on par with what you just offered.

I'm in agreement about his behavior though I understand his emotions.

The advice she was getting was absolutely appalling however.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> But that's part of the problem, you CAN get needs for affection, conversation, attention etc etc met elsewhere and it's perfectly ok. You can do those things with other friends, family, coworkers, people you share the same hobbies and interests with, pets etc etc.
> 
> Romance and sexuality are what makes your special someone special and makes that relationship different from all the others. If that is missing, then it is just another person.
> 
> ...


Not at all, I expect intimate conversaton with my H not with my friends (that is different). I expect affection, a peck on the lips, a hug, a slap on the butt, etc, I cannot get that from my friends. So to rephrase, I expect romance and more romance, otherwise he is not getting laid. Does that sound right?


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.
> 
> I've always wondered if guys ever really hear the truth from women.
> 
> ...


Jeez, SF, you're only finding out now that guys have fragile egos? :grin2:


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> But listen, I'm not really able to imagine that you never knew your wife had sex when she didn't feel like it. Was there never a time that you were friskly, and she said something like "Nooo, I don't feeeeel like it" but then gave in and did it? Hasn't that happened with everyone? It would mean you knew you were having sex even though she didn't want to. So what's the big deal that she confessed it? Was it the context or the way that she said it? Or was it simply that she said it?



Some times my wife would reject me openly. Other times we would have sex, she would enjoy it, have her orgasm and then told me she loved me. There were no other occasions. I think she didn't orgasm 5 times during all our relationship. Of course, she might have faked it, but I know my wife... :smile2: So, I always assumed she had sex because she wanted to and she was always into it when she was having it... no starfish sex. Sex was good. So, yes, I was shocked when she told me. Of course, I could never have sex with her again, now.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> Oh geez, In Absentia, you really must be kidding me. Do I need to write you a dictionary or something? That is NOT withholding sex. But I'm going to leave this here because it's gotten too ridiculous for me to bother. I mean it began ridiculously so this is no surprise. You can't be wrong about anything and wanted me out of your thread by posting nonsense, it worked because this one is beneath me. Take care.


It is withholding sex. She doesn't have sex with him for longer than usual when he whinges... she is punishing him. This is not how you behave in a loving relationship (goes both ways, obvs). It's clear that she doesn't like him. She should be honest and leave him.

And I don't want you out of this thread. I just think you have an unhealthy view of men in general, painting them with the same brush.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

There is a big difference between "withholding sex" and not wanting to do it.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> There is a big difference between "withholding sex" and not wanting to do it.


she is withholding systematically... because he whines... let's face it: she doesn't like her husband.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> There is a big difference between "withholding sex" and not wanting to do it.


But the net result is pretty much the same. Lack of sex is hard on a marriage whether the underlying cause is inhetent lack of desire or deliberate maneuvering. Either way, it's not good.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> But the net result is pretty much the same. Lack of sex is hard on a marriage whether the underlying cause is inhetent lack of desire or deliberate maneuvering. Either way, it's not good.


No it's definitely not and I'm not sure which is more destructive to the marriage. 

Where wisdom comes in is in differentiating the two. 

If someone is not attracted to their spouse and does not want to have sex with them, then that spouse may be able to do something to change and appeal to the other better. 

But in the case of someone using withholding intimacy as a manipulation, that is on them and is a bad behavior and character issue on their part.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Admittedly I haven't read all posts so this may have already been touched upon.

Sex is unique compared to many other aspects of marriage or partnerships because of the enthusiasm factor. There was a time where husbands expected access, not necessarily enthusiasm. But men, and women, want enthusiasm. I 100% understand... nothing kills libido like knowing your partner doesn't want to be there....but access is easy to provide and measure.

The enthusiasm thing is trickier because so many different things go into it, and even when most things are in order it can ebb and flow. 

Often people conflate the two.... one can be willing to have sex but not be that excited about it. 

Contrast this with chores... it's quite normal and acceptable to be less then excited by washing dishes as long as they get done. Nobody cares if the person who washed their clean dish was excited about it. 

So can one expect steady sex? I honestly don't know. I know I have no interest in sex with one who doesn't want it and don't know who would find badgering an unwilling partner more appealing then taking care of themselves. And I don't see how a marriage can be a marriage without it by my definition of marriage.

Hell, I'd dump a guy after a bit of dating if he showed no interest in sex. That's part of what I want in a partner.

But I do think it's important to be clear on whether it's access or enthusiasm that you really want and to ask yourself if your approach is likely to achieve this. It is good to examine one's own behavior first because you control you. 

Some people just aren't compatible sexually.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> But the net result is pretty much the same. Lack of sex is hard on a marriage whether the underlying cause is inhetent lack of desire or deliberate maneuvering. Either way, it's not good.


Inherent lack of desire and deliberate maneuvering aren't independent.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> No it's definitely not and I'm not sure which is more destructive to the marriage.
> 
> Where wisdom comes in is in differentiating the two.
> 
> ...


Sure, if you load enough caveats on something, you can make it "different."

If there is no inherent attraction your spouse getting bigger biceps or a boob job isn't going to change that. Doing more vacuuming for one cooking better isn't going to change that.

Wisdom comes in looking unflinchingly at the real situation and determining exactly what you're up against and acting accordingly.

As you said yourself, you don't know which is more destructive, which is a spot on confirmation of my point that both are likely to have negative outcomes.

Then, you imply withholding is worse because it is a deliberate, conscious behavior. But deliberate behavior is easier to chance than inherent traits.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Every man who wants a deeper understanding of their sexual relationship with their wife should read this post repeatedly until it sinks in. 

Simply put, there is no replacement for the truth. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> How so? My husband agrees with me. HE is married to a woman who will cheerfully bang him silly or make slow love to him whenever he wants. A woman who initiates because it makes him feel desirable even when she would rather go to bed. I suppose there is nothing there. That he might be an example of a mindset that engenders exactly what people claim to seek.


You are assuming that, if a man behaves just like your husband, his wife will respond just like you do.

I think that this is rarely the case.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> In the article I got the impression her main beef wasn't really about having sex per se but rather his pissy and whiney attitude when she wasn't up for it.
> 
> I can't say that I disagree with her on that at all. If someone is going to stomp off in a huff and act like a spoiled little brat, I understand why that is a big turn off.


It's very true that being pissy and whiny when getting rejected for sex is weak and very unlikely to result in more sex.

Men who do that are severely lacking in the self respect department. 

However, *show me one example on TAM where a man stopped being whiny and pissy after being rejected for sex and that resulted in more frequent sex*.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> You are assuming that, if a man behaves just like your husband, his wife will respond just like you do.


I don't assume that at all, though I DO think it would work better than the complaining about how wife won't do x and y that you see here.


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

minimalME said:


> Actually marriage does entitle a person to a steady stream of sex. I mean, that's kind of the point. Or at least it used to be.
> 
> Most of our needs for all sorts of support from one another can be satisfied through friends and family and the variety of contact with others on a daily basis.
> 
> ...


Agreed! If you don’t want to be responsible for fulfilling someone else’s sexual desire, don’t get married. “I do” is consent. Read 1 Corinthians 7.


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

aine said:


> peterrabbit said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't it say in Corinthians 7 to not deny your spouse except for praying and fasting and then only for a short while? If we all loved by the Bible think how great things would be.
> ...


Actually the verse goes for both spouse’s. The husband does not own his own body, his wife does. A wife does not own her own body, her husband dies. Neither is to deny the other. This verse is not “cherry picked,” it is the essence of what it means to be married. To submit our of love for God, not because you do or do not feel like it. That is very selfish. Selfish people should not get married. If you are not prepared to put your spouse’s needs and desires above your own, stay single.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> It's very true that being pissy and whiny when getting rejected for sex is weak and very unlikely to result in more sex.
> 
> Men who do that are severely lacking in the self respect department.
> 
> However, *show me one example on TAM where a man stopped being whiny and pissy after being rejected for sex and that resulted in more frequent sex*.


Can you give one example on TAM where a man continued being whiny and pissy after being rejected for sex and that resulted in more frequent sex?

There is at least one guy on TAM who has said that... FarsideJunky


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> In Absentia said:
> 
> 
> > It's a matter of balance and understanding isn't it? In the thread I cited, *the husband is considered a jerk and almost a rapist for wanting to have sex once a week with his wife* and for getting annoyed if he got rejected... of course sulking is not attractive, but in a loving marriage the onus is on both... man and wife. Once a week is not pestering anybody and the reaction in the thread is appalling and it's all coming from women on a board for women... I bet she was happy having sex when they were trying to conceive... if you get married, you should take into consideration that having sex with your husband once in a while is normal... and not think he is some kind of rapist because he wants to be intimate with you. He is the father of your children, not a monster.
> ...


I woman who does not understand that to a man, sex is intimacy, should not be married.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.
> 
> I've always wondered if guys ever really hear the truth from women.
> 
> ...


I find this very odd. When I was married, I never had sex when I did not want it. And I never turned down sex when my husband initiated. Well, except if I was sick and running a fever. 

I don't think I'm all that unusual. I think that a lot of women are like me. We like sex, lots of it and are more than happy to have as much of it as we can.

I really do not recognize anything you wrote as 'normal' female behavior. I guess it might be different if I was married to a man who felt that sex was only for him, who was absolutely awful at sex, etc. But I have not experience that.


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> For the record... I agree with the notion that being a petulant, sulking child when not getting sex on his terms makes him a jerk.


And a wife who denies her husband sex is a poor excuse for a wife.


----------



## StillSearching (Feb 8, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> Actually the verse goes for both spouse’s. The husband does not own his own body, his wife does. A wife does not own her own body, her husband dies. Neither is to deny the other. This verse is not “cherry picked,” it is the essence of what it means to be married. To submit our of love for God, not because you do or do not feel like it. That is very selfish. Selfish people should not get married. If you are not prepared to put your spouse’s needs and desires above your own, stay single.


Yes withholding sex is withholding from yourself, as you are one.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> she is withholding systematically... because he whines... let's face it: she doesn't like her husband.


I don't think that she is withholding because he whines. I think that his whining when she does not want sex turns her off. The fact that he even mistreats his child as part of this whine fest is a huge turnoff for her as it should be.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> I woman who does not understand that to a man, sex is intimacy, should not be married.


To MY man sex <> intimacy. I wonder if people know what the logical operator equality that I used is. For HIM, sex without ME genuinely IN it is not intimacy. It is not bad on a gift day. 

I really doubt what a lot of people say it MEANS TO BE A MAN here on SIM. The only common denominator seems to be not getting sex with their wives. Whatever "being a man" means to them, it is not working. I am not meaning to be mean. But it is always weird to me how hard posters will try to avoid anything that has to do with looking internally.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> And a wife who denies her husband sex is a poor excuse for a wife.


Yah so long as he shows up in the monkey suit, it is game on for the rest of his life. Where do I sign?


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Looking at it objectively, and trying to be empathetic with the woman:

Wouldn't an exit affair be more fun and a lot faster than this method of destroying the man you want to ditch?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> Looking at it objectively, and trying to be empathetic with the woman:
> 
> Wouldn't an exit affair be more fun and a lot faster than this method of destroying the man you want to ditch?


Maybe she does not want a divorce or to destroy him. But she wants him to stop whining, giving her the silent treatment and stop mistreating the children when he does not get sex. 

Keep in mind that she says that they do have sex 1 or 2 times every week. Its not like they don't have sex.

We don't know the circumstance under which he is asking her for sex when she turns him down. He might be asking for it when it's not reasonable. That's part of the problem I see with the website linked to. Most people are just spewing a quick response. There is no dialogue with the OP, no one is asking for particulars to find out what's going on.

in her post she's asking how to handle this bad behavior. And yes, his behavior is not good at all.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> Looking at it objectively, and trying to be empathetic with the woman:
> 
> Wouldn't an exit affair be more fun and a *lot faster than this method of destroying* the man you want to ditch?


Well this is interesting. Makes me think of a KEY difference between my DH and this attitude. I can hurt him. His self esteem is not so fragile that I can DESTROY him. Maybe THAT is the attractive difference between a MAN and petulant child.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Unattainable standard, once again.

On with the Bash Fest!


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

EleGirl said:


> inmyprime said:
> 
> 
> > No, because her post makes no sense. She complains about ‘his behaviour’ and the fact that she doesn’t feel like having sex with him because he gets ‘into a huff’ whenever she rejects him sexually.
> ...


Yes.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> Yes.


How is that working for you? Are you married?


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

OK I went back to the origin and read it. I don't understand people saying it is hard to understand. She got what she wants and now she wants to ditch him.



> -snip- I'm not up for it, -snip - I find it hard to want sex. -snip- Often, I feel cheapened. -snip- that's just a massive passion-killer. -snip- I have sex with him when I don't want to. -snip-


She doesn't like having sex with him. She likes worrying and staying at home. He should stop doing the things she doesn't like (having sex with her) and just do the thing she likes, (send her money). He has no need to be married to her to fulfill her needs.


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

aine said:


> oldshirt said:
> 
> 
> > This is probably a topic worth it's own thread.
> ...


If your spouse is not there for your sexual gratification - who is? Marriage is largely about having a reliable sexual partner. Everything else in a marriage can be done with a roommate. Sex with a spouse IS a right in a marriage. 
Treating your spouse with live and affection is also a requirement in a marriage. But one spouse failing their duty does not give the other spouse permission to deny their duties.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> Yes.


Just to make sure I understand you....

If a woman initiates, do you believe that her husband has to have sex with her ... even if he's so uninterested at the moment that he cannot get it up?

If a person has a fever or is ill, do you think they still have to have sex?

Do you feel that is a husband has been yelling at his wife and demeaning her, and then says he wants sex, that the wife still should have sex with him?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> OK I went back to the origin and read it. I don't understand people saying it is hard to understand. She got what she wants and now she wants to ditch him.
> 
> 
> 
> She doesn't like having sex with him. She likes worrying and staying at home. He should stop doing the things she doesn't like (having sex with her) and just do the thing she likes, (send her money). He has no need to be married to her to fulfill her needs.


The way I read her post is that there are some serious issues in their marriage that need to be addressed. We don't know what they are since there is no discussion in the thread. It might be that she does not want much sex with him because of these problems. Generally, when there are unresolved issues in a marriage, a couple's sex life suffers. 

The woman and her husband need help, not every one piling on them and disparaging them.


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

StarFires said:


> In Absentia said:
> 
> 
> > This is what I thought she said, but you are right, she said one or twice, albeit *roughly*. My bad, but I didn't misrepresent what the woman said *deliberately*... I take offence at that...
> ...


I hope your not married. You seem to miss the reason people get married and the obligations one makes when they say “I do.” A spouse is willing because their partner for life wants to make love with them. If you cannot be willing, don’t get married.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> The way I read her post is that there are some serious issues in their marriage that need to be addressed. We don't know what they are since there is no discussion in the thread. It might be that she does not want much sex with him because of these problems. Generally, when there are unresolved issues in a marriage, a couple's sex life suffers.
> 
> *The woman and her husband* need help, not every one piling on them and disparaging them.


Well that's a generous characterization. Certainly a Woman would not Feel cheapened by being with her Husband. She might feel cheapened by being with her rapist or her abuser. The divorce happened 3 years ago in her mind. The sooner he is informed, the less time he can spend huffing around in a funk. Which she claims is her Goal.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> Well that's a generous characterization. Certainly a Woman would not Feel cheapened by being with her Husband.



Right? Because husbands are never nasty? She WOULD feel cheapened if all he wanted was sex and did not care for HER.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Right? Because husbands are never nasty? She WOULD feel cheapened if all he wanted was sex and did not care for HER.


Perhaps He knows that her self esteem is so strong that nothing he can do would make her cheapened?


----------



## SeattleWill (Aug 8, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> SeattleWill said:
> 
> 
> > And a wife who denies her husband sex is a poor excuse for a wife.
> ...


I don’t think you should. Marriage is clearly not for you.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> And a wife who denies her husband sex is a poor excuse for a wife.


That is way over the top too simplistic. 

The devil is in the details. 

If your wife has gained 50+lbs of blubber and stopped brushing her teeth and putting on deodorant and has breath of cigarette smoke and beer and lays around playing video games in sweatpants and smelly old tshirt for 3 days in row and then while you are in the middle of trying to get a screaming kid to sleep she wants to slobber up against you, are you going to drop what your doing and try to find her jay-jay through the folds of fat to do your duty so you aren't a poor excuse of a husband?

And then if you say, "not now" and she growls at you and stomps off in a huff and gives you the cold shoulder and scowls at you, are you supposed to suck it up and put a clothes pin on your nose and do the deed? 

That sounds graphic, but this is what a lot of these supposedly 'frigid' women are dealing with. 

I don't know if you've looked around and taken a harsh look at married men with young children lately but I'm not that far off in my analogy in many instances. 

What you are referring to almost borders up against sexual slavery. 

If married men with young children in the house want to have sex lives, they are going to have to be decent partners and coparents first, and then they are going to have to be at least reasonably sexually desirable. 

That means at minimum clean and showered, clean clothes, fresh breath, clean teeth and no big white, hairy gut hanging over their junk with nasty stuff growing in their folds of fat. 

A normal, decent, single guy hoping to score with a single chick would not go to a dance club in sweat pants and 3-day old tshirt after he hadn't taken a shower, put on deodorant or brushed his teeth in 3 days, so why does he think a marriage license gives him a free pass to do that at home while his wife is trying to get a coliky kid down to sleep? 

If a wife is showing a pattern of rejection and virtually no interest, the first thing a guy needs to do is look in the mirror and reflect on his behavior and ask himself if he is even F-able or if it is even reasonable at this time in the first place. 

If someone has gained 50lbs since they were dating and they have flakes of tobacco in their teeth and haven't had a shower in 3 days, then there's no point in any further discussion. 

But if a guy has his stuff together and is consistently doing his due diligence at being a productive partner and an otherwise attractive and desirable man that could get dates and sexual relationships if single, then there needs to be a little more digging and looking into other things that may be causing the shut down.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

(and just so y'all know - I am sitting here like a blob in the recliner in sweat pants and tshirt I've worn since the weekend and have 3days of stubble going so it's not like I'm pointing fingers. 

….But I'm also not trying to score at the moment either LOL)


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I don't assume that at all, though I DO think it would work better than the complaining about how wife won't do x and y that you see here.


Maybe.

Have you ever seen anything on TAM or IRL where the guy stopped whining, really "listened", understood that being turned down for sex "wasn't personal" (or however you would describe what your husband got out of "listening") and the sex life improved (other than your own, of course)?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> Can you give one example on TAM where a man continued being whiny and pissy after being rejected for sex and that resulted in more frequent sex?
> 
> There is at least one guy on TAM who has said that... FarsideJunky


I don't recall that the key to @farsidejunky's sexless marriage turning around was due to the fact that he stopped being pissy and whining.

But, I'll let him speak for himself.

Again. I fully agree that being pissy and whinny about not getting sex with your wife is pathetic behavior and counter productive.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> I find this very odd. When I was married, I never had sex when I did not want it. And I never turned down sex when my husband initiated. Well, except if I was sick and running a fever.
> 
> I don't think I'm all that unusual. I think that a lot of women are like me. We like sex, lots of it and are more than happy to have as much of it as we can.
> 
> I really do not recognize anything you wrote as 'normal' female behavior. I guess it might be different if I was married to a man who felt that sex was only for him, who was absolutely awful at sex, etc. But I have not experience that.


I said I wouldn't participate in this thread anymore because In Absentia responded to me with something so ridiculous that I thought he was trying to push me off the thread, so I resisted commenting anymore.

But I couldn't resist asking you what you are talking about and on what do you base it on? You quoted my post about women not being honest and lying sometimes so as not to hurt men's feelings. I enumerated some of the truths that we don't come out and say. But you responded to it as if I said something about women do or don't want to have sex. Where did that come from? But if you never felt or thought something you didn't mention, that really doesn't make you a good sample. I don't purport to speak for every single woman ever born. I spoke for the majority but can't possibly always think to indicate "some" or "most" or "not every single one," so to simply say "women" has to be understood to encompass enough of a sample that it represents a majority. You are fortunate to have had only good lovers who didn't require that you stroke their ego or trumpet their prowess. But there have a great number, a majority, of women who have been asked "Was it good for too?" or "Did you cum?" and so on, to which most women answer "yes" to spare his feelings, which according to In Absentia in this thread men's feelings are even more fragile than I and all these other lying women thought we knew. So it proves we have been right to lie out of consideration.

The lies we tell can be found on the internet. It's never been a secret among women that we don't speak up. In fact, I recall a post here from a woman who said her husband calls her all kinds of horrible names during sex, and she has never told him to stop. We don't speak up and we lie.

Did you quote the wrong post or something?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> Can you give one example on TAM where a man continued being whiny and pissy after being rejected for sex and that resulted in more frequent sex?
> 
> 
> 
> There is at least one guy on TAM who has said that... FarsideJunky


Well, in fairness, this is several parts. 

1. Stop whining. 
2. Be willing to compromise.
3. Have something in your life more important than your wife.
4. Do only for your wife that which prevents you from building resentment. 
5. 'No means no' works both ways.

So yes, it did result in more sex, as part of a larger approach.

But...

My sex life is not off the charts in frequency, but interesting and fun when it does happen. While my wife and I are emotionally very compatible, sexually is a slightly different story. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I totally agree that a man needs to continue to woo his wife. However, both partners need to understand that there is just less time for such things, and adjust accordingly. That might include not only how often you have sex, but how much non-sexual attention you demand before engaging in sex lovingly.



aine said:


> In the same way he wants his sexual needs met, I wonder how much he does for her.
> Working and paying bills do not meet a woman's needs. Wonder does he woo her, make her feel special and meet her emotional needs. Marriage is not just about sex, (although some in this forum seem to think so). I don't feel inclined to get sexual or **** my H brains out if he ignores me all day and then expects his conjugal needs to be met when we go to bed, **** that, if my needs are not taken care off.
> I think there are many men on here who thinks that it is their right to **** their wives, well it is not. When courting the wife, then they pulled out the stops, once married, nothing........ remember it works both ways.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Well, in fairness, this is several parts.
> 
> 1. Stop whining.
> 2. Be willing to compromise.
> ...


The problem is that items 3-5 on your list are sticking points for many women. If your wife is the easy-going kind who accepts that, then you're golden; but women like that are fairly rare.

Most ladies would be mighty upset if she wasn't top rung in your life (with the possible exception of where you rank your kid) and treated her accordingly. I don't know of any married lady who would accept that, and most people in committed relationships (but unmarried) would not take it either.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> I fully agree that being pissy and whinny about not getting sex with your wife is pathetic behavior and counter productive.


On the other hand, in my opinion, saying "_okay, that's fine_" about it doesn't help either!


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Well, in fairness, this is several parts.
> 
> 1. Stop whining.
> 2. Be willing to compromise.
> ...





DTO said:


> The problem is that items* 3*-5 on your list are sticking points for many women. If your wife is the easy-going kind who accepts that, then you're golden; but women like that are fairly rare.
> 
> *Most ladies would be mighty upset if she wasn't top rung in your life *(with the possible exception of where you rank your kid) and treated her accordingly. I don't know of any married lady who would accept that, and most people in committed relationships (but unmarried) would not take it either.


Strangely enough this worked for me even if it seemed counter-intuitive. Once I started going places without her she suddenly got interested in me. In fact it may be time for another new Hobby.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Life,
I think that many sexual relationships are slain by the HD person demanding passion. 




lifeistooshort said:


> Admittedly I haven't read all posts so this may have already been touched upon.
> 
> Sex is unique compared to many other aspects of marriage or partnerships because of the enthusiasm factor. There was a time where husbands expected access, not necessarily enthusiasm. But men, and women, want enthusiasm. I 100% understand... nothing kills libido like knowing your partner doesn't want to be there....but access is easy to provide and measure.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

You can't kill what is already dead.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Nail,
The viewpoint you expressed below is likely part of the reason your situation has played out in a way you don’t much like. 





Mr. Nail said:


> Well that's a generous characterization. Certainly a Woman would not Feel cheapened by being with her Husband. She might feel cheapened by being with her rapist or her abuser. The divorce happened 3 years ago in her mind. The sooner he is informed, the less time he can spend huffing around in a funk. Which she claims is her Goal.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



DTO said:


> The problem is that items 3-5 on your list are sticking points for many women. If your wife is the easy-going kind who accepts that, then you're golden; but women like that are fairly rare.
> 
> 
> 
> Most ladies would be mighty upset if she wasn't top rung in your life (with the possible exception of where you rank your kid) and treated her accordingly. I don't know of any married lady who would accept that, and most people in committed relationships (but unmarried) would not take it either.


Everyone has a choice...including my wife. 

I would argue that many SAY their spouse is the most important thing in their life, but often BEHAVE the exact opposite.

In the meantime, we (proverbially) pursue hobbies, spend time with friends, work long hours, and more...then we expect our spouses to cater to our whims, whether it be sex, a listening ear, or any number of things people do for each other.

But I digress...

The point is this:

To expect a platinum level of service while only being willing to deliver a basic level of service doesn't work for me. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I also feel I need to add that I sometimes wonder if I have any business advising people on this forum.

Whether it comes through my posts or not, I have no idea...but I am an extremely intense person. I do things all the way, and then some. 

From my wife's perspective, it may just simply be too much to bear to be what is "in focus". Maybe she stays because she likes who I am and how I treat her when that intensity is focused elsewhere. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MEM2020 said:


> Life,
> I think that many sexual relationships are slain by the HD person demanding passion.


Yes.... people have a tendency to view things through their own lens. So if their partner doesn't respond like they do they get upset. 

Normal human reaction, but often unsuccessful. Passion cannot be demanded.... it's either there or not. I've found that while you can kill it it's very difficult to create.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> I think we can agree that women's needs are different from mens.


I can agree with that, but I'm not sure that everyone here agrees.



aine said:


> I think we can agree that women's needs are different from mens. Men need both sex for emotional closeness and companionship (doing things side by side) whereas women need affection (not only in the bedroom) and conversation (time).
> Now if a husband is too busy working to earn a living and has no time to give his wife attention or spend time in conversation with her, does that mean she too can find that attention/affection/conversation elsewhere? IMO what is good for the gander is good for the goose.


Sure. The two situations are roughly equivalent.

The husband in the post made a serious mistake by saying "I don't feel like it, but I'll try" in regards to getting the kids ready for school. 

He should have have said "I don't feel like it" when she wanted to talk about her day.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> When a woman knows she is loved, adored, treated with love and affection, then sex is a wonderful thing between husband and wife. She knows she is not being used for someones sexual gratification. Can your wife say that? (just speaking to all in general here).
> 
> If you feel that you cannot do that for your wife then stop whinging and end it.


It would seem to me that many men on TAM with sexless marriages do (at least try) to do that for for their wife. I've never seen it result in more sex.

It's the right thing to do. But, the idea that many put out there that, if you "treat your woman right, she'll want to have sex with you" just isn't supported by any evidence I've ever seen.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

"Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex."

Yep, and likewise as follows.

Any spouse who often, frequently or always withholds sex, is not entitled to sexual fidelity from their spouse.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I am not sure what the point is of monogamous marriage without sex or sexual fidelity. 

I think in most cases when it's not do to health there is a statute of limitations of a sexless marriage or at least there should be.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.
> 
> I've always wondered if guys ever really hear the truth from women.
> 
> ...


Well, my intention was to come up with a bunch of insulting things I told women after having sex with them (i.e. were you aware that your ***** smells like something totted and died in there?) and how they all really appreciated the input. But I just couldn't deal with coming up with an extensive list of things to say for the purpose of hurting someone's feelings who had just taken the risk of being vulnerable with me. I would never any of those things to someone I'd just had sex with because, yes, it isn't worth hurting someone's feelings.

That's a one night stand. If I actually married someone to whom I felt the need to say things like that, it would be my problem.



StarFires said:


> But listen, I'm not really able to imagine that you never knew your wife had sex when she didn't feel like it. Was there never a time that you were friskly, and she said something like "Nooo, I don't feeeeel like it" but then gave in and did it? Hasn't that happened with everyone? It would mean you knew you were having sex even though she didn't want to. So what's the big deal that she confessed it? Was it the context or the way that she said it? Or was it simply that she said it?


I'm sure that my wife has had sex with me when she was not already aroused. But, since she loves me, cares about my happiness and because she knew from experience that she'd end up enjoying herself, she had sex with me. She chose to have sex with me because she wanted to.

If she just said, "I've had sex with you when I didn't want to", that would be the last time I ever had sex with her.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I’ve come to the conclusion that you can’t suggest anything to anyone unless they at least try to paint a 360 degree picture of their marriage. 

The situations that are described solely in the bedroom are so lacking in context that it isn’t possible for me to have a real opinion.

Most of the posters also engage in a lot of ego protective behavior. So much so that they avoid, duck and dodge hard questions.




Buddy400 said:


> I can agree with that, but I'm not sure that everyone here agrees.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Buddy,

This simply isn’t comparable. When a woman is mediocre in bed, her partner almost always cums. When a man is mediocre in bed the opposite becomes the norm.

And Star was talking about honest feedback, not intentionally cruel feedback. Totally different.





Buddy400 said:


> Well, my intention was to come up with a bunch of insulting things I told women after having sex with them (i.e. were you aware that your ***** smells like something totted and died in there?) and how they all really appreciated the input. But I just couldn't deal with coming up with an extensive list of things to say for the purpose of hurting someone's feelings who had just taken the risk of being vulnerable with me. I would never any of those things to someone I'd just had sex with because, yes, it isn't worth hurting someone's feelings.
> 
> That's a one night stand. If I actually married someone to whom I felt the need to say things like that, it would be my problem.
> 
> ...


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> LOL You might have seen me tell guys here sometimes that we women don't tell the truth, we just don't speak up for fear of hurting his feelings. I see we are right to do that. I guess that's saying we're right to be dishonest. It's unfortunate that this actually means women are forced to lie. Jeez o peez who wears the panties? You're telling me men are even more sensitive than I thought.
> 
> I've always wondered if guys ever really hear the truth from women.
> 
> ...


Frankly it's much nicer to just tell him, or certainly not marry him. If you marry someone who you think is that bad in bed then I can only assume that sex in marriage is not at all important to you, but it probably is to him so in the end you are still doing him and yourself disservice. It does shine some light into the problems in some of these marriages though. I suspect some women (and sometimes men) never liked the sex that much or at least the sex with their husband but married them anyway for his other characteristics. At least as far as the sex part they could take it or leave it. Unfortunately if you happen to be one of those guys stuck in that kind of marriage there is not a lot you can do about it if you stay. I think this is a very unfair thing to do to these people and is marring under false pretenses. So in your post as in example telling him is a much nicer thing to do. 

In other cases though I think it kind of simplistic to assume the problem is just that someone is plain bad in bed because people like sex in different ways. Some like soft loving sex, some like hard pounding sex, some like it kinky, some romantic. All kinds of ways, lots of times the problems have nothing to do with performance but compatibility. But lots of times I also read on these boards stuff like, I have to have my sex this way! Again when I hear that I have a hard time thinking they are much fun in bed. At least in my mind part of the fun of sex should be trying new things. Also even stake can get tiring if you eat it every night, sometimes you want chicken, sometimes even ostrich. 

I am also weary of people who say, I better get mine, when talking about what they expect from their partner. I can't think of anything less appealing then trying to make love with someone who is just out for their own orgasm. Sex by it's very nature should be collaborative and giving. It should be fun and exploratory. If it's just about me helping you get off then I don't want to have sex with you. I also think that everyone to a certain respect is responsible for their own orgasm. There are many women for instance who can't even bring themselves to climax, I am not sure how they expect their partner to do it if they can't. In cases like that I think you are going to need to take some time to get there. There is nothing wrong with that though. It can be a lot of fun experimenting with what works. 

That is really the thing I don't get about the thread linked. Let's assume it's both their faults to some extent, what is striking about it is that she describes sex as a chore. The reader is left to wonder why that is. Is it because he sucks at it. Is it because she is very tired. Is it because she only enjoys it when she is not stressed. Is it because he feels entitled an she understandably resents that? Since I don't know the answer to that I don't think there is a way to give good advice. 

But your right he sucks, is not any kind of advice that will help her problem or her marriage. I didn't read all the responses but the ones I did read weren't much deeper then that. I mean how about, you know sex can be great for both of you. I am sorry whatever it is in your marriage and history has gotten you two to the point that it has become a source of contention. You should work on that for both your sake's. I am left to wonder why this isn't a common response. 

At least for me there are two overall issues you can have when it comes to sex in your marriage. 

The first is outside or inside issues prevent you from having it, or if you are having it, enjoying it like you should. Those things should be worked on and fixed by both spouses. It should be a priority. They should want to be fixed by both spouses because for most of us sex is and can be a wonderful thing. 

The second is the more ominous possibility that your spouse just doesn't think sex should be a priority in your marriage. In a case like this I don't think that can be worked on and you have two choices live with it or leave. There is really no middle ground.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MEM2020 said:


> Buddy,
> 
> This simply isn’t comparable. When a woman is mediocre in bed, her partner almost always cums. When a man is mediocre in bed the opposite becomes the norm.


Why does this matter? It's one thing when we are talking about a ONS not sure if it matters to either party that much, it's just mediocre. But for long term monogamous sex if your partner is "mediocre" man _or women_ that sucks. I mean I can cum with my hand so why does just making me cum count for anything?

I am not even sure why this whole thing has to be gender based, that is one of the problems. People should be giving in their relationships, that includes when having sex. If you are not striving to be your best in all things with your partner, sex included then you are not really living up to your vows.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



SeattleWill said:


> I don’t think you should. Marriage is clearly not for you.


Weird. I am very happily married. As is my husband.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> Maybe.
> 
> Have you ever seen anything on TAM or IRL where the guy stopped whining, really "listened", understood that being turned down for sex "wasn't personal" (or however you would describe what your husband got out of "listening") and the sex life improved (other than your own, of course)?


Yes.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> Strangely enough this worked for me even if it seemed counter-intuitive. Once I started going places without her she suddenly got interested in me. In fact it may be time for another new Hobby.


I identify with this. I know I’m not my H no 1, I come after kids, work etc. But he’s not mine either. He comes after work, friends etc. I have a much better life now, no longer struggling to be first.


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> Strangely enough this worked for me even if it seemed counter-intuitive. Once I started going places without her she suddenly got interested in me. In fact it may be time for another new Hobby.


I identify with this. I know I’m not my H no 1, I come after kids, work etc. But he’s not mine either. He comes after kids, work, friends etc. I have a much better life now, no longer struggling to be first. He does him and I do me and then we come together.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> I said I wouldn't participate in this thread anymore because In Absentia responded to me with something so ridiculous that I thought he was trying to push me off the thread, so I resisted commenting anymore.


Sorry, you are not allowed now... :laugh:


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

all this talk about men having fragile egos (more than expected) and women lying a lot got me thinking... i can see some sort of dynamics there, true... but this is my point... why lie? Be honest and put the guy out of his misery...


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> all this talk about men having fragile egos (more than expected) and women lying a lot got me thinking... i can see some sort of dynamics there, true... but this is my point... why lie? Be honest and put the guy out of his misery...


For the same reason husband's lie when their wives ask them if they look fat. It's one thing to stay with your wife because you think the reason she doesn't want to have sex with you she is because she is tired or mad at you. At least there is hope. If she is just not attracted to you or thinks you suck in bed that is kind of at the decision point.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MEM2020 said:


> Buddy,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting. Where exactly is the distinction between honest and cruel? (Or who decides it?)

And if the women doesn’t cum as much as the man, does it mean he is worse in bed than her?

These are pretty heavy statements.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



aine said:


> I identify with this. I know I’m not my H no 1, I come after kids, work etc. But he’s not mine either. He comes after work, friends etc. I have a much better life now, no longer struggling to be first.


See I don't see this as having them be first. It's about having requirements or standards. If you want to be with me I have expectations. I don't have to give you my time, it's enough that I married you, you still have to earn my time. It's not a question of being 1st it's about boundaries.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Whether it comes through my posts or not, I have no idea...but I am an extremely intense person.



Don’t know. But what sometimes I need to filter out is the slight combative attitude towards your partner that I probably misinterpret. I think it could just be the phrasing (mainly the quid pro quo stuff; I would simply change it to ‘symbiosis’, it’s friendlier 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> For the same reason husband's lie when their wives ask them if they look fat. It's one thing to stay with your wife because you think the reason she doesn't want to have sex with you she is because she is tired or mad at you. At least there is hope. If she is just not attracted to you or thinks you suck in bed that is kind of at the decision point.


I was talking bout women lying to men if they are crap in bed... like the stuff below...

_You're not good in bed.
You don't know how to please a woman.
I don't like your jackrabbit sex.
You think sex is just for you and women don't want to orgasm.
No, it wasn't good for me too.
Please come up from down there, you're just annoying me.
No, I didn't cum.
Yes, I fake the moaning.
Yes, I fake orgasm._


To which you replied... and I agree with your reply... I just don't get this high level of dishonesty... because this is not lying... it's pure dishonesty.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> For the same reason husband's lie when their wives ask them if they look fat. It's one thing to stay with your wife because you think the reason she doesn't want to have sex with you she is because she is tired or mad at you. At least there is hope. If she is just not attracted to you or thinks you suck in bed that is kind of at the decision point.



Yes but in the case of the referenced situation, it’s not so much lying to husband and more the fact that she seems to be dishonest with herself or maybe it’s her presentation of the situation (these are almost always ‘sugar coated’, there’s nothing unusual about that. Does anyone really think that if the husband wrote it that he would say “yeah I pester my wife for sex incessantly and whine about when I don’t get it. Why is she not sleeping with me?” I don’t think so.

That’s why I think that she is just looking for sympathy rather than anything else. However the other members are actually cheering her on to the point that she becomes hostile and resentful towards her husband by the end of the thread and I don’t think this is a helpful thing to do so I agree with Conan’s ‘brain dead’ assessment...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MEM2020 said:


> I’ve come to the conclusion that you can’t suggest anything to anyone unless they at least try to paint a 360 degree picture of their marriage.
> 
> The situations that are described solely in the bedroom are so lacking in context that it isn’t possible for me to have a real opinion.
> 
> Most of the posters also engage in a lot of ego protective behavior. So much so that they avoid, duck and dodge hard questions.


"Please come up from down there, you're just annoying me." Isn't a helpful hint.

And the entire tone of the post was not that of a caring partner honestly trying to educate.

Edit, quoted the wrong post of yours, but I'm guessing it's obvious which one I was responding to.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> "Please come up from down there, you're just annoying me." Isn't a helpful hint.
> 
> And the entire tone of the post was not that of a caring partner honestly trying to educate.


I'm afraid that particular poster is still having a go at me in another thread... a bit childish, IMO... we can disagree, but it's not some kind of crusade...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MEM2020 said:


> Buddy,
> 
> This simply isn’t comparable. When a woman is mediocre in bed, her partner almost always cums. When a man is mediocre in bed the opposite becomes the norm.
> 
> And Star was talking about honest feedback, not intentionally cruel feedback. Totally different.


And here's the thing. We KNOW that men can be sensitive to criticism, even when constructive. It is a bad feedback loop. We KNOW that some men can have their self esteem destroyed by just not DOING it, let alone admitting that you don't enjoy it, just convulse with passion... If just not wanting to do it on any given Tuesday when you have a headache can cause a man to lose his mind, what would actually talking to him honestly look like?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> And here's the thing. We KNOW that men can be sensitive to criticism, even when constructive. It is a bad feedback loop. We KNOW that some men can have their self esteem destroyed by just not DOING it, let alone admitting that you don't enjoy it, just convulse with passion... If just not wanting to do it on any given Tuesday when you have a headache can cause a man to lose his mind, what would actually talking to him honestly look like?


Agreed.

Conversely, is the fear one of how the man's ego would take it, or fear that it could lead to the man deciding to end the union?

I think both are true.

What it comes down to for both parties is the inability to manage their own fear and insecurities. 



Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I don't know a single man whose ego would be destroyed by one headache on a random Tuesday.

But when it's a headache on Tuesday, then stress, then dishes to wash, then being tired, than "you didn't do enough X", then....

Well, I think we all get the idea.

Here's an idea: if you do not want to have regular sex, don't get married.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Conversely, is the fear one of how the man's ego would take it, or fear that it could lead to the man deciding to end the union?
> 
> ...


Not in the case of my husband and I. The fear was entirely that his fragile ego would yield a backlash. When he was finally able to hear that I did not want to be responsible for his ego in that way, and that I wanted to be able to discuss things HONESTLY, then progress could be made. I don't understand why men who feel sexuality NEEDS to be on the menu don't make that clear on the up front without the dancing around.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Conversely, is the fear one of how the man's ego would take it, or fear that it could lead to the man deciding to end the union?
> 
> ...


For me it was always that I knew I would eventually end the union if things didn’t or couldn’t change. So I was stalling a bit because I loved the guy. But I knew that the full truth coming out of me would have to be followed by “so that means we are over”. I don’t think he would have necessarily ended it over that, and I never feared that he would.

I’m not sure women in general fear their man is going to up and leave. And I don’t mean that they are complacent, I just mean that I don’t think it’s a constant source of insecurity for women, on average. They only think things like that when the guy starts acting shady. Same goes for men, right? They don’t worry in general that their wife will just up and leave.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Not in the case of my husband and I. The fear was entirely that his fragile ego would yield a backlash. When he was finally able to hear that I did not want to be responsible for his ego in that way, and that I wanted to be able to discuss things HONESTLY, then progress could be made. I don't understand why men who feel sexuality NEEDS to be on the menu don't make that clear on the up front without the dancing around.


That is fair.

What is also fair to recognize is that the man's ego is not the only barrier to honest communication.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> That is fair.
> 
> What is also fair to recognize is that the man's ego is not the only barrier to honest communication.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Yes, our love for them or our desire to not be hurtful (by being honest) is a huge barrier. IMO.

Being that I don’t know what it is like on the mans side, I have to assume something similar occurs when you want to guide, correct, or improve her in some way having to do with sex, right?

So I assume in some cases, and some cases I know of for sure, the guy is not going to say “honey your lack of a sex drive just doesn’t cut it for me at all, and with that honesty on the table, I’m out of here”. Until he actually does say it and leaves.

Some men love their LD wives very much, but will eventually leave them because the truth will come out and he will know that he has to. Other men will just stay. 

Women sometimes also stay, and never say the truth.

Not always right, not always wrong. It’s difficult either way.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Faithful Wife said:


> Yes, our love for them or our desire to not be hurtful (by being honest) is a huge barrier. IMO.


I am sure this is true for some. I know it had nothing to do with my reticence. I did not want to deal with his huge pity party for himself about how I don't looooooveeee him and desiiiiirrrrreeeee him. And why don't I???


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

This is that insidious idea that society is held together by a web of white lies that everyone accepts. We must continuously lie to each other and we know that we are being lied to. And this improves us Because eating excrement is a valuable and desired social skill? If you are deceiving your spouse it is in order to get something. Something that you could not get if you were truthful.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Faithful Wife said:


> Yes, our love for them or our desire to not be hurtful (by being honest) is a huge barrier. IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Example:

"Honey, your 35 lb weight increase is affecting my sexual attraction to you."

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I'm afraid that particular poster is still having a go at me in another thread... a bit childish, IMO... we can disagree, but it's not some kind of crusade...


That is such a blank statement. It's just blank and empty, devoid of anything purposeful and derived from nothing but your overly sensitive imagination. You take everything too personally without reflection or introspection, so your responses are born of that mental block. What you say here is a go at me. What I said there was hardly a go at you since I spoke several times of most of the male respondents in this thread and did so purposefully and to prove my point in explanation of my response to the OP's request for advice along the same nature this thread was based on. I could have used almost any of their statements to repeat but used one of yours because that particular one was short and most expediently served as an example of the idea I was trying to convey. The point I was making about the woman's true attempt to save her sexual relationship with her husband was completely lost on most of the respondents in this thread, including you, so I was trying to prevent that from happening to him in his thread with an example from this one. It had nothing to do with you specifically or personally and hardly a crusade beyond my ongoing effort to help guys understand the female species a little better. I can't make them, but that was specifically what he came to the board asking for.



NobodySpecial said:


> And here's the thing. We KNOW that men can be sensitive to criticism, even when constructive. It is a bad feedback loop. We KNOW that some men can have their self esteem destroyed by just not DOING it, let alone admitting that you don't enjoy it, just convulse with passion... If just not wanting to do it on any given Tuesday when you have a headache can cause a man to lose his mind, what would actually talking to him honestly look like?


Amen to every word and proven a multitude of times in this thread.



farsidejunky said:


> Agreed.
> Conversely, is the fear one of how the man's ego would take it, or fear that it could lead to the man deciding to end the union?
> I think both are true.
> What it comes down to for both parties is the inability to manage their own fear and insecurities.


It was too general to be relegated to or confined by any particular type of union, so wouldn't necessarily have anything to do with fearing he might end the union. There doesn't have to be any union involved besides an opportune coupling.



personofinterest said:


> I don't know a single man whose ego would be destroyed by one headache on a random Tuesday.
> But when it's a headache on Tuesday, then stress, then dishes to wash, then being tired, than "you didn't do enough X", then....
> Well, I think we all get the idea.
> Here's an idea: if you do not want to have regular sex, don't get married.


The nature and context of the post this thread was based on negate these statements and ideas.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> That is such a blank statement. It's just blank and empty, devoid of anything purposeful and derived from nothing but your overly sensitive imagination. You take everything too personally without reflection or introspection, so your responses are born of that mental block.


There was an AHA moment in my marriage when DH realized that he had a BIG mental block. It is so similar to what we read on here. The desire for it not to be "his fault" was so huge that he was obstructing his own understanding of the situation. I KNEW, without a shadow of a doubt, that he was not going to live in a sexless marriage because he told me. But even still, he could not get how I could say 1) I love you, I want to be with you. I want a sexual relationship with you. 2) I would rather give up on this marriage all together than just go with I f you whether I want to or not as our solution.




> What you say here is a go at me. What I said there was hardly a go at you since I spoke several times of most of the male respondents in this thread and did so purposefully and to prove my point in explanation of my response to the OP's request for advice along the same nature this thread was based on. I could have used almost any of their statements to repeat but used one of yours because that particular one was short and most expediently served as an example of the idea I was trying to convey. The point I was making about the woman's true attempt to save her sexual relationship with her husband was completely lost on most of the respondents in this thread, including you, so I was trying to prevent that from happening to him in his thread with an example from this one. It had nothing to do with you specifically or personally and hardly a crusade beyond my ongoing effort to help guys understand the female species a little better. I can't make them, but that was specifically what he came to the board asking for.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I actually DO know MANY people who would get the knickers in a pretty serious twist over being turned down at all. The fact that that poster says that in light of the original referred post is disingenuous since the person who originated the referred story said as much. They have sex once or twice a week. DH gets petulant and behaves badly to her and the children when she is not into it. 

I get that this topic is painful for the folks that find themselves in this situation. But I don't get the desire to just not see what is right in front of them.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> That is such a blank statement. It's just blank and empty, devoid of anything purposeful and derived from nothing but your overly sensitive imagination. You take everything too personally without reflection or introspection, so your responses are born of that mental block. What you say here is a go at me. What I said there was hardly a go at you since I spoke several times of most of the male respondents in this thread and did so purposefully and to prove my point in explanation of my response to the OP's request for advice along the same nature this thread was based on. I could have used almost any of their statements to repeat but used one of yours because that particular one was short and most expediently served as an example of the idea I was trying to convey. The point I was making about the woman's true attempt to save her sexual relationship with her husband was completely lost on most of the respondents in this thread, including you, so I was trying to prevent that from happening to him in his thread with an example from this one. It had nothing to do with you specifically or personally and hardly a crusade beyond my ongoing effort to help guys understand the female species a little better. I can't make them, but that was specifically what he came to the board asking for.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Apparently in Absentia isn't the only one who's sensitive. Yeesh


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> This is that insidious idea that society is held together by a web of white lies that everyone accepts. We must continuously lie to each other and we know that we are being lied to. And this improves us Because eating excrement is a valuable and desired social skill? If you are deceiving your spouse it is in order to get something. Something that you could not get if you were truthful.


I feel very badly for people who worry so much about their little behaviors' affect on society is going to be. Really, my being honest with my husband has nothing to do with society. If you are bound by that, that is all on you.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



> I actually DO know MANY people who would get the knickers in a pretty serious twist over being turned down at all.


1. Since I don't take polls of my friends' sex lives, I could not say I know MANY of anything with regard to sexual refusal 

2. No, my comment stand no matter what the OP was about. MOST men are NOT going to have a duck fit over one random refusal. It is continual and repeated refusal that becomes upsetting.

I get that it is easier for it to always be the man's fault, and that women who empathize with "the man" are not popular, but it doesn't negate what I said.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> 1. Since I don't take polls of my friends' sex lives, I could not say I know MANY of anything with regard to sexual refusal
> 
> 2. No, my comment stand no matter what the OP was about. MOST men are NOT going to have a duck fit over one random refusal. It is continual and repeated refusal that becomes upsetting.
> 
> I get that it is easier for it to always be the man's fault, and that women who empathize with "the man" are not popular, but it doesn't negate what I said.


I have a lot of friends who use DH and I as their unofficial therapists. What can I say. 

Re: "I get that it is easier for it to always be the man's fault,"

I get it that it is easier for you to maintain your blind spots around the handful of chips on your shoulder, but it does not change what I have said. Which has nothing to do with fault. But COULD have something to do with solutions. Here's hoping.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> This is that insidious idea that society is held together by a web of white lies that everyone accepts. We must continuously lie to each other and we know that we are being lied to. And this improves us Because eating excrement is a valuable and desired social skill? If you are deceiving your spouse it is in order to get something. Something that you could not get if you were truthful.





NobodySpecial said:


> I feel very badly for people who worry so much about their little behaviors' affect on society is going to be. Really, my being honest with my husband has nothing to do with society. If you are bound by that, that is all on you.


And so it continues with out so much as a breath. You do not feel badly for me, you hold me in utter contempt. You can't even spare a thought to address my statement. You lie to me in order to maintain your position of moral superiority and to avoid censure. But lying in society has become so "normal" that we all accept it without a thought. It has even continued to invade our habits to the point that we lie in our closest relationships. My post was to point out that carrying on the white lies to an intimate sexual relationship destroys that intimacy, and makes it as base as greeting the letter carrier in the morning. I also Suggest that all and sundry examine their own lies to see what it is that they are lying to get.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Mr. Nail said:


> And so it continues with out so much as a breath. You do not feel badly for me, *you hold me in utter contempt*.


Mr. Nail. I don't know you. I don't know why you think you know me. 



> You can't even spare a thought to address my statement. You lie to me in order to maintain your position of moral superiority and to avoid censure. But lying in society has become so "normal" that we all accept it without a thought. It has even continued to invade our habits to the point that we lie in our closest relationships. My post was to point out that carrying on the white lies to an intimate sexual relationship destroys that intimacy, and makes it as base as greeting the letter carrier in the morning. I also Suggest that all and sundry examine their own lies to see what it is that they are lying to get.


Okay. Good luck!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I don't really have a dog in this fight.

Hell, I don't even have a dog that is the same breed as any dog in this fight but there seems to be a lot of "fragile male ego" examples being given.

I have seen this situation play out, more than once, with the genders reversed and the wives were suffering at a very high level.

Their egos were even more damaged because of the perception that men always want sex and a lot of them suffered in silence instead of being thought of as undesirable.

I have also known women who walked quickly through divorce court when the husband wasn't performing enough.

Not even mentioning the numerous affairs that were opted for.

Doesn't everyone have egos?

I have never even worried about whether I was rocking some lady's world or not.

I'm generous and want mutual enjoyment but I have never even had a stray thought about how I stacked up or trying to compete.

If I'm in the sack with a woman, there is more than enough to keep my attention as well as keep me busy.

I'm actually seeing what she has to offer me.

I don't really understand how, apparently, a lot of men think with sex being one sided about their performance and ego.

Are there a lot of women that think one sided as well?

I have had a pretty fulfilling sex life by expecting women to show me what they can do as well as giving what talents I can bring to the bedroom.

Doesn't the "fragile male ego" thing only happen if he, or she, believe sexual performance and response is one sided?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I am sure this is true for some. I know it had nothing to do with my reticence. I did not want to deal with his huge pity party for himself about how I don't looooooveeee him and desiiiiirrrrreeeee him. And why don't I???


Well yes, that part was not a happy moment either. But in my case, I knew it was never going to change. So I also knew that telling him and causing a pity party wasn't going to help either of us. I did love him, and wished it was all much different, but it wasn't.

Maybe if I felt our love and actual connection was a lot stronger, I would have faced up to telling the full truth sooner. But I know now in retrospect, I still would have had to accept an unfulling situation for myself even if the connection was stronger.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



farsidejunky said:


> Example:
> 
> "Honey, your 35 lb weight increase is affecting my sexual attraction to you."
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Yes, exactly. Or the fact that you (the wife) don't actually like sex.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> I don't really have a dog in this fight.
> 
> Hell, I don't even have a dog that is the same breed as any dog in this fight but there seems to be a lot of "fragile male ego" examples being given.
> 
> ...


I was about to ask if it was related to sex after the sentence above. Look at you reading my mind. I have never, personally, seen a fragile egoed female translate into sexual withholding (to use the popular vernacular though I HATE the word withholding). 



> I have also known women who walked quickly through divorce court when the husband wasn't performing enough.
> 
> Nit even mentioning the numerous affairs that were opted for.
> 
> ...


I am not clear on what you mean? A former partner of mine had WICKED performance anxiety. A turn down was a HUGE blow. And not loving what he was doing was a HUGE problem. It was seriously problematic (in and out of the bedroom) becuase he would rather perceive himself to be attractive and everything rather than BE. Is this related to what you mean?

But really, fragile ego, as I think you are saying, is definitely problematic regardless of the gender of the person with it. 



> I have had a pretty fulfilling sex life by expecting women to show me what they can do as well as giving what talents I can bring to the bedroom.
> 
> Doesn't the "fragile male ego" thing only happen if he, or she, believe sexual performance and response is one sided?


I am unclear what "one sided" means in this context. Are you willing to elaborate?


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> There was an AHA moment in my marriage when DH realized that he had a BIG mental block. It is so similar to what we read on here. The desire for it not to be "his fault" was so huge that he was obstructing his own understanding of the situation. I KNEW, without a shadow of a doubt, that he was not going to live in a sexless marriage because he told me. But even still, he could not get how I could say 1) I love you, I want to be with you. I want a sexual relationship with you. 2) I would rather give up on this marriage all together than just go with I f you whether I want to or not as our solution.


The just do it mentality is insane, isn't it? But I'm glad your husband had an aha moment and came to his senses.



NobodySpecial said:


> I actually DO know MANY people who would get the knickers in a pretty serious twist over being turned down at all. The fact that that poster says that in light of the original referred post is disingenuous since the person who originated the referred story said as much. They have sex once or twice a week. DH gets petulant and behaves badly to her and the children when she is not into it.
> 
> I get that this topic is painful for the folks that find themselves in this situation. But I don't get the desire to just not see what is right in front of them.


Yes, her effort to talk to her husband in order to save their sexual relationship was lost on him because he doesn't want to be turned down ever AT ALL. That purpose and her request of the board members for suggestions to make him understand wasn't understood here. The cause and effect nature of his actions were completely ignored here, except for one poster (that I saw) accusing her of being dishonest. 

"desire to just not see" is so incredibly profound and the only way it can be explained. How wise you are.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Faithful Wife said:


> Well yes, that part was not a happy moment either. But in my case, *I knew it was never going to change. *


So I thought as well. 



> So I also knew that telling him and causing a pity party wasn't going to help either of us.


I guess I got lucky. Because after enough pity parties, when we were seriously thinking of closing that door, he "got it". 




> I did love him, and wished it was all much different, but it wasn't.
> 
> Maybe if I felt our love and actual connection was a lot stronger, I would have faced up to telling the full truth sooner. But I know now in retrospect, I still would have had to accept an unfulling situation for myself even if the connection was stronger.


I don't know what that means. You kind of can't blame him for not getting what you never told him. Or am I missing what you are saying?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> They have sex once or twice a week


I really think we have to be careful depending on this statement being a 100% accurate description of the truth.

Anyone familiar with HD/LD situations knows that the LD partner doesn't necessarily keep the most accurate counts.

And, this is when he's not being whiny, so if he's as whiny as stated, then she pretty much says that the once or twice a week no longer applies.

She also does say that 'she finds it hard to want sex with him".

She also says that some times she goes along with it and enjoys herself, other times she goes along with it and feels "cheapened". So, one would imagine that if she only had sex when she actually wanted to, it would be far less than the "once or twice a week" everyone is so reliant upon (as if it was willing, enthusiastic sex once or twice a week).


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I don't know what that means. You kind of can't blame him for not getting what you never told him. Or am I missing what you are saying?


I told him, I guided him, I made suggestions, I bought instructional videos, I wrote stories for us to act out, I demonstrated, I did many more things.

But the fact was (and I had the strong feeling this was always true but wished it wasn't) he could not "get" or understand or execute what I was asking him to do. And no more talking would have changed this. So the full truth was always "once I completely admit how this is never going to work for me, it's over".

It really took a long time for me to admit that to myself, but now I wish I had much sooner because I always suspected it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> The just do it mentality is insane, isn't it?


Well it looks obvious to us on the outside. What the insanity looks like is both just do it AND but no I really love you and want you to be really into in AND demonstrate YOUR desire to ME... It comes off as pretty baffling sometimes.



> But I'm glad your husband had an aha moment and came to his senses.


Me too! He is a hot as hell man. And from his historical perspective, he never had to think At All about being attractive to someone. He just always was. But he also did not live with the woman he wanted to be attracted to, nor did they pick up his dirty underwear.  




> Yes, her effort to talk to her husband in order to save their sexual relationship was lost on him because he doesn't want to be turned down ever AT ALL. That purpose and her request of the board members for suggestions to make him understand wasn't understood here. The cause and effect nature of his actions were completely ignored here, except for one poster (that I saw) accusing her of being dishonest.
> 
> "*desire to just not see*" is so incredibly profound and the only way it can be explained. How wise you are.


This desire not to see is frequent in SIM. It really seems like people's desire not to be "at fault" interferes with their desire to solve. It is amazing to me how often fault comes up. I LOVE being at fault. If I am the cause of a problem, then I have the power to fix it! Very liberating.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Faithful Wife said:


> I told him, I guided him, I made suggestions, I bought instructional videos, I wrote stories for us to act out, I demonstrated, I did many more things.
> 
> But the fact was (and I had the strong feeling this was always true but wished it wasn't) he could not "get" or understand or execute what I was asking him to do. And no more talking would have changed this. So the full truth was always "once I completely admit how this is never going to work for me, it's over".
> 
> It really took a long time for me to admit that to myself, but now I wish I had much sooner because I always suspected it.


Oh. You are talking technique type stuff. Man, that is even more basic. I'm sorry.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I have a lot of friends who use DH and I as their unofficial therapists. What can I say.
> 
> Re: "I get that it is easier for it to always be the man's fault,"
> 
> I get it that it is easier for you to maintain your blind spots around the handful of chips on your shoulder, but it does not change what I have said. Which has nothing to do with fault. But COULD have something to do with solutions. Here's hoping.


OMG I have a serious girl crush!!! :x


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I don't understand the drive to be right and make your wife wrong. This just makes no sense for at leas two reasons.

First, I chose my wife. May as well say "look ad me... I make bad choices!"

Second, and more importantly in strengthening the state of the marriage and the bonds that keep it together, both partners need to feel safe and, as had been noted multiple times on this thread, confident. If I attack my wife, she is not safe; we all know this. But a little more subtle, and no less important, is that if I make her wrong, that tears down her confidence and I will be *sabotaging her ability to provide the results I supposedly desire. *


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> OMG I have a serious girl crush!!! :x


I am free this weekend. Wanna get it on?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> I don't understand the drive to be right and make your wife wrong. This just makes no sense for at leas two reasons.
> 
> First, I chose my wife. May as well say "look ad me... I make bad choices!"
> 
> Second, and more importantly in strengthening the state of the marriage and the bonds that keep it together, both partners need to feel safe and, as had been noted multiple times on this thread, confident. If I attack my wife, she is not safe; we all know this. But a little more subtle, and no less important, is that if I make her wrong, that tears down her confidence and I will be *sabotaging her ability to provide the results I supposedly desire. *


I never looked at it that way. But it makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> I really think we have to be careful depending on this statement being a 100% accurate description of the truth.
> 
> Anyone familiar with HD/LD situations knows that the LD partner doesn't necessarily keep the most accurate counts.
> 
> ...


I wish you understood something about the two threads.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Not in the case of my husband and I. The fear was entirely that his fragile ego would yield a backlash. When he was finally able to hear that I did not want to be responsible for his ego in that way, and that I wanted to be able to discuss things HONESTLY, then progress could be made. I don't understand why men who feel sexuality NEEDS to be on the menu don't make that clear on the up front without the dancing around.


I've been here for a long time and usually have a pretty good idea of the history of most of the long time posters.

My recollection is that, a long time ago, your marriage was somewhat (mostly?) sexless (or at least your HB wasn't happy with the frequency).

As you recall it now, it seems as if the lack of sex was primarily your husband's fault. He took rejection badly. He wouldn't take advice about how to make sex for you better. It sounds like you rejected him because the sex wasn't good for you. He finally was willing to listen to your suggestions to make sex better for you and stopped being bothered if you rejected sex or not and everything was wonderful. Basically, that you didn't change; he did.

My earlier understanding was that you had quite a few FOO issues that gave you negative impressions of sex, you thought he just wanted to use you for sex, he made it clear that he had no intention of staying in a sexless marriage and that you subsequently took a more active role in working with your HB to improve your (and his) sex life. Also, he did a good job of working on the problem from his end as well.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> I wish you understood something about the two threads.


Well, that's helpful.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I was about to ask if it was related to sex after the sentence above. Look at you reading my mind. I have never, personally, seen a fragile egoed female translate into sexual withholding (to use the popular vernacular though I HATE the word withholding).
> 
> 
> I am not clear on what you mean? A former partner of mine had WICKED performance anxiety. A turn down was a HUGE blow. And not loving what he was doing was a HUGE problem. It was seriously problematic (in and out of the bedroom) becuase he would rather perceive himself to be attractive and everything rather than BE. Is this related to what you mean?
> ...


Ok.

It seems from a couple of your posts as well as others that a lot of men are destroyed if they get turned down for sex by their SO or if they find out that their partner isn't always satisfied in bed.

I'm just a little weirded out by the one sidedness of that POV.

I know that sometimes Mrs. Conan hasn't been dtf and I didn't take it as an ego blow because I have turned her down just as much if not more when I wasn't in the mood. I also know there are times she doesn't get off, rare, but it does happen to me as well and I don't take it as an ego attack ever.

I view sex as teamwork and I expect my partner to perform for me just as much as I do for her.

It seems the "fragile male ego" is dependent on believing his performance is what is being judged in the sex act and him being turned down for sex as well.

Mrs. Conan isn't afraid to not climax with me because she knows I don't ever take it personally and she will probably have her head blown off next time.

It just seems that it all has to be about the man's performance and the woman's response to his performance for the "fragile male ego" thing to even function.

You have good communication with your husband and Mrs. Conan and I do too so we overcome difficulties but I have never viewed sex as so one sided with the male's performance and the female's response to his performance being how the sex is judged.

I have expected a lot from my partners and most have been more than happy to show their stuff.

My sex life has never been about my performance and her response to me alone.

It has been mutual with expectations and effort.

I have been let down in the sack but never thought it was all on her.

I don't know why a lot of men feel this way and I'm wondering how many women do as well?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> Ok.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


QFT.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> I've been here for a long time and usually have a pretty good idea of the history of most of the long time posters.
> 
> My recollection is that, a long time ago, your marriage was somewhat (mostly?) sexless (or at least your HB wasn't happy with the frequency).


Yes. A VERY long time ago. Early in our marriage. 



> As you recall it now, it seems as if the lack of sex was primarily your husband's fault.


No. Not only was it not primarily his "fault", I never cared about "fault". Never have, never will.



> He took rejection badly. He wouldn't take advice about how to make sex for you better. It sounds like you rejected him because the sex wasn't good for you.


Sentence 1: Yes,
Sentences 2 and 3: No. I rejected him more often than he liked (which would have been never) because I felt like since putting the ring on my finger, he was complacent. Job done. He showed up in the monkey suit, now it is game on whenever he felt like it. It had nothing AT ALL to do with the sex not being good. It was always good when our feelings were aligned. It is still always good. Things outside the bedroom were not going well as we BOTH learned to navigate marriage. 

To sum up: He had not lived on his own ever. As a result, he had no idea what went into a household. I had a pretty weird vision of what "marriage" was and tried to fit him into it rather than appreciating him. We had quite a lot of conflict at that time from household chores, to free time to play, to, as you know, sex. We both had a LOT of responsibility in all of those areas. He thought that sex was outside of the context of ANYTHING else and I SHOULD be on board with it regardless.



> He finally was willing to listen to your suggestions to make sex better for you and stopped being bothered if you rejected sex or not and everything was wonderful. Basically, that you didn't change; he did.


No. He finally heard that I needed to feel safe to turn him down without it killing his ego. And in so hearing, we continued the convo around sexuality and how to leave both our egos at the door. His hearing was a beginning of a conversation, not the end of the problem. But the openness that followed had no discernable things about it that I can recall except that it was a HUGE weight off my shoulders not to have to carry his ego on them any longer.



> My earlier understanding was that you had quite a few FOO issues that gave you negative impressions of sex, you thought he just wanted to use you for sex, he made it clear that he had no intention of staying in a sexless marriage and that you subsequently took a more active role in working with your HB to improve your (and his) sex life. Also, he did a good job of working on the problem from his end as well.


I don't know what an FOO is. He definitely DID make it clear that he had no intention of staying in a sexless marriage. That was part of the eyes wide open conversations. (And I WISHHHHHHH so many of the men who have suffered sexlessly for years had done this at the beginning!!) He also said he never ever ever wanted me to feel pushed, pressured or having to have sex for the sake of his ego again. That we could figure out what awesome sex looked like TOGETHER.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

FOO is family of origin.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> My sex life has never been about my performance and her response to me alone.


Like duh? Right? 




> It has been mutual with expectations and effort.
> 
> I have been let down in the sack but never thought it was all on her.
> 
> I don't know why a lot of men feel this way and I'm wondering how many women do as well?


I have no idea.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Well it looks obvious to us on the outside. What the insanity looks like is both just do it AND but no I really love you and want you to be really into in AND demonstrate YOUR desire to ME... It comes off as pretty baffling sometimes.


"Just do it" can sound (and be) pretty bad if sex is an actively awful experience for the one "just doing it".

However, I've read in many places that there's "Spontaneous Desire" (where one is just spontaneously horny and wants sex) and "Responsive Desire" (where one doesn't actually get aroused until actions meant to cause arousal have already begun).

Estimates are that 75% of men have Spontaneous Desire and 75% or women have "Responsive Desire".

If a woman has Responsive Desire and refuses to have sex unless she's actively aroused, there's not going to be much sex happening. On the other hand, if the woman is willing to give her partner an opportunity to arouse her, she'll probably have a great experience. So, in this case, "Just try to do it" is probably the best advice.

For a woman for whom sex is not an awful experience, "Just Do It", may be appropriate.

From someone who's far from a religious fundamentalist:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/samantha-rodman-phd/women-should-have-sex-whe_b_5686315.html

No one should ever be required to have sex and saying "No" is always available and should be used freely.

But, if the rule is going to be "Always say No unless you really, really feel in the mood to do it" and if one feels that they can always follow this rule and expect to remain in a sexual relationship, I think that's problematic.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> "Just do it" can sound (and be) pretty bad if sex is an actively awful experience for the one "just doing it".
> 
> However, I've read in many places that there's "Spontaneous Desire" (where one is just spontaneously horny and wants sex) and "Responsive Desire" (where one doesn't actually get aroused until actions meant to cause arousal have already begun).
> 
> ...



This is all assuming that the reticence to sex is bad sex. Which very often it is not.

I will say that, for us, I used a fake it till I could make it approach, but that approach was within the conversations of improving our sex life for both of us, not what seems to be being asked for sometimes here which is just do it when I want anywya cuz sex is a part of marriage don't ya know.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> Mrs. Conan isn't afraid to not climax with me because she knows I don't ever take it personally and she will probably have her head blown off next time.


This was a big factor in sex life going off the rails for a bit. She had always orgasmed very easily from PiV and we'd simul-cum most of the time. At some point (right around menopause) she lost the ability to O from PiV, no problem I have talented digits and tongue. 

The problem was she wouldn't always want me to even to try to give her an O. I guess I took it personally. I do recall it was really confusing, I mean I get it she may not cum every time, but at least give me a chance try.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



CharlieParker said:


> This was a big factor in sex life going off the rails for a bit. She had always orgasmed very easily from PiV and we'd simul-cum most of the time. At some point (right around menopause) she lost the ability to O from PiV, no problem I have talented digits and tongue.
> 
> The problem was she wouldn't always want me to even to try to give her an O. I guess I took it personally. I do recall it was really confusing, I mean I get it she may not cum every time, but at least give me a chance try.


We had that convo a couple times. What is the point of giving you a chance to try if SHE doesn't want it?


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> We had that convo a couple times. What is the point of giving you a chance to try if SHE doesn't want it?


Yes, I get that, now, but it took a while.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> He definitely DID make it clear that he had no intention of staying in a sexless marriage. That was part of the eyes wide open conversations. (*And I WISHHHHHHH so many of the men who have suffered sexlessly for years had done this at the beginning!!*) He also said he never ever ever wanted me to feel pushed, pressured or having to have sex for the sake of his ego again. That we could figure out what awesome sex looked like TOGETHER.


I try not to pry and bring up things said long ago that people might not want brought up again.

I just followed up on this because it seems like you were saying that you didn't change, he did and that his biggest change was accepting rejection and advice without his fragile ego getting crushed. 

So, do you still say "No" as often as you did way back when (and he just deals with it better)? If not, why?

I would have sworn that you'd used the term FOO yourself (I was unfamiliar with it until I came here). 

Yes. The most important thing a man (or woman) can do in a sexless marriage situation is say "I have no intention of staying in a sexless marriage" and offer their assistance in helping to figure out a solution. But, one has to MEAN it and too many people are afraid to put the relationship at risk. People with lots of options have an easier time doing this than those with fewer options as the result may be (or seem to be) that they end up with no partnet at all.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> I would have sworn that you'd used the term FOO yourself (I was unfamiliar with it until I came here).


Could we say that those who battle against their childhood are..

...FOO Fighters?:grin2:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> I try not to pry and bring up things said long ago that people might not want brought up again.


If you are worried about me, don't be. 



> I just followed up on this because it seems like you were saying that you didn't change, he did and that his biggest change was accepting rejection and advice without his fragile ego getting crushed.


I think the most effective thing that either of us did, or really the one thing that could not have been skipped, to solve the problem of inadequate sex was to own his own ego. 



> So, do you still say "No" as often as you did way back when (and he just deals with it better)? If not, why?


Oh geez. It's been over 20 years. Going back to then. One of the reasons for saying no was resentment and hurt that *I* felt. When he began to understand and we agreed to work on things, I started trying to fake it till I could make it. That involved not saying no. We were reading Passionate Marriage at the time. There is this one section that I can remember 20 years later of 2 couples who tried an exercise. One woman was like ha ha this is fun/funny. One was like this is stupid. That illustrated how not to be an uptight jerk (second woman) well to me. So even if I felt awkward AF during some of the exercises in that or whatever else we were reading, I put my best fact forward. BECAUSE I WAS SAFE TO DO SO WITH HIM because he was not going to give me **** or feel sorry for himself if I said no I did not like/want something ... 

Fast forward a few months and the awkward reset was achieved and bing bang boom. The him just getting ok with no and him not having a sexualy satisfying marriage was simply never on the table. Ever.




> I would have sworn that you'd used the term FOO yourself (I was unfamiliar with it until I came here).


Dude. I am old enough that I can use a term AND forget that it existed! Yah sexuality was this bug ugly awfulness to my Mom. I try not to be like my Mom. But I also had no education or decent role models, so had to figure things out for myself.



> Yes. The most important thing a man (or woman) can do in a sexless marriage situation is say "I have no intention of staying in a sexless marriage" and offer their assistance in helping to figure out a solution. But, one has to MEAN it and too many people are afraid to put the relationship at risk. People with lots of options have an easier time doing this than those with fewer options as the result may be (or seem to be) that they end up with no partnet at all.


Ayuh. But also one's assistance in helping figure out a solution can't be limited to ... so just STFU and screw me.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> We had that convo a couple times. What is the point of giving you a chance to try if SHE doesn't want it?


You want to give your wife pleasure because you love your wife. There is joy in that. Surely you understand the pleasure of giving someone else pleasure right? Not every guy is all about getting off. 

Plus depending on the person lots of people don't try because they are just defeatist.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> You want to give your wife pleasure because you love your wife. There is joy in that. Surely you understand the pleasure of giving someone else pleasure right? Not every guy is all about getting off.


I find a great deal of joy giving pleasure from the point of view of the person receiving the pleasure. "Giving pleasure" to someone who does not want it is selfish.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> You want to give your wife pleasure because you love your wife. There is joy in that. Surely you understand the pleasure of giving someone else pleasure right? Not every guy is all about getting off.
> 
> Plus depending on the person lots of people don't try because they are just defeatist.


Ah....but IS that the motive.

If the motive is truly to give pleasure to one's spouse, then they will defer to the SPOUSE to decide what is pleasurable. If a man INSISTS one trying "to give pleasure because I love you" even if the wife doesn't want to....then his motive is probably NOT "to give my wife pleasure because I love her."

It is probably - it boosts my ego when I make her come.

When someone says "But I WANT to do thi for you, why won't you let me????" It is pretty clear that they are not, in fact, doing in FOR ME.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I find a great deal of joy giving pleasure from the point of view of the person receiving the pleasure. "Giving pleasure" to someone who does not want it is selfish.


And remaining in a relationship with someone with whom you do not wish to share pleasure is ........?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> And remaining in a relationship with someone with whom you do not wish to share pleasure is ........?


False equivalency. The woman may indeed want to receive pleasure....but HER definition of pleasure. It isn't that hard.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> And remaining in a relationship with someone with whom you do not wish to share pleasure is ........?


Did you not see the post to which I replied? The poster wanted to give his wife an O _when she did not want that_.


----------



## GoldenR (Jan 6, 2019)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I probably would've divorced my XWW over the no sex thing if I hadn't divorced her for cheating. But that's why I wasnt getting sex, bc she didn't want to cheat on her OM of the day. 

My real wife... been together now 14 years. She's been thru menopause. And our sex life is better than ever. She ALWAYS wants me. Doesn't matter if I've showered her with attention, or veged out in front of the tv all day, she constantly initiates and never says no. 

But maybe that's bc I do normally show a lot of affection towards her? So if there's an "off" day, it just doesn't really matter? 

Idk....


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



GoldenR said:


> I probably would've divorced my XWW over the no sex thing if I hadn't divorced her for cheating. But that's why I wasnt getting sex, bc she didn't want to cheat on her OM of the day.
> 
> My real wife... been together now 14 years. She's been thru menopause. And our sex life is better than ever. She ALWAYS wants me. Doesn't matter if I've showered her with attention, or veged out in front of the tv all day, she constantly imitates and never says no.
> 
> ...


Probably so. It's the overall pattern. My husband is amazing, so if he has a grouchy or broody day, it doesn't change anything because his NORMAL pattern is wonderful.

This is probably why a crappy husband who has a pattern of being selfish and neglectful isn't going to get a changed wife just because he was nice for 3 days either.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> Ah....but IS that the motive.
> 
> If the motive is truly to give pleasure to one's spouse, then they will defer to the SPOUSE to decide what is pleasurable. If a man INSISTS one trying "to give pleasure because I love you" even if the wife doesn't want to....then his motive is probably NOT "to give my wife pleasure because I love her."
> 
> ...


Why do you ask someone to taste something when they have no interest? Is it ego or do you want them to experience the pleasure that you feel from eating it?

Why do you ask them to go somewhere with you when they say they have no interest? Is it for your ego or because you want them to experience the excitement that you have from being at this place?

Listen to music, watch a movie, art or jump from a plane. Whatever it is. 

There is so much baggage when it comes to sex that I think the natural tendency is to see anything different thinking around it to be contentious. I think this thread and the one posted about kind of shows that. Actually you could say that about marriage in general. I don't want to discount the fact that many times people have good reason for that. 

I DO think though that whatever it is if you want to have a good marriage both parties have to get to a place that they trust that if your spouse challenges you on something that the reasoning is not purely selfish.

Could it be because of ego, sure. But it could just as easily be because losing the ability to orgasm seems like a terrible loss for your love one, and you may just really want to help them fix it if you can. Just like any other debilitating aspect of age. 

My response to this situation might just be. Please don't give up so easily, lets try to work together to fix it first.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> Why do you ask someone to taste something when they have no interest?


That's weird. You don't. Do you?



> Is it ego or do you want them to experience the pleasure that you feel from eating it?
> 
> Why do you ask them to go somewhere with you when they say they have no interest? Is it for your ego or because you want them to experience the excitement that you have from being at this place?
> 
> ...


Fix what? On any given occasion, is the fact that she does not want an O once in a while something to FIX because it is broken?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Actually, this used to happen to me. I have some texture issues, and when someone INSISTS I try X food because they want me to enjoy the amazing taste, it DOES feel pushy, and it annoys me. I have inner ear issues and balance issues at times since childhood. So when my friends kept bugging me to ride a roller coaster because it was SO FUN and eventually basically carried me onto one.....well, I threw up on the ride and was terrified.

So no.....a man who insists on "trying" to give a woman an O after she has said she wasn't interested is NOT thinking about her.

Sorry


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I find a great deal of joy giving pleasure from the point of view of the person receiving the pleasure. "Giving pleasure" to someone who does not want it is selfish.


I find it interesting that you don't feel any responsibility in receiving pleasure. Again I just don't see sex that way. If it's only about my pleasure then it's not collaborative in my mind.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> That's weird. You don't. Do you?
> 
> 
> 
> Fix what? On any given occasion, is the fact that she does not want an O once in a while something to FIX because it is broken?


The original post said she lost the ability to O because of menopause.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> I find it interesting that you don't feel any* responsibility in receiving pleasure.* Again I just don't see sex that way. If it's only about my pleasure then it's not collaborative in my mind.


This is one of the weirdest phrases I have ever read....

And men wonder why women fake it???

So I am now responsible for wanting everything you want to give because I am responsible for feeling the pleasure YOU want me to feel?

I'm sorry, that's just.....odd


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> The original post said she lost the ability to O because of menopause.


She lost the ability to O through PIV.

"The problem was she wouldn't always want me to even to try to give her an O." <shrug>


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> This is one of the weirdest phrases I have ever read....
> 
> And men wonder why women fake it???
> 
> ...


Less odd than you think, I think. My former partner was baffled that I did not "get" that. That is was a huge boost for HIM. Like everything was not already all about him.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> This is one of the weirdest phrases I have ever read....
> 
> And men wonder why women fake it???
> 
> ...


How so sex is any different then any other activity. Part of the pleasure of doing anything with your spouse is to see their enjoyment of that activity with you. Why do I take my wife out on a date? Because I want to give her pleasure, I want to celebrate her and wine and dine her. If she told me over and over we can go wherever you want, to me that is essentially saying, I don't care about this. Again that's not collaborative. I don't see any difference. Part of the fun of sex is giving pleasure is at least for me. Refusing to see any responsibility in that says to me we just would never be on the same page. 

I mean no wonder there is so much passionless sex out there. Franky if the sex is consistently passionless I don't want it. The joy in it for me is as much giving it as receiving it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> How so sex is any different then any other activity. Part of the pleasure of doing anything with your spouse is to see their enjoyment of that activity with you. Why do I take my wife out on a date? Because I want to give her pleasure, I want to celebrate her and wine and dine her. If she told me over and over we can go wherever you want, to me that is essentially saying, I don't care about this. Again that's not collaborative. I don't see any difference. Part of the fun of sex is giving pleasure is at least for me. Refusing to see any responsibility in that says to me we just would never be on the same page.
> 
> I mean no wonder there is so much passionless sex out there. Franky if the sex is consistently passionless I don't want it. The joy in it for me is as much giving it as receiving it.


Nobody said anything about consistently passionless. At all. No one said anything about over and over. Except you. Poster said sometimes.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> False equivalency. The woman may indeed want to receive pleasure....but HER definition of pleasure. It isn't that hard.


That makes perfect sense, but that's not what I was referring to. The post I was responding to made no such caveats. It just said she didn't want pleasure, it made no distinctions.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> So I am now responsible for wanting everything you want to give because I am responsible for feeling the pleasure YOU want me to feel?


I had to learn that it's her orgasm and that she's ultimately responsible for it. But I'm always ready to help.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> How so sex is any different then any other activity. Part of the pleasure of doing anything with your spouse is to see their enjoyment of that activity with you. Why do I take my wife out on a date? Because I want to give her pleasure, I want to celebrate her and wine and dine her. If she told me over and over we can go wherever you want, to me that is essentially saying, I don't care about this. Again that's not collaborative. I don't see any difference. Part of the fun of sex is giving pleasure is at least for me. Refusing to see any responsibility in that says to me we just would never be on the same page.
> 
> I mean no wonder there is so much passionless sex out there. Franky if the sex is consistently passionless I don't want it. The joy in it for me is as much giving it as receiving it.


So....if you wanted to take your wife out on a date and she said she didn't want to go, would you beg, pout, and drag her there because she is responsible for receiving pleasure?

Do you really not get this?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> Did you not see the post to which I replied? The poster wanted to give his wife an O _when she did not want that_.


Got it.
I was just broadening the aperture a bit to a more common issue that baffles a lot of folks. I'll leave be now and let y'all stay squarely on the current situation.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> I don't know why a lot of men feel this way and I'm wondering how many women do as well?


NB responded to you that she doesn't know, and I'm saying I don't know either. I never felt responsible and never heard of any other woman feeling responsible. It's just my guess, but to try to explain why, I would say it has to do with the (subconscious for women perhaps) understanding that sex is something done to us, and men also see it as something they do to women. Because of the nature of anatomies and because of the mechanics of the act itself, women are on the receiving end of intercourse, and, therefore, our perceptions and opinions are based on what is done TO us and can't be flipped the other way. So, we wouldn't very well say or think "I wonder if he enjoyed me doing that to him" because it isn't something we consider ourselves doing to him. It's something he does to us so based on how well he does it, opinions are formed based on how he made us feel. And that becomes especially more noticeable if a prior or subsequent lover made was able to make us feel better. We participate, of course, and do whatever we can to enhance the pleasure for him and for ourselves, but it isn't something we view as a success or fail proposition.

Acts other than intercourse might cause women some performance anxiety. Of course "performance" is very different for us since we don't transform any part of our anatomy in order to execute an act. I know I really sucked (pun intended) at going down the first few times until a guy told me what he liked and didn't like. I became quite good at it (if I say so myself lol) and able to judge my performance based on deliberate methods designed to produce a response. I was extremely anxious my first and second time doing anal play and hoped like hell he would like it. I was so scared I didn't go through with it the first time. I just went in and came right back out. Boy was he mad at me! I was just as scared the second time but went through with it, and we were both glad I did. A piece of cake since then.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I have never thought of sex as something being done TO me (except when I was raped). But the fact that certain women do feel this way certainly would explain their view.

It's interesting how our minds work, and it is also interesting that we tend to believe that most other people's minds work the ways ours does.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> "Giving pleasure" to someone who does not want it is selfish.



It’s either an oxymoron or a criminal offence. Depends on your perspective.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> And remaining in a relationship with someone with whom you do not wish to share pleasure is ........?



Probably just moronic. Without the oxy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> I have never thought of sex as something being done TO me (except when I was raped). But the fact that certain women do feel this way certainly would explain their view.
> 
> It's interesting how our minds work, and it is also interesting that we tend to believe that most other people's minds work the ways ours does.


I think the same way. I've never thought of sex as something that was done to me. My thought has always been that it's a mutual thing with both people enjoying it and seeking to please each other.

The idea that it is something done "to me" is sort of scary to me.


----------



## GoldenR (Jan 6, 2019)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Sex is only something that "is done to me" when I'm by myself. 

/cue rim shot/


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> So, do you still say "No" as often as you did way back when (and he just deals with it better)? If not, why?





NobodySpecial said:


> Oh geez. It's been over 20 years. Going back to then. One of the reasons for saying no was resentment and hurt that *I* felt.


Yeah, that was kind of a rhetorical questions as I was certain you rarely do.

So, while getting all pouty about getting rejected looks bad on a man, it mostly happens only after he's been rejected a lot. Not that that's any excuse for bad behavior.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I am free this weekend. Wanna get it on?


I'm on my way, girl. But don't be trying to kiss me like you did last time. lol



sokillme said:


> I find it interesting that you don't feel any responsibility in receiving pleasure. Again I just don't see sex that way. If it's only about my pleasure then it's not collaborative in my mind.





sokillme said:


> How so sex is any different then any other activity. Part of the pleasure of doing anything with your spouse is to see their enjoyment of that activity with you. Why do I take my wife out on a date? Because I want to give her pleasure, I want to celebrate her and wine and dine her. If she told me over and over we can go wherever you want, to me that is essentially saying, I don't care about this. Again that's not collaborative. I don't see any difference. Part of the fun of sex is giving pleasure is at least for me. Refusing to see any responsibility in that says to me we just would never be on the same page.
> 
> I mean no wonder there is so much passionless sex out there. Franky if the sex is consistently passionless I don't want it. The joy in it for me is as much giving it as receiving it.


Sokillme, I think I understand what you mean by "responsibility in receiving pleasure." I'm going to use husband to wife in my example, but it applies both ways.

So, you're saying a wife should allow her husband the pleasure that he derives from giving his wife pleasure, right? And that it's her responsibility to allow him that pleasure.

If I understood you correctly, okay I get it and don't disagree.

But it becomes a contrary tale when considering the example story that you based your theory on. His wife's chemistry had changed with menopause, and she became disinterested in having orgasms. I'm subsitituting you and your wife - In such a case, your insistence in giving her pleasure was not only something she didn't want, which should have been enough for you to accept, but the effort and/or the orgasm itself might cause her a measure of discomfort. And it's HER body. You're not in someone else's skin and have no idea what she feels or what she thinks of the feeling, but being her own body she doesn't have to allow you to try it in order to know she doesn't want it. I have found myself having to tell people that I don't have to allow them to try something I said can't be done just to prove to them that I was right. The attempt itself may be detrimental in some way. So, whatever you thought you would do to give her pleasure was not going to be pleasurable for her at all, and that's why she wouldn't let you do it. 

Is she still responsible to receive pleasure from you? Is it still her responsibility to allow you the pleasure of giving her what you think would pleasurable?

Conversely, insisting on doing something your wife doesn't want you to do is, in itself, selfish because if you want to pleasure her quite that badly, then the desire and the attempt are for you and your own sense of accomplishment regarding your sexual prowess. While the thought and desire to please your wife would be generous and selfless under any other circumstances (which I'm sure she appreciates you being such a generous husband and lover, she's a lucky woman), insisting on allowing you to try to do something she neither wants you to try nor wants you to accomplish is very selfish of you. This would be a better time to do something different that would bring her joy, like the restaurant of her choice, if her happiness is what you want to achieve. But if specifically an orgasm is your aim, she doesn't want that and refusing to accept her wish or preference is selfish and very inconsiderate. 



personofinterest said:


> I have never thought of sex as something being done TO me (except when I was raped). But the fact that certain women do feel this way certainly would explain their view.
> 
> It's interesting how our minds work, and it is also interesting that we tend to believe that most other people's minds work the ways ours does.


I stated I was guessing, so it didn't mean every woman's mind works the same as mine. And you took it further than it needed to go since I was expecting readers would be able to think in abstract terms. A woman is penetrated, so by virtue of the mechanics of how that occurs, i.e. intercourse in this instance, is done to the person who receives the inserted penis (or object). Moreover, a person could do kegels all day, but I would find it especially hard to get any pleasure from it, and certainly not an orgasm. A penis or object does something TO the vagina that creates the pleasure. Maybe you don't need that since you can't see that's how sex works, but it doesn't matter how you've ever thought of sex. It's just the way it is, and, therefore very likely produces a subconscious component.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> So....if you wanted to take your wife out on a date and she said she didn't want to go, would you beg, pout, and drag her there because she is responsible for receiving pleasure?
> 
> Do you really not get this?


I was talking specifically about that one post not the subject of this thread. And of course I wouldn't beg and pout, do I sound like the type of person who begs. I would probably whine to my friends if I was being honest but I wouldn't whine to her. It would be discussed for sure. 

I don't believe marriage is you and I, I believe it is us. 

There was a time I didn't think like this but then I was also fat, my wife told me it was no big deal and she still found me attractive. Then I read on here and other boards and I realized I was only fat because I was selfish and lazy, I had a responsibility to my wife to be the best me I could be. So I lost over 40 pounds started lifting weights and apologized to my wife. I see my entire marriage like that now. I married my wife because I love her and want to give to myself to her, but the gift has to be worthy. 

I see sex the same way. Sex should be collaborative and giving, part of giving is receiving as well. Now in the posters case maybe it just is a health issue and the O is gone forever, but I think it wrong to not at least try. 

I see it similar to someone I know whose husband got tonsil cancer. He the cancer is gone now but he lost some of his taste from radiation treatments. Thing is part of the dynamic of their relationship was her cooking for him. Both of them got pleasure from that. Now I would understand if he is sad for a while and doesn't want to eat anything, but I think eventually he has a responsibility to at least try to eat stuff and just see if there is anything that she can make that brings some of that joy back for them. I suspect you might say how dare his wife want to cook for him. That is only for her own ego, but I would say that cooking was something that they bonded over and it's unfair even if he is depressed for him to just give up and not try. He has a responsibility to her NOT to give up. 

Thankfully he is slowly getting better but the nice thing is she changed up his diet to cook things that he still has a taste for. How wonderfully bonding that is for both of them. She gets to show her love for him by changing, and he gets to receive that love and still enjoy eating. Now did she do that for her ego, or because she wanted to help him, probably both. This is how good marriage work. And hell yeah ego is involved. 

I suspect you have never met a man like me. I must to be a damn good husband to my wife, in fact my ego demands it. 

Finally at least 50% of everything we do is for our own ego it's silly to think anything different. A truly selfless act is very rare.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

On the topic of trying to force one to receive pleasure they didn't want.....

My ex hb had ED for a long time. I was ok working with him, but it got to the point where he could only get it up if I accommodated a specific kink he had. I didn't mind for a long time, but it got to the point where that's all we could do (his particular porn tastes he thought I didn't know about didn't help).

He got to the point where he couldn't get it up at all but chose to ignore it instead of visiting a doctor.

In the mean time he'd try to pressure me into receiving lots of oral I really didn't want because the passion and connection was gone. 

He demanded to know why I "wouldn't let him make me happy". Except it had little to do with making me happy and everything to do with his ego, and my resentment grew because he refused to deal with the ED. If he'd made an honest effort and it didn't work that would be different.... he refused to try because it made him uncomfortable.

That was more important than connecting with his wife sexually. 

Of course anyone who knows my story knows there were other issues, but that was a big one. 

An example of one who's trying to push something their partner doesn't want to soothe their own ego.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*

If it’s selfish to want to please someone then it should be selfless to make someone miserable...

I think most of you know exactly what is meant by ‘wanting to give someone pleasure’ but for some reason you are getting hung up on words or trying to make a fairly banal concept into something ‘sophisticated’...

Wanting to give someone pleasure implies that the other person actually wants to receive it. Otherwise it’s not giving someone pleasure, it’s making someone miserable. 

And generally speaking, in normal language, if there is a constant refusal of ‘accepting pleasures’ or ‘acts of kindness’ or any such things that are generally considered by normal human beings as ‘selfless’ and generally nice (from a loved one), then one is just being a spoilt brat. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I find a great deal of joy giving pleasure from the point of view of the person receiving the pleasure. "Giving pleasure" to someone who does not want it is selfish.


I agree.

But men are constantly told that if their partner doesn't have an orgasm, the man is a selfish lover.

And, if *I* don't have an orgasm, my wife is very unhappy and feels like she did something wrong.

I'll assure her that I enjoyed it greatly and that it wasn't her, but she doesn't believe me for a second.

I'd love to be able to fake an orgasm from time to time. 

As long as no one tells my wife that she's a lousy lover for not giving me an orgasm or that she should have known I was faking it and tried harder.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> I think the same way. I've never thought of sex as something that was done to me. My thought has always been that it's a mutual thing with both people enjoying it and seeking to please each other.
> 
> The idea that it is something done "to me" is sort of scary to me.


I didn't see your post when I responded to personofinterest, so I already address it.

But to add, come to think of it, oral sex is something that is done to a person as well. Or is that something that is also mutual just for the sake of disagreeing?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> But to add, come to think of it, oral sex is something that is done to a person as well. Or is that something that is also mutual just for the sake of disagreeing?



It depends. Wife sometimes gets more pleasure out of giving oral, than me receiving it. 
Or her giving me oral, could be something that is done TO her, if you see what i mean (if she is in submission mode)...

These are all just words...and people will agree/disagree depending what those words will mean to them.

Either way, if she really wants to ‘give’, I will never deny her that pleasure and I will of course also enjoy it. I would also NEVER feel resentment if she couldn’t for whatever reason receive PIV and wanted to find other ways to please me and/or herself. To actually feel resentment when someone wants or is keen to give you pleasure...something else must be severely damaged.

Anyway, the basic concept is that any sexual activity is supposed to be a mutual thing, whether it is done TO someone or WITH someone. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

@StarFires

Thanks for taking a swat at it.

You are probably close with your ideas. It is definitely learned behavior.

My first time was with a very wild gal that was definitely doing a lot more to me than vice versa.

I have had a lot of similar experiences where women were doing their thing with me in the sack.

I never felt the need to take the lead all the time or even be the pursuer. 

I learned pretty early that women are hunters and enjoy the chase.

I do think you are correct in the why many developed the one sided concept about sex. That combined with a lot of fraudulent teaching regarding male vs. female sexuality.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

"The most important thing a man (or woman) can do in a sexless marriage situation is say "I have no intention of staying in a sexless marriage" and offer their assistance in helping to figure out a solution. But, one has to MEAN it and too many people are afraid to put the relationship at risk."

It doesn't work like that.

Marriages don't go cold overnight. They go cold over a long long time where 3x a week becomes 2x, 1x, 0.5x, etc. And that, regardless of cause, takes enough time and seems plausible enough to keep the marriage running until kids are, say, in middle school. By then, given the implications of divorce, things get even more entertaining.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



inmyprime said:


> If it’s selfish to want to please someone then it should be selfless to make someone miserable...


YOu often post about things that no one has said. It is selfish to think you are pleasing someone _who does not want it_.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I think there are many varieties of sexual enjoyment. Something can be enjoyed for the direct physical pleasure. It can be enjoyed because of the appreciation of the reaction of one's partner. It can be physically enjoyable but not specifically sexually stimulating for one partner. It can be enjoyed because of the (naughty) control the other person's reaction. 

The same action may cause different reactions in different people. 




StarFires said:


> I didn't see your post when I responded to personofinterest, so I already address it.
> 
> But to add, come to think of it, oral sex is something that is done to a person as well. Or is that something that is also mutual just for the sake of disagreeing?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*



NobodySpecial said:


> YOu often post about things that no one has said. It is selfish to think you are pleasing someone _who does not want it_.



Then you are not PLEASING them, by definition, since they aren’t pleased with it.

What am I posting that no one says?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sports Fan (Aug 21, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I was flabbergasted at all the Femanazi's response. Whether male or female a partner who continually denies sex to their partner is wrong. In this case she was complaining of his need for sex once a week. She is a stay at home mum. He works, and obviously pays most the bills, food, clothing, and keeps a roof over their head, and she wants to complain about her husbands need for sex once a week. Perhaps next time he should tell her his not in the mood to pay the bills see how that goes down.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Sports Fan said:


> I was flabbergasted at all the Femanazi's response. Whether male or female a partner who continually denies sex to their partner is wrong. In this case she was complaining of his need for sex once a week. She is a stay at home mum. He works, and obviously pays most the bills, food, clothing, and keeps a roof over their head, and she wants to complain about her husbands need for sex once a week. Perhaps next time he should tell her his not in the mood to pay the bills see how that goes down.


And soooo we're back to marriage being a legal state of prostitution, are we?

I've learned from this thread not to expect it, but it would have been nice if you understood what her complaint was or even tried to understand it.


----------



## Sports Fan (Aug 21, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I undertstand her complaint. Its the responses and advice that are given to her that shows a complete lack of understanding for her husbands feelings. I agree he probably is not expressing his needs in the most healthiest of ways but the advice she is being given is just terrible. Not one person on that forum advised her to sit down and try find some middle ground.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> @StarFires
> 
> Thanks for taking a swat at it.
> 
> ...


My goodness, you had a zinger of a first time lol. I rather wish I could forget mine.

I'd say the women in those experiences are least likely to espouse the one-sided nature of responsibility, at least not once they became more assertive after their first time or first few times. I'd even go further to submit that to be the reason they became more assertive (or aggressive) as a learned behavior so as not to relinquish the responsibility of their own pleasure after learning they could take care of it better themselves. For most others though, aside from those who prefer disagreeing with me for the sake of it, it's hard to do that. A lot of women depend on the man - what he does and that he does it to her satisfaction - for her orgasms, not to mention how often women say "give/gave me an orgasm(s)" or guys say "give/gave her an orgasm(s)." What is there to deny or dispute about that? 

Additionally, I hate being on top. It's always given me discomfort, or pain if he is larger than average like my husband. My most orgasmic positions are those where I have the least amount of control, so I can't very well say "I gave myself an orgasm by willing it to happen." It's something that is done to me for me, so obviously if nothing is done (no penetration) for it to happen, then he didn't do it to me. Even if there is penetration and I don't cum, he's still doing it TO me.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> I didn't see your post when I responded to personofinterest, so I already address it.
> 
> But to add, come to think of it, oral sex is something that is done to a person as well. Or is that something that is also mutual just for the sake of disagreeing?


Oral sex is mutual. I get a lot of sexual pleasure out of giving a bj. For me it's a huge turn on. So both of us are getting pleasure out of it. The more I see him enjoying all kinds of sexual play, the more pleasure I get. It's mutual. At least it is for me. I certainly seems to be for every lover I've ever had.

I have had lovers tell me the exact same thing... that doing sexual things for me was a huge turn on for them.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Buddy400 said:


> Buddy400 said:
> 
> 
> > So, do you still say "No" as often as you did way back when (and he just deals with it better)? If not, why?
> ...


 Yup, pretty much.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"Maybe you don't need that since you can't see that's how sex works, but it doesn't matter how you've ever thought of sex. It's just the way it is, and, therefore very likely produces a subconscious component."

Are you always this arrogant? I know exactly how sex works. I've been doing it for quite some time period yes, my husband penetrates me. That does not mean he is doing something to me. Maybe he is doing something for me or something in me… but because I am help the, I prefer to think of it as he is doing something with me and I am doing something with him. Your view of sex and men comes through loud and clear.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Sports Fan said:


> I was flabbergasted at all the Femanazi's response. Whether male or female a partner who continually denies sex to their partner is wrong. In this case she was complaining of his need for sex once a week. She is a stay at home mum. He works, and obviously pays most the bills, food, clothing, and keeps a roof over their head, and she wants to complain about her husbands need for sex once a week. Perhaps next time he should tell her his not in the mood to pay the bills see how that goes down.


 On behalf of the ever growing number of women who are just flat embarrassed by radical feminism, I profoundly apologize.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



EleGirl said:


> Oral sex is mutual. I get a lot of sexual pleasure out of giving a bj. For me it's a huge turn on. So both of us are getting pleasure out of it. The more I see him enjoying all kinds of sexual play, the more pleasure I get. It's mutual. At least it is for me. I certainly seems to be for every lover I've ever had.
> 
> I have had lovers tell me the exact same thing... that doing sexual things for me was a huge turn on for them.


I don't understand having to break this down in such practical terms to an otherwise intelligent woman. But, I guess it's necessary since I have no idea, again in this thread, what you are on about at me. Nothing I stated was about pleasure or mutual pleasure. Nothing I stated was based on or had anything to do with pleasure or mutual pleasure. My reason for stating it had nothing to do with pleasure or mutual pleasure. It was about mechanics and anatomies. It was technical. And it was true. There is no way possible you could give a person pleasure by way of a bj if you didn't give them a bj. To give someone a bj, you have to do it. Therefore, you are doing something TO them in order to do it for them. So unless you can will that man those bj's that you and he enjoy so much, or blink them into existence, then they are something you do to him.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I didn't read the entire thread, only the last page, initial post and first dozen or so of the replies to the link. So, if this repeats anything that has already been said, I apologize. But.
From the first post on the link I could see where she had a point. But then I continued to read and saw where she asked him to get the twins ready and he responded in the same manner as what she had already told him herself. 
So if I get this correctly it appears that her needs (to get the twins ready) was important, but his needs (to have sex) weren't. I noticed that he still did something that he may have been completely not into, but he did it. She on the other hand went onto the internet to complain about his needs and his response to her, probably spending more time composing, reading responses and replying to them than the time it might have taken her to do the very same thing (fulfill a need) she asked of him (which he did, even if grudgingly).
I am not condoning bad behavior on anyone's part, but it seems as though they BOTH needed to learn to communicate with each better.
Honestly, when I think back to my own past, I feel the primary cause of the dissolution of my own long term marriage was the complete and total break down or more probable complete lack of any real communications between my ex and I. Thinking back over my marriage and since my divorce, I have probably had more deeper and more meaningful conversations and discussions about expectations, desires, wants and needs, and general discussion about what life means to me and to them selves with many of the women I have been with. Neither of us had the ability to communicate with each other. So any disagreement became and argument instead of a discussion. I think we both had the expectation of how we felt life should be, but never discussed them with each other.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> And soooo we're back to marriage being a legal state of prostitution, are we?
> 
> I've learned from this thread not to expect it, but it would have been nice if you understood what her complaint was or even tried to understand it.


I agree with this. Not sure how this would work anyway. I see paying the bills like taking care of the kids (especially when you are a stay at home mom). Neither one entitles you to avoid or demand sex. 

I am going to answer you other post to me in more detail but these posts are just hard for me to relate to. I have never seen sex as a requirement in my marriage but I also can't imagine how anyone could see it as a chore either unless there is something else very wrong. 

I think if you have these problems assuming both parties are reasonable then you have a problem of intimacy and empathy in your marriage all together. But I must concede that it can also be a problem of selfishness and that can be the one asking and the one not wanting it.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

StarFires said:


> EleGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Oral sex is mutual. I get a lot of sexual pleasure out of giving a bj. For me it's a huge turn on. So both of us are getting pleasure out of it. The more I see him enjoying all kinds of sexual play, the more pleasure I get. It's mutual. At least it is for me. I certainly seems to be for every lover I've ever had.
> ...


 Perhaps what you need to understand is that just because you perceive something to be the way it is…. that doesn't necessarily mean that is universally the way it is. Your condescending lament of having to break it down to such intelligent women is actually nauseatingly.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Ynot said:


> I didn't read the entire thread, only the last page, initial post and first dozen or so of the replies to the link. So, if this repeats anything that has already been said, I apologize. But.
> From the first post on the link I could see where she had a point. But then I continued to read and saw where she asked him to get the twins ready and he responded in the same manner as what she had already told him herself.
> So if I get this correctly it appears that her needs (to get the twins ready) was important, but his needs (to have sex) weren't. I noticed that he still did something that he may have been completely not into, but he did it. She on the other hand went onto the internet to complain about his needs and his response to her, probably spending more time composing, reading responses and replying to them than the time it might have taken her to do the very same thing (fulfill a need) she asked of him (which he did, even if grudgingly).
> I am not condoning bad behavior on anyone's part, but it seems as though they BOTH needed to learn to communicate with each better.
> Honestly, when I think back to my own past, I feel the primary cause of the dissolution of my own long term marriage was the complete and total break down or more probable complete lack of any real communications between my ex and I. Thinking back over my marriage and since my divorce, I have probably had more deeper and more meaningful conversations and discussions about expectations, desires, wants and needs, and general discussion about what life means to me and to them selves with many of the women I have been with. Neither of us had the ability to communicate with each other. So any disagreement became and argument instead of a discussion. I think we both had the expectation of how we felt life should be, but never discussed them with each other.


Oh my goodness, Ynot, this was so disappointing. And I was secretly thinking of you as my buddy lol. 
The thread had gotten sooo far away from the subject and then......BAM!


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



lifeistooshort said:


> On the topic of trying to force one to receive pleasure they didn't want.....
> 
> My ex hb had ED for a long time. I was ok working with him, but it got to the point where he could only get it up if I accommodated a specific kink he had. I didn't mind for a long time, but it got to the point where that's all we could do (his particular porn tastes he thought I didn't know about didn't help).
> 
> ...


Certainly you are not comparing my comment to this situation?

I can't see what you wrote and my examples are remotely similar.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> Perhaps what you need to understand is that just because you perceive something to be the way it is…. that doesn't necessarily mean that is universally the way it is. Your condescending lament of having to break it down to such intelligent women is actually nauseatingly.


Okay, whatever you say. Are you done now?


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> Oh my goodness, Ynot, this was so disappointing. And I was secretly thinking of you as my buddy lol.
> The thread had gotten sooo far away from the subject and then......BAM!


You seem very judgmental and argumentative lately, what is really bothering you? This particular subject seems to have tripped something in you that you feel the need to have at least four on going "discussions" going (all with long time members with hundreds of posts all of whom are respected on TAM including an Administrator) and have just attempted to start another me. Something about this subject has particularly set you off.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



sokillme said:


> Certainly you are not comparing my comment to this situation?
> 
> I can't see what you wrote and my examples are remotely similar.


Nope... my comment had nothing to do with yours. 

It's a stand alone comment on the topic in general. 

I'm not even sure what your comment was...but I'm going to read it now.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Ynot said:


> You seem very judgmental and argumentative lately, what is really bothering you? This particular subject seems to have tripped something in you that you feel the need to have at least four on going "discussions" going (all with long time members with hundreds of posts all of whom are respected on TAM including an Administrator) and have just attempted to start another me. Something about this subject has particularly set you off.


I began one with you, the others I responded to in the same way they addressed me. So, how is it I'm the only one that got set off? I expect I have a target on my back now, but I don't have to be addressed however they please and then get blamed for doing the same.

Sorry I was rather cryptic in my response to you. You probably didn't even know what I was referring to.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> I began one with you, the others I responded to in the same way they addressed me. So, how is it I'm the only one that got set off? I expect I have a target on my back now, but I don't have to be addressed however they please and then get blamed for doing the same.
> 
> Sorry I was rather cryptic in my response to you. You probably didn't even know what I was referring to.


I have reacted similarly myself. But usually there is a reason why I feel so passionately about my own POV.
I usually end up getting banned for a while. I just had #6 a little while ago.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I was nonplussed by the responses from the Mumsnet crowd. Apparently the husband is a sex crazed beast for wanting sex once a week. The fiend!

I was also sad that Mumsnet members who put up a different point of view were told to **** off and that their moderators obviously didn't give a damn.

Not good.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> *I don't understand having to break this down in such practical terms to an otherwise intelligent woman.* But, I guess it's necessary since I have no idea, again in this thread, what you are on about at me. Nothing I stated was about pleasure or mutual pleasure. Nothing I stated was based on or had anything to do with pleasure or mutual pleasure. My reason for stating it had nothing to do with pleasure or mutual pleasure. It was about mechanics and anatomies. It was technical. And it was true. There is no way possible you could give a person pleasure by way of a bj if you didn't give them a bj. To give someone a bj, you have to do it. Therefore, you are doing something TO them in order to do it for them. So unless you can will that man those bj's that you and he enjoy so much, or blink them into existence, then they are something you do to him.


You might like to dial back on the rudeness and the condescending tone.

It does not help your argument.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



personofinterest said:


> So....if you wanted to take your wife out on a date and she said she didn't want to go, would you beg, pout, and drag her there because she is responsible for receiving pleasure?
> 
> Do you really not get this?


This is pretty much 80% of the times I take my wife out. She says how much she hates going out, how mean I am to make her go out, etc.

But! When we get to our destination suddenly she is having the time of her life and she is glad she decided to go.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MattMatt said:


> This is pretty much 80% of the times I take my wife out. She says how much she hates going out, how mean I am to make her go out, etc.
> 
> But! When we get to our destination suddenly she is having the time of her life and she is glad she decided to go.


She also isn't the average bear 🐻 BooBoo!


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MattMatt said:


> You might like to dial back on the rudeness and the condescending tone.
> 
> It does not help your argument.





Ynot said:


> I have reacted similarly myself. But usually there is a reason why I feel so passionately about my own POV.
> I usually end up getting banned for a while. I just had #6 a little while ago.


This is something I was wondering about. One person suggests I dial back my tone, and another tells me I could get banned. Is it okay that those two ladies - one of whom is a moderator and the other is following me around the board on other thread(s) insulting me and my comments - spoke to me however they pleased? Do they get advised similarly?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> This is something I was wondering about. One person suggests I dial back my tone, and another tells me I could get banned. Is it okay that those two ladies - one of whom is a moderator and the other is following me around the board on other thread(s) insulting me and my comments - spoke to me however they pleased? Do they get advised similarly?


Matt was specifically calling you out about your comment to Ele which did come off as pretty sharp considering you both have valid points of view, namely, your own.

Ynot occasionally gets a little too worked up and gets banned. Different scenario from yours.


----------



## StarFires (Feb 27, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> Matt was specifically calling you out about your comment to Ele which did come off as pretty sharp considering you both have valid points of view, namely, your own.
> 
> Ynot occasionally gets a little too worked up and gets banned. Different scenario from yours.


Thanks, ConanHub. I appreciate it.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

* Starfire
Is she still responsible to receive pleasure from you? Is it still her responsibility to allow you the pleasure of giving her what you think would pleasurable?*

A reward or something pleasurable is in the eye-mind of the person receiving said reward or pleasure. This works the same way with dogs or people. With dogs some food treats do not, are not a reward to the dog. Pleasure-reward is up to the individual's determination.


OTH, most women not wanting an orgasm usually leads to fewer and fewer sexual encounters.

My W said an O wasn't her thing but a good foot or back rub was a good reward. Fast forward 10 years and she will take the foot-back rub but has no interest in anything sexual.


Moral (un scientific) no joy with sexual activities often leads to no sexual activities for both partners. Maybe if the woman (or in some cased the man) got a buzz from sexual activities the sex and intimacy play would not have ended.

I wpuldn't believe any one that offered to work for free (no reward for them) to continue to work at that task very long. OK, allow that person to work for free but pay out a generous bonus on a very regular basis.

One mans way of thinking based on my experiences.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> This is something I was wondering about. One person suggests I dial back my tone, and another tells me I could get banned. Is it okay that those two ladies - one of whom is a moderator and the other is following me around the board on other thread(s) insulting me and my comments - spoke to me however they pleased? Do they get advised similarly?


You were not insulted. However you have insulted other members.

And you have done this before and, as CH pointed out, you have been banned previously for such behaviour.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> That is such a blank statement. It's just blank and empty, devoid of anything purposeful and derived from nothing but your overly sensitive imagination.


Please, just refrain from attacking me in other threads and this one. This is all I'm asking. It gets boring after a while.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Please, just refrain from attacking me in other threads and this one. This is all I'm asking. It gets boring after a while.


You get used to it. TAM isn't quite as self evident as Mumsnet in this aspect but it is what it is.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



john117 said:


> You get used to it. TAM isn't quite as self evident as Mumsnet in this aspect but it is what it is.


First time it happens to me here...


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> This is something I was wondering about. One person suggests I dial back my tone, and another tells me I could get banned. Is it okay that those two ladies - one of whom is a moderator and the other is following me around the board on other thread(s) insulting me and my comments - spoke to me however they pleased? Do they get advised similarly?


No. They did not.

Why? Because they did nothing to be advised about.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



StarFires said:


> This is something I was wondering about. One person suggests I dial back my tone, and another tells me I could get banned. Is it okay that those two ladies - one of whom is a moderator and the other is following me around the board on other thread(s) insulting me and my comments - spoke to me however they pleased? Do they get advised similarly?


It has happened to me five or six times. Although once or twice I think I got banned for merely questioning the heavy handedness of the mods. All I was asking was what instilled such passion in you in this thread.
The rest of the times usually involved some ankle biter yapping incessantly about something it turns out they didn't have a clue about.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MattMatt said:


> You were not insulted. However you have insulted other members.
> 
> And you have done this before and, as CH pointed out, you have been banned previously for such behaviour.


??? Stop confusing the barbarian. It is too easy after all!:wink2:


----------



## VladDracul (Jun 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

In addition to participating in discussion to simply enjoy the discussion, I see myself as a devils advocate to provok.....engage the participates. However, I know there are multiple answers to every question, problem, purpose, or objective. More important, folk see the world through different eyes and have different perspective. So my recommendation is ask yourself if the substance of your response is supporting your position with your perception of the facts or an exercise in ridicule or criticism against them. 
But hey, if you've just got to call somebody a dumb azz, at least tell them why.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I hope we can agree to be embarrassed by radical feminism and by radical men's rights advocates. Extremists of all flavors are a problem. Most of these movements have some very valid ideas, then a radical branch takes over and exaggerates these to a ridiculous extent. 

Topics like the one in this thread are actually really complex. There are a lot of different situations and its not easy to come up with global solutions. 

I'd say that in a good marriage, both parties should be happy to have regular sex with their partners, and that extends to having sex even if they aren't particularly in the mood at the moment. At he same time both should understand that there are times when people actively don't feel like sex, and that sometimes being turned down is fine. 

In real marriages though, there can be all sorts of valid reasons someone doesn't want sex. Sometimes it is due to things that their partner could change, sometimes not. 










personofinterest said:


> On behalf of the ever growing number of women who are just flat embarrassed by radical feminism, I profoundly apologize.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I think it helps to separate the concepts of "physical pleasure" from enjoyment, they really are different. 

Its possible to stimulate someone in a physically pleasurable way, even have them orgasm, but not to have enjoyed the experience. I feel like sometimes this confused people: "He / she got off so it must have been good". 

Separately when kinks become fetishes (something that is necessary), its generally a problem unless both happen to be into the same fetish. If someone has a fetish, its a difficult situation, because even if the physical issue of ED is solved, they may not enjoy the activity. I don't know a good solution to fetishes. 







lifeistooshort said:


> On the topic of trying to force one to receive pleasure they didn't want.....
> 
> My ex hb had ED for a long time. I was ok working with him, but it got to the point where he could only get it up if I accommodated a specific kink he had. I didn't mind for a long time, but it got to the point where that's all we could do (his particular porn tastes he thought I didn't know about didn't help).
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



uhtred said:


> I hope we can agree to be embarrassed by radical feminism and by radical men's rights advocates.


I feel like shouting TOXIC MEN every time I see someone post about feminazis. Who defines what is extreme? But then bashing feminists, even married ones, is de rigueur here.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*&quot;Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex&quot;...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I feel like shouting TOXIC MEN every time I see someone post about feminazis. Who defines what is extreme? But then bashing feminists, even married ones, is de rigueur here.



‘Even’?  What’s that supposed to mean.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhtred
"I hope we can agree to be embarrassed by radical feminism and by radical men's rights advocates." 


NobodySpecial said:


> I feel like shouting TOXIC MEN every time I see someone post about feminazis. Who defines what is extreme? But then bashing feminists, even married ones, is de rigueur here.


I guess not


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Ynot said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Uhtred
> "I hope we can agree to be embarrassed by radical feminism and by radical men's rights advocates."
> 
> ...


Haaaa. I'm an idiot. But we knew that.


----------



## StillSearching (Feb 8, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



NobodySpecial said:


> I feel like shouting TOXIC MEN every time I see someone post about feminazis. Who defines what is extreme? But then bashing feminists, even married ones, is de rigueur here.


Exactly that's the real problem with all this...It comes down to reading minds. And that's Horse****!
It's like who defines hate speech?
Apparently anyone offended.
But if you THINK, you run the risk to offend.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



john117 said:


> "The most important thing a man (or woman) can do in a sexless marriage situation is say "I have no intention of staying in a sexless marriage" and offer their assistance in helping to figure out a solution. But, one has to MEAN it and too many people are afraid to put the relationship at risk."
> 
> It doesn't work like that.
> 
> Marriages don't go cold overnight. They go cold over a long long time where 3x a week becomes 2x, 1x, 0.5x, etc. And that, regardless of cause, takes enough time and seems plausible enough to keep the marriage running until kids are, say, in middle school. By then, given the implications of divorce, things get even more entertaining.


I agree that there's no one moment when it is "the time". 

However, yes, even when your wife has just had a kid and the frequency drops off suddenly, it's time to mention that you're not willing to live in a sexless marriage forever. Of course, at the time, one should be understanding and be prepared for a possible drought of some length. But, it wouldn't hurt to mention that, though it's understandable at the time, something will need to be done eventually.

And, yes, divorce with kids sucks. So, the right choice might be to ride it out for a while and make plans for when the kids get older (or just accept it and stop complaining).


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MattMatt said:


> I was nonplussed by the responses from the Mumsnet crowd. Apparently the husband is a sex crazed beast for wanting sex once a week. The fiend!
> 
> I was also sad that Mumsnet members who put up a different point of view were told to **** off and that their moderators obviously didn't give a damn.
> 
> Not good.


Having read similar posts (and responses) on other sites (including Jezebel of all places) it was unusual that on Mumsnet it was so one-sided.

Usually, there's a significant minority of women pointing out that sex is an important element of a relationship and problems shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



MattMatt said:


> This is pretty much 80% of the times I take my wife out. She says how much she hates going out, how mean I am to make her go out, etc.
> 
> But! When we get to our destination suddenly she is having the time of her life and she is glad she decided to go.


There IS something to this.

Men pointing out that their wife usually rejects their sexual initiations but then says "that was great, we should do this more often" are fairly common. Michele Weiner-Davis talks about this phenomena.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> Usually, there's a significant minority of women pointing out that sex is an important element of a relationship and problems shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.



Those are probably dudes posing as women trying to lull us into a false sense of hope. Who needs to dismiss it out of hand when you have...hands? (joking).



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Buddy400 said:


> There IS something to this.
> 
> Men pointing out that their wife usually rejects their sexual initiations but then says "that was great, we should do this more often" are fairly common. Michele Weiner-Davis talks about this phenomena.


To quote myself....

This happening fits in pretty neatly with the idea that a majority of women have Responsive Desire.

PS, as it should be evident, I believe that knowing about Responsive Desire in women (particularly in LTRs) is extremely important when dealing with a lack of sex in otherwise healthy relationships (and the woman is the LD partner).


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Da womens godda giv da bootee anee tim da mens wuant sum humpin!

Fud gud....fyr baaaaddd!!!!


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

^^^ Do I win a prize for understanding that? :smile2:


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I speak Appalachian . It's obvious what he meant


----------



## Pac-Man (Jun 5, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Faithful Wife said:


> I knew it was never going to change. So I also knew that telling him and causing a pity party wasn't going to help either of us. I did love him, and wished it was all much different, but it wasn't.





john117 said:


> "The most important thing a man (or woman) can do in a sexless marriage situation is say "I have no intention of staying in a sexless marriage" and offer their assistance in helping to figure out a solution. But, one has to MEAN it and too many people are afraid to put the relationship at risk."
> 
> It doesn't work like that.
> 
> Marriages don't go cold overnight. They go cold over a long long time where 3x a week becomes 2x, 1x, 0.5x, etc. And that, regardless of cause, takes enough time and seems plausible enough to keep the marriage running until kids are, say, in middle school. By then, given the implications of divorce, things get even more entertaining.


It's especially hard to honestly say what you really think when your staying for the kids. 

My relationship isn't 100 % bad. There's some good aspects of it. Currently, we almost never fight in front of the kids. The kids don't know what happens (or do not happens...) in the bed. To disclose that I am staying for the kids could make the atmosphere in the house unbearable. I guess it would precipitate the breakup. So, if I think that's it's better for the kids to keep the family intact for a few years, then I have to keep the dissatisfaction disclosure in non-lethal doses.

I am still working at building the best relationship I can. I try to make lemonade out of the lemons. But it's hard to get changes when your not ready to draw a line in the sand. As the kids become progressively older, I will become progressively be less hesitant to rock the boat. At some point it will sink. I guess that what is sometime perceived as midlife crisis or grey divorce have sometime deep roots.


----------



## Vinnydee (Jan 4, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Take sex out of marriage and you are left with two people sharing paying the bills. Love without sex is not the kind of love that should lead to marriage. Frequency needs to be negotiated so that both spouses are happy. I am married 46 years and we have sex once a week, but we are in our late 60’s. We had sex once or twice a day in our younger days. The problem I have seen among family and friends in unhappy marriages or divorced, is that they expected their partner to change after they got married. When you marry a person you pretty much get what you see. Someone is not going to turn into an insatiable sex goddess if they were not that before marriage. 

Granted there are women who engage in sex more than they really want to in order to catch themselves a husband or even just to get pregnant. My cousin married women who pretty much stopped sex after she had her baby telling him that she is not that into sex but just wanted a baby. They divorced. There are also those who get bored with sex after a few years of the same thing. That can be fixed among couples still in love. We fixed it and fixed it very well. 

The internet is filled with mostly men complaining that their wives have a lower libido than they do. Not uncommon, especially if the woman has gone through menopause like my wife did. You love each other so you adjust. However had my wife not been very interested in sex during our early years of marriage, we would have probably divorced too because I have a very high sex drive and did not want a friend, I wanted a loving wife and sex is a physical expression of love. When that stops its time to take a look at your marriage.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

vinnydee said:


> take sex out of marriage and you are left with two people sharing paying the bills. Love without sex is not the kind of love that should lead to marriage.


this


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



> Love without sex is not the kind of love that should lead to marriage


if both husband and wife agree, I don't see the problem...


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

In Absentia said:


> > Love without sex is not the kind of love that should lead to marriage
> 
> 
> if both husband and wife agree, I don't see the problem...


 I think the problem is that most of the time the husband and wife do not agree. Either one of the spouses was unaware this was even going to happen, or 1 of the spouses just decides to white knuckle contentment with sexual starvation.


----------



## red oak (Oct 26, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Marriage may not entitle one to an endless stream of sex: However there is a an often unstated understanding spouses are to look out/after one another and care about the needs of each other. Whether anyone wants to acknowledge the fact or not, for men and women sex is a need, required for optimal long term physical health; emotional well being, and a feeling of acceptance.

How it applies to this thread one can figure out.


----------



## Talker67 (Apr 7, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

a person who thinks they can shut off their married partner from sex...is simply not going to remain married for very long.
Yes marriage IS a guarantee for continued sex...throughout its duration


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Talker67 said:


> a person who thinks they can shut off their married partner from sex...is simply not going to remain married for very long.
> Yes marriage IS a guarantee for continued sex...throughout its duration


I think a better way to word that is if someone unilaterally shuts off the sex in a marriage, they waive their right to their partner's sexual exclusivity and cannot assume that their spouse should remain married to them. 

I do not think anyone should be sex slave due to marriage and I do not believe that being married indentures one to sexual servitude. But once that sexual aspect is severed, one must accept the fact that their spouse might seek it elsewhere or terminate the marriage altogether. 

One has the right to end the sexual relationship if they no longer want to have sex with their spouse. 

But once they do, they no longer have the right to demand their partner's sexual exclusivity and neither do they have the right to expect the marriage to continue.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> But once they do, they no longer have the right to demand their partner's sexual exclusivity and neither do they have the right to expect the marriage to continue.



Some partners do, unfortunately... mine doesn't (openly), but I always get the feeling that she thinks I'm being incredibly selfish by throwing everything away for a little bit of sex... she doesn't get my need for sexual connection. At all. And men think they are some kind of caveman for wanting it...


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> Some partners do, unfortunately... mine doesn't (openly), but I always get the feeling that she thinks I'm being incredibly selfish by throwing everything away for a little bit of sex... she doesn't get my need for sexual connection. At all. And men think they are some kind of caveman for wanting it...


She's the one being incredibly selfish by making you suffer while she retains her current lifestyle and uses you for all the perks and benefits of marriage. 

Let's remember she has given you permission to seek sex elsewhere and has acknowledged that this gives you just cause in divorcing her. She has knowingly acknowledged this and has consciously chosen to terminate the marital sex life with full knowledge of the potential ramifications and consequences.

Your guilt and your assumption of her feelings is *YOUR* cross to bear. That is your self-imposed burden. 

Chuck that cross and walk away and you'll be amazed at the freedom and how much better your life will be without being weighed down by it. 

You're not caveman, you are a human being and human beings have needs for physical touch and affection and sexuality. It's normal and healthy. 

She is the one that is not normal or healthy. 

If she doesn't want to have sex with you, that is her prerogative and she should not be placed into human bondage and sexual slavery and servitude just because she signed a marriage license 30some years ago. She has the right to not have sex with you and to not be burdened or pressured or threatened to have sex with you. 

But the cost to her of that in terminating the sexual component of the marriage is that she no longer has any claim to your sexual exclusivity (which she has acknowledged and given you express permission to seek elsewhere) and she no longer has the assumption of 'till-death-do-you-part' marriage (which she has also acknowledged)

So this lays squarely on YOU. She has knowingly and consensually waived her rights to sexual exclusivity and continued marriage. There for your situation lays squarely on YOUR shoulders and is your conscious choice to remain celibate.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



ConanHub said:


> Da womens godda giv da bootee anee tim da mens wuant sum humpin!
> 
> Fud gud....fyr baaaaddd!!!!


As this thread's resurrected, I was going to like this, then I saw I already did!

Liked again!!

😊😊😊


----------



## Talker67 (Apr 7, 2016)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> I think a better way to word that is if someone unilaterally shuts off the sex in a marriage, they waive their right to their partner's sexual exclusivity and cannot assume that their spouse should remain married to them.
> 
> I do not think anyone should be sex slave due to marriage and I do not believe that being married indentures one to sexual servitude. But once that sexual aspect is severed, one must accept the fact that their spouse might seek it elsewhere or terminate the marriage altogether.


well said


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I'm aware of this... yes, it is my cross to bear. But when your wife tells you after many years that you have put her off sex completely with your behaviour, it's a bitter pill to swallow and it will never leave me. I know she has to blame someone (and not herself), but it's a cruel thing to say, especially when we had so many special moments together, including some of our sex life. Ah well... 






oldshirt said:


> She's the one being incredibly selfish by making you suffer while she retains her current lifestyle and uses you for all the perks and benefits of marriage.
> 
> Let's remember she has given you permission to seek sex elsewhere and has acknowledged that this gives you just cause in divorcing her. She has knowingly acknowledged this and has consciously chosen to terminate the marital sex life with full knowledge of the potential ramifications and consequences.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

I just enjoyed my steady stream of sex.

😍😍😍


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*

Now I'm finding it hard to head on out to the gym, honestly.


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

IA,

It still reads like you are stuck in inertia BECAUSE your wife has treated you badly and unfairly (and is totally gaslighting you!!). See the BUT in your response to oldshirt? 

You've been wronged. It sucks. But that's no excuse to be a wishy washy Eeyore "I was unfairly wronged, so I'll do nothing about it".



In Absentia said:


> I'm aware of this... yes, it is my cross to bear. But when your wife tells you after many years that you have put her off sex completely with your behaviour, it's a bitter pill to swallow and it will never leave me. I know she has to blame someone (and not herself), but it's a cruel thing to say, especially when we had so many special moments together, including some of our sex life. Ah well...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



Livvie said:


> IA,
> 
> It still reads like you are stuck in inertia BECAUSE your wife has treated you badly and unfairly (and is totally gaslighting you!!). See the BUT in your response to oldshirt?
> 
> You've been wronged. It sucks. But that's no excuse to be a wishy washy Eeyore "I was unfairly wronged, so I'll do nothing about it".



Ouch... you are right. And thank you for reminding me that I need to grow a pair of big balls. I'm serious...


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



In Absentia said:


> I'm aware of this... yes, it is my cross to bear. But when your wife tells you after many years that you have put her off sex completely with your behaviour, it's a bitter pill to swallow and it will never leave me. I know she has to blame someone (and not herself), but it's a cruel thing to say, especially when we had so many special moments together, including some of our sex life. Ah well...


You're wrong in your line of thinking here, but just for the sake of argument let's say that something you said or did is the cause of her loss of love and desire for you - that still does not condemn you to a live of loneliness and celibacy. Whatever you supposedly said or did does not mean you must serve out a life sentence of celibacy without possibility of parole. That's just dumb. 

Loss of desire is not a punishment (at least it's not unless you allow it to be) it's just part of life. People fall out of love and people opt out of relationships and people break up all the time. It may be sad, disruptive and painful for them at the time, but no one is condemned to a lifetime of indentured celibacy because the pissed of their spouse a decade before. Everyone has free agency to carry on with their own lives. It's just weak and stupid to indenture yourself to a life of loneliness and lovelessness because you supposedly said some things that your wife didn't like 10 years ago. 

We've *ALL*said and done things our spouse didn't like a various points of marriage. 

Marriage is not a form of punishment or a prison. One does not get condemned to marriage for wrongdoings. 

If people don't like it, they are free to leave it.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

*Re: "Marriage does not entitle any person to a steady stream of willing sex"...*



oldshirt said:


> You're wrong in your line of thinking here, but just for the sake of argument let's say that something you said or did is the cause of her loss of love and desire for you - that still does not condemn you to a live of loneliness and celibacy. Whatever you supposedly said or did does not mean you must serve out a life sentence of celibacy without possibility of parole. That's just dumb.
> 
> Loss of desire is not a punishment (at least it's not unless you allow it to be) it's just part of life. People fall out of love and people opt out of relationships and people break up all the time. It may be sad, disruptive and painful for them at the time, but no one is condemned to a lifetime of indentured celibacy because the pissed of their spouse a decade before. Everyone has free agency to carry on with their own lives. It's just weak and stupid to indenture yourself to a life of loneliness and lovelessness because you supposedly said some things that your wife didn't like 10 years ago.
> 
> ...



yes, you are right. I have to snap out of it, stop grieving and get on with my life. I have to rationalise what she is actually doing to me. And that she is free to do it and that I have a choice in all of this. I must say it's been better recently. I think I'm coming to term with it.


----------

