When A Woman Isn’t The Mood…Tough!

vanya
wrote on December 26 2008 @ 12:58 pm: [report]

There is a difference between not being in the mood once in a blue moon, and never being in the mood.  The later of which indicates there are deeper underlying issues, I think.

Culled from chatter with my girl friends, many of the women I know who are “never in the mood” really just feel ignored by their husbands and find it hard to rev up for sex with a “stranger” at the end of the day. Or they feel too resentful.  Typical scenario is that their husbands work long hours, come home and sit down in front of XBox or the internet all night long with barely a word of hello, leaving them to eat dinner alone, feed the kids alone and get said kids bathed & into bed alone, and then suddenly at bedtime want sex and finally turn their attention towards their wives with a grope or a grab, sometimes while still playing Xbox. In that scenario, male or female, who would ever be in the mood?

Quite honestly, it makes me extremely grateful for the husband I have…

jazzyj
wrote on December 26 2008 @ 02:31 pm: [report]

I was offended by almost every line of the Town Hall article. It honestly made me desire the company of men less than I did before reading it.

The only redeeming quality of it was that in its brutality, it proved honest. At least we got to see a clear picture of the mind of a man who believes those with a penis are better than those without.

Unless said penis doesn’t make much money, give the penis what the penis desires. And how lovely the idea that men are in some sort of bondage without random sex partners and this is a difference between the sexes?

I think men underestimate how much women may need and desire variety as well. I can understand why this man has to emotionally blackmail for sex. He reminded me of the stupid boys in high school.

jollygolly024
wrote on December 26 2008 @ 06:10 pm: [report]

Ahhh, this totally misses the boat.  I think the point of the article was long term, committed relationships.  I think most men understand where women are coming from, but I think women need to understand two things.  One, that is why divorce is high and men cheat with younger and more energetic women.  Two, woman constantly turning a cold shoulder is the reason why prostitution is the oldest profession.  You only live once people, you should have sex everyday and enjoy it!

Lynn
wrote on December 26 2008 @ 08:15 pm: [report]

I agree that there is a big difference between someone not being in the mood every once in a while, and not being in the mood as a regular thing. The latter can seriously take a toll on a relationship. If I get married and my husband decides he only wants sex once a month, you can bet I’ll feel rejected and hurt, not to mention stressed and sexually frustrated. That would definitely take a huge toll on my marriage. I’ve talked with men whose wives don’t ever want to have sex, and they’ve gone months without it and it makes them feel completely like crap, and like they’re living with a roommate, not a wife. I’ve talked to women whose husbands only want to have sex a couple times a year, and they feel the same way.

What was interesting was when I met a woman who was never in the mood. She said that she could be celibate for the rest of her life for all she cared. But her husband still wanted sex, and it caused a lot of strain to their marriage. Finally she started “giving it up” even though she didn’t really want to, and she said the impact on their relationship was immediate and significant.

I think it’s the give-and-take and compromise that any marriage needs to have. If Person A never wants to have sex, and Person B wants to have sex regularly, there’s a middle ground they should try and find. It’s just as unfair to make Person A always have sex as it is to make Person B always go without.

vanya
wrote on December 26 2008 @ 09:12 pm: [report]

Something the article doesn’t touch upon - since it is addressing sex within marriage - is the role postpartum depression has in destroying a woman’s libido. 

PPD is very under-diagnosed in new mothers & mothers of young children, especially those with children close in age. It can linger for years after childbirth, and will worsen with subsequent pregnancies & births, if not treated.

I wouldn’t be surprised if many of the women who seldom desire sex aren’t suffering with untreated postpartum depression.

Those who are being treated for PPD with antidepressants are likely to experience the loss of sexual desire and the sexual dysfunctions (inability to orgasm) that are all-too-common side effects of antidepressants.

Nick at Night
wrote on December 27 2008 @ 11:15 am: [report]

My sex life with my wife became practically non-existent the day we got married.  She is just never in the mood.  I’ve tried talking to her about it but she shrugs and says she doesn’t know why, just insists that it’s not me.  I’m pretty sure she would be content if we never had sex again.  I would be thrilled with any level of compromise.  But with very infrequent exceptions, I’ve basically learned to do without.

Unsympathetic
wrote on December 27 2008 @ 05:15 pm: [report]

At what point is this a discussion?  A relationship without sex is not a relationship.  The frequency of sex is something that should be just as factual as the frequency of doing anything else that is part of living on this planet.

The person with a low libido should step up - and the person who’s asking for it 3 times a day should learn compromise. Anything else demands therapy.  Gender doesn’t matter - you’re in a committed relationship, right?

An emotionally mature guy “looks beyond” this? Really? What kind of fantasy world are you living in?  Perhaps after we’re dead.  We’ve all seen Clerks—it’s hard after death, too.

Misogynist? Nope, nice try at shifting blame, though.  Your attempt to define what makes a man happy simply will never work.  You do not think like a guy.  The only way you will actually be able to know what makes your guy happy will be to ask him.  He will tell you.  Anything else is simply your projection.. and you will not be able to “figure out” what he “actually” wants.. because you are not a guy, and do not think like a guy.

This is just as passive-aggressive as cheating.  If you don’t want to accept the biological fact that a happy man has sex, then don’t date men.  It’s that simple.

clearslate2007
wrote on December 27 2008 @ 10:46 pm: [report]

Here is the reality of most marriages: you will have sex when your wife wants to. End of story. After a year or a few years of initiating sex and getting rejected, you (the man) will simply give up, and wait for her to initiate.

I know what I am talking about. I am a man, and my wife and I have been together for about 13 years. Sex has steadily dropped off in frequency, and by year 4 or 5, I quit initiating, and just took what I can get.

Oh, and when we do have sex - we do the same few things every time. She never wants to try anything new, no matter what I suggest and how I suggest it.

Needless to say, I am resentful, hurt, and bitter. I view a lot of porn on the net, and fantasize about having the time and money to go to hookers. Marital sex sucks. I have talked to my wife about her hang-ups, and she praises me for being a good husband, but our bed is cold.

I would estimate we have sex maybe once a month on average.

nemesis1
wrote on December 28 2008 @ 09:25 am: [report]

My thoughts:

1) Refusal of sex every now and then is normal. But ANY man who stays in a relationship, for any reason, with a woman who refuses sex all the time needs to do a testicle check, because I think he’s ‘missing’ something.

2) For any man out there re: this situation, here’s how to start having a pair of testicles.

“Oh, you don’t feel like having sex again? That’s ok, honey. I don’t feel like paying those bills either this month. In fact, I’m not going to.”

A person (note how I say a ‘person’ and not just a ‘woman’) who constantly refuses sex is not fulflling their marital obligations, and henceforth does not deserve all of the other benefits of marriage. These benefits include having someone else help to pay your bills.

3) All of the psychobabble I see here WILL NOT help anything. The more psychobabble we have, the more the divorce rate climbs. I know that it’s politically incorrect to look at the facts, but look at them we must.
Relationships only work when people do what they’re supposed to do. Everything else is rationalization and BS. If you’re married, you’re supposed to have sex with your spouse. That’s part of the age old requirements of marriage. If we don’t like those age old requirements anymore, we need to start calling marriage something else and set up a separate legal system for it.

BS list:

“Maybe she’s unfullfilled.”

“Maybe she’s depressed.”

“Maybe she feels un-loved.”

“Maybe she’s not appreciated.”

**** What a bunch of crap. GET OVER IT ****

Here’s some advice for you ladies:

Have lots of good sex, and your relationship will be better. Your husbands will love you and do lots of nice things for you. In fact, they will walk through lakes of fire just to bring you a glass of lemonade. Sex is part of the deal, and if you’re not giving it, you’re not living your end of the bargain. END OF STORY.

Keep your man happy, and he’ll keep you happy. Quid pro quo. ANY smart woman will tell you this. And - GASP - you might even enjoy yourselves!!

Barb
wrote on December 28 2008 @ 09:33 am: [report]

This is an interesting subject.  I was married to a man (dated Jekyll and married Hyde-or vice versa) to whom I’d never said “no”.  Imagine my surprise when he announced that we would only have sex when HE wanted it.  I made the mistake of putting my hand on his shoulder one night when I went to bed, so he told me that “aggressive women turned him off.”  You can believe that I never again said “yes” unless I wanted it… and he was absolutely floored the first time I turned him down.  He could not grasp the correlation between his behavior and the change in mine.  Go figure.

smartbombradio@gmail.com
wrote on December 29 2008 @ 01:27 am: [report]

I feel the same way about cleaning the house.  Sure, I could pitch in and it would feel like I want to be a productive member of the team, but honestly I’m just not often in the mood.  I completely agree with the poster, no one in the relationship should ever have to do anything exhausting or time consuming unless they are getting something out of it. 

I’m like “Cleaning, just to lower your stress level and prove I care about you?  Why should I have to exert myself in an act that I don’t even feel like doing when I don’t want to right now.  If you don’t know I love you WITHOUT my doing nice things for you, then maybe you need to get some self esteem Miss Thang!” 

And honestly, if she needs my help that bad and I don’t want to, she needs to just go sit in the clean shower and chill out. 

Furthermore, I applaud her for pointing out that it doesn’t MATTER that men look at the world different from women, what matters is how *I* view the world, and everyone should deal with that or I’ll snap my fingers right in their face.  It doesn’t matter that she just wants to be listened to without interjecting my solutions, why should I have to make any sort of compromise to how I see the world just to make my partner happy?

Remember, a rigid desire to only follow your own self interest is the cornerstone of any empowered relationship.  I think any emotionally mature woman would understand that my love has nothing to do with the miriad of things I refuse to help her with on a daily basis.  If she doesn’t, maybe she’s a cavewoman who should be anihilated for her personal thoughts and ideas.

Bravo Amelia!

Belle
wrote on December 29 2008 @ 07:21 am: [report]

If I don’t want to, I won’t. If he doesn’t, he doesn’t. End of story. Guilting someone in bed is one of the most unhealthy things I can think of in a relationship.

persia
wrote on December 29 2008 @ 05:01 pm: [report]

Marriage is hard. When you have children, it’s especially hard. After having kids, I found myself not wanting to have sex as often, but when my husband approached me about it, I knew I needed to change and start being more available sexually again. After talking with him and realizing how important sex is to men (in general), I’ve become more open to his advances and initiate more often. Now that we are having sex more, we are BOTH happier and it’s really a stress reliever, rather than a burden!

Throne of Cynicism
wrote on December 29 2008 @ 07:19 pm: [report]

As a man, i cringe at this.
As a cynic I laugh. a lot. I vote the writing of this article was directly preceded by a refussal fro the writer’s wife.

Also, nice call Amelia on the line about the writer believing that sex is something women give and men receive. I’ve personally noticed that the religious (or at least those who are very conservative) hold this type of view.

Lynn
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 12:31 pm: [report]

nemesis1 - seriously? All you’re doing there is trying to take the blame off the woman. You say that if she gives it up more, she’ll get more love in return. Why not the other way around? Why shouldn’t the man give his woman some affection to make her want to have sex in the first place? It’s a chicken-or-the-egg thing. But while I think sex is an important part of a relationship, affection is, too. It’s cyclical. And you just can’t say that it’s all the woman’s fault here. Sex, in general, is more emotional for women. So don’t just ignore the emotions because you don’t understand them or don’t want to deal with them. You’ll have a very cold bed.

Lynn
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 12:33 pm: [report]

of course, when I said “take the blame off the woman” I meant “take the blame off the man” - when I’m impassioned I’m less inclined to proofread

nemesis1
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 02:22 pm: [report]

Lynn,

Perhaps you should wait until you’re less impassioned to respond. Nonetheless . . .

1) You assume that sex is more emotional for women than it is for men. This is propaganda, and it is patently false. Just because people say something over and over and turn it into a mantra doesn’t make it true. If women are more emotional than men when it comes to sex or anything else, and if what women want is more emotional involvement, perhaps women should be in relationships with women and disregard men completely. (Since I don’t assume that all women want the same thing or are alike, I do not believe in this statement. I’m just taking your ‘idea’ and drawing it to a conclusion to show how false it is. It’s a strawman argument.)

2) Likewise, why shouldn’t a woman give more affection to a man? And who’s keeping score anyway? Are you saying that women have to be emotionally coaxed or coerced by men into having sex, that women do not have inherent sexual drives of their own? Funny, that’s not the sentiment I’ve gathered from the rest of this site.

3) Re: above: where did I divorce the notion of affection from sex? Are you saying I did so by not mentioning it? Or is it that I am male, and can never have as great a grasp of the ‘emotional’ landscape as women? Since all men are of course emotional retards, I’m guessing, but not assuming, it’s the latter.

4) As far as ‘ignoring emotions,’ I’m hard pressed to see where I did that. In fact, I believe I have a greater grasp of the emotional landscape of relationships than you do. The idea is that NOTHING IN LIFE IS FREE, not even relationships or love. This is an adult reality, and everything else is psychobabble nonsense. The question is, are you willing and happy to ‘pay’ whatever is required, in the way of love, service, and what have you. And by ‘pay’ I mean that it is a two way street. Relationships work when two people are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Sex is a part of that ‘doing,’ as are other things. Again, unless all those vows mean nothing . . .

5) Where did I say it’s all women’s fault? I don’t even think I implied it. I notice that you didn’t quote me or refer to anything specific I said, so I think you’re making a jump.

6) As far as the ‘very cold bed’ remark, that’s just an amateur shaming tactic. Works on boys, not on men. Laughed at and disregarded.

7) Women really don’t like it when men have objections to their ideas about sex or relationships, do they? We’re just supposed to sit there quietly, pay bills, and chime in when it’s time for us to agree, eh? Sorry, it’s a new world out here, and you helped create it.

Lynn
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 04:45 pm: [report]

1) I don’t just regurgitate #&@$% I read everywhere. I have come to this conclusion because I am friends with both men and women, and have talked to both men and women about their feelings about and relationship with sex. If men are really just as emotional and are hiding it, or if women aren’t more emotional but just pretend to be, I can’t help that. But thanks for explaining what a strawman argument is. God knows I didn’t go to school myself!

2) I don’t think sane men OR women sit down with tally sheets and think “well, he gave me three hugs and one emotional conversation today, I guess that merits an entry pass to my vagina” or “she had sex with me last night, so she deserves for me to help her with the kids tonight” And I don’t think anyone should withhold affection just because s/he isn’t getting any. I already said it’s a chicken-or-the-egg thing. But you put the blame on women for not having sex (and therefore not deserving all the other marital benefits) but what I’m saying is that when men don’t give affection, by YOUR logic they shouldn’t receive all other marital benefits (like sex) especially if, for HIS wife, affection is directly related to her mood and sexual desire. So whose responsibility is it to start the wheel in motion? I’m not faulting the man or the woman specifically. I’m just saying, I think it’s wrong of you to be doing so.

3) I didn’t say you think sex and affection aren’t linked. But when you said “Have lots of good sex, and your relationship will be better. Your husbands will love you and do lots of nice things for you.” makes it sound like if you want love, you need to have unwanted sex first. You seem to be implying that sex is the more important part of the equation here - and that she doesn’t deserve love or affection if she doesn’t “give” sex FIRST. Also, don’t put words into my mouth. Never did I say or imply that men are emotional retards. Only that you, specifically, may be in an emotional wheelchair based on what you wrote before.

4) You ignored emotions when you gave the “BS list” and said it was a load of crap. When presented with real emotions a woman might have, you immediately disregard them, as if they cannot be valid simply because you don’t understand why someone would have them.

5) If you didn’t mean to imply it, then maybe I read something into it that wasn’t meant to be there. But I sure don’t think I did, reading over your last comment again.

6) It wasn’t supposed to be a shaming tactic. It wasn’t supposed to guilt you. It was just a conclusion. If you’re lucky enough to have someone who has sex with you even when you ignore her concerns, then congratulations. But I would hold on to her for dear life if you can.

7) That’s not what I said at all. Again, you’re putting words into my mouth. If you read my first comment here, before you had said anything, you’ll see that I thought it is wrong for women to withhold something so important to her man, and that if he was unhappy it was up to BOTH of them to figure out a compromise.

smartbombradio@gmail.com
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 05:16 pm: [report]

tl;dr

nemesis1
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 07:21 pm: [report]

Lynn,

1)You are assuming, based on your own experience and your subjective interpretation of it, that all the men and women you know are representative of the entire planet. That, my friend, is tepid reasoning at best.

And BTW – the flipside of the ‘Women are more emotional than men’ thing is, ‘Women are less logical than men.’ It’s not too pretty when you draw the statement out to its full conclusion, is it? (BTW, I know female scientists and mathmeticians who would disagree with both statements, and rightly so.)

2) It’s not about FAULT. It’s about QUID PRO QUO. You get from this world what you put into it, and relationships are part of this world. If you don’t put anything into a human relationship, you’ll get nothing out of it. I understand you want to accuse me of ‘blaming women’ (probably because I just don’t agree with you), but I am not blaming ‘women.’ I am blaming anyone, men or women, who think they can get something for nothing in their relationships. There is no such thing as ‘something for nothing.’ You get what you give in this life – one way or another.

It’s funny; you think there’s something wrong with a woman giving sex to her man in order to gain affection and love, but you don’t think there’s anything wrong with a man giving affection and love to a woman to get sex. Double standard there?

3) What I am saying is that you SHOULD want to have lots of sex in your relationship! If there is a dearth of sex in your relationship or the sex is unwanted, something is amiss – namely, your relationship!

Here’s how the real world works: I do something for you, you do something for me (or vice versa), and everyone’s happy.  That’s what keeps the wheels turning. There is no blissful state of ‘unconditional love’ where nothing is required except that the other person exist. Sooner or later, we all require things of the other person. Reasonability, compromise, a relatively good nature, and, yes, sex. That’s reality, and it’s the same for men and women.

4) I did not ignore emotions. I called these things RATIONALIZATIONS. There’s a difference. I think that people commonly present rationalizations as ‘emotions’ to excuse themselves for their behavior. This is an easy out, because ‘emotions’ can’t be right or wrong or valid or invalid; they exist in some nether-sphere beyond judgment. This is one of the major fallacies of modern psychology, and it’s so ingrained in us that any reasonable discussion grinds to a halt when the word ‘emotions’ appears. Hence, all this talk of ‘emotions’ without examining their validity or invalidity is not making us any smarter or emotionally aware; it’s making us dumber.

Example: take a male ‘player.’ A real scalawag user and abuser. When questioned about his ceaseless bed-hopping, he might say that he doesn’t want to be in a committed relationship because he’s afraid of ‘abandonment.’ This is a proclamation of an emotional state. While his statement might be true, one of my instincts is to guess that he might be rationalizing his behavior and that he’s just a scumbag. Sounds reasonable enough, right? Regardless of my conclusion, I won’t learn anything more about the human condition if I stop thinking about it or examining the situation because the guy started to talk about how he ‘feels,’ especially when he’s using ‘feeling talk’ as a ruse to avoid examining the moral or intellectual value of his own behavior.

Now imagine the same situaiton with a woman ‘player,’ of which there are many. Same thing applies.

5) Yet another shaming statement. Save it for amateur night. What you said is basically another version of; “If a dork/chauvinist/creep like you is lucky enough to even get laid . . .” All women do this when they run out of ammunition in a debate. It’s the common fall-back, and women rely on the fact that men will do whatever they can to avoid having their sexuality or sexual prowess impugned, even anonymously. It also relies on the male need for female approval, since there is disapproval inherent in the statement. When the male withdraws from the conflict with his tail between his legs, the woman will reinstate her approval. That’s basically how it works. But once a man learns how it works, it’s harder to do to him. (Women really hate that.)

Usually, when I point out a shaming tactic, a woman’s immediate response is to launch yet another shaming tactic. This can go on ad infinitum, until the woman hurls some bitter invective and storms off. That’s pretty fun to watch.

6) I actually think it’s wrong in a relationship for anyone to withhold something from anyone, man or woman, no matter what it is, as long as the desire or need is reasonable. Again, you are looking for me to blame someone. I blame our fallible human nature instead.

Lynn
wrote on December 30 2008 @ 11:27 pm: [report]

Sigh. Frankly I don’t care to keep writing humongously long comments anymore, seeing as I don’t think we’re getting anywhere, but I will say: I think we agree more than you realize, and more than I thought until you just said everything that you just wrote. However, it’s hard to know what you *actually* think, considering the fact that you seem to be contradicting yourself quite a bit here, between comments and even within the same comment (for example, since I know you like those, you told me it was wrong for me to base my *admittedly generalized* opinions of men and women’s behavior on my own experiences, but then in #5 you said “All women do this…” which is, in fact, a generalization based on your experiences).

And yes, I absolutely did mean “If a dork/chauvinist/creep like you is lucky enough to even get laid . . .” I meant it the first time I said it and I assumed that you could figure out what I was saying. But if you’re asking for confirmation, then yes that is exactly what I meant. Good job on your reading skills!

Like I said several times before, but which you apparently haven’t caught onto yet, I agree that people get out of relationships what they put into it, and I think relationships are work and I think that when something is wrong, like when sex decreases to the point of the relationship’s deterioration, it’s the responsibility of *both* parties to fix things up. But in your first comment, you made it sound like you believe it’s the women’s job, and fault, entirely. And I’m saying, it’s the responsibility of both parties. Not just the women.

I think you are totally misunderstanding me. You said “...you think there’s something wrong with a woman giving sex to her man in order to gain affection and love, but you don’t think there’s anything wrong with a man giving affection and love to a woman to get sex.” No. That is exactly not what I am saying. If a couple’s sex life is dead because the woman feels under-appreciated, I think she should try having sex with him to encourage his affection and strengthen their relationship (just like I said in my very first comment!!). Likewise, it is his responsibility to give her affection in hopes that it will improve their sex life. It’s a two-way street. It’s *both* of their responsibilities. The thing I found “wrong” with all of this is that it *seemed* that you thought the whole responsibility was entirely on the shoulders of the woman.

I’m not dating a player because those kind of things, whether valid emotions or horrible rationalizations, aren’t something I can deal with. I don’t date people if I think their “emotions” aren’t real, or are just rationalizations. Also, yes I would agree that on the whole, in general, women are less logical than men. That “fact” doesn’t anger me one bit. That’s great that you know female scientists and mathematicians. I do too. Whoop-de-doo. I also know men who cry while watching The Notebook. But those women, and those men, are rarities, statistically.

But since we don’t seem to be understanding each other, I’m just going to drop this now. One or both of us isn’t communicating very well, and that is leading to a really pointless discussion. But my whole *problem* with your comments was that you seemed to be *blaming* women. If you sincerely weren’t *blaming* women for these problems, and you believe, as I do, that it is the responsibility of BOTH the man and the woman to revive a flailing relationship, I have no issue with you. Then I merely misunderstood you.

nemesis1
wrote on December 31 2008 @ 01:24 pm: [report]

Lynn,

Since you did mean those shaming comments, I guess you won’t mind that all this time I figured you for a lazy slut anyway.

Oh, sorry, only women are allowed to say bad things about men. Men just need to shut up. Maybe you should get your boyfriend to beat me up?

wanman
wrote on December 31 2008 @ 03:41 pm: [report]

Wow nemesis1…..
what a DI*K move.

vanya
wrote on December 31 2008 @ 04:10 pm: [report]

Dare I ask when “Part II” of this article comes out?

simpsonic
wrote on January 1 2009 @ 11:14 am: [report]

Lynn,

I want to date you, and would ask, if I weren’t married to the woman (I believe) Nemesis is talking about.  Nemesis, you and I are best friends but I’ll make sure never to invite you to a party where just you and Lynn are attending, unless there is a firehose handy.  Ultimately, you two will end up together, finally dying in a hail of mutual gunfire.  Given my own situation (3rd marriage - 13 yrs) which has just been perfectly described by both of you, please keep talking. I’d rather be wrong.

Lessy
wrote on January 1 2009 @ 04:41 pm: [report]

I’m sorry, but this is ridiculous. If women are so emotionally involved in sex, as several individuals have stated, than forcing women to complete a task which encourages such emotional involvement is unhealthy at best. The woman would either emotionally disconnect from the act, which is not healthy, or the emotions would be false, at best. Sure, there are cases where you’re kinda sorta in the mood, and fooling around helps out, but the “fake it til you make it” crap just doesn’t work.

As a woman who thought this way and did this in a relationship, it made me resentful of the man and even less likely to engage in sex. I went from a woman who wanted it several times a day to once a week at best, and it was horrible. He managed to always catch me when I wasn’t in the mood (I’m generally not at night, for example, and he wasn’t interested in any other time).

I do, however, firmly believe that if one partner is never in the mood, there could be physical reasons. I was on the pill, which caused my libido to do strange things, for example. Stress could be another reason. Children, I’ve been told, cause significant problems in sexual relationships. There are also cases where one person’s libido is simply higher than another’s, and in that instance, some sort of compromise is necessary, though that’s highly individual between couples.

As someone else pointed out, the conservative religious types generally tend to follow this pattern. I’m not quite sure why, if your spouse/significant other has no interest in compromise, you would stay in the relationship. If your wife refuses to have sex more than once a month and that’s not acceptable, and she won’t be checked out by a doctor or work with you at all, why stay in the relationship? Partners should have mutually agreed upon definitions of the importance of sexuality in relationship—if you don’t, what the hell else don’t you agree upon?

Lynn
wrote on January 2 2009 @ 12:19 am: [report]

nemesis1 - yet another shaming statement. Save it for amateur night

smartbombradio@gmail.com
wrote on January 2 2009 @ 12:40 am: [report]

Alright… I think it’s clear at this point that we need to break up and find a 3rd and 4th gender, since we’re obviously not compatable with you ladies, and vice versa. 

But thanks to stem cells and genetics, help is on the way.  Due to a large grant from HYDRA, I’ve been working on this project for quite some time, and the first models are ready.

Ladies, your new gender will all look like that sickly kid from Twilight that you all love so much.  He enjoys having long conversations about people at your work he hasn’t met, watching movies without explosions in them, and “just staying the night, you know, sleeping together naked, but nothing happens.” 

He believes Anne Rice to be a good writer, and thinks the Sleeping Beauty series is edgy fiction because they like totally tie people up… and stuff. And thanks to a few genetic tweaks, the 2009 series is able to sit through three episodes of Gilmore Girls in a row without stabbing himself in the eye with a penknife to end the pain of unrealistic dialogue.  Also he has a fetish for rarely shaven legs and those little hairs between your eyebrows.  And he wants to know if you’re happy, you know… really happy.

And don’t worry fellas, you won’t have to buy a fleshlight just yet!  Your new gender is modeled on famous “vagina attached to talking asian,” Tila Tequila.  She cares what level your Warcraft character is, and will happily listen to you explain how you slew Tiamat once on a critical hit. 

She believes that the movie 300 is totally about masculine combat and not about watching sweaty dudes in leather g-strings oil each other up and slap their chests together, and understands how important it is that your team of 20 year old communications majors put a piece of leather into the endzone of someone elses 20 year old team of communications majors once more, thereby making you a better person for supporting them.  Also, she’s totally asian and stuff. Like, alot.

Please send five thousand dollars through Paypal, American to “damniwishthiswasntsatire@gmail.com”.  All replacement spouses will be shipped UPS ground, allow seven to ten business days for shipping.  Air holes in box extra.

(seriously, you’re both taking this nonsense WAYYYYYY too seriously.  If your girlfriend really is so insensitve that she doesn’t care about your needs, leave her.  If your boyfriend really emotionally blackmails you into unwanted intercourse constantly, curb him.  Both of you argue like an old married couple, let me know when the wedding is, I’ll send a blender.)

DidSheReallyGoThere
wrote on January 4 2009 @ 11:08 pm: [report]

In my opinion, I believe it IS a woman’s ‘duty’ to a point to provide her man a physical necessity of this nature. I’m SO no Donna Reed, but to regularly deny him sex is like regularly denying him food. As for the fellas, my suggestion to keep ‘I’m not in the mood’ from plaguing your ears, it doesn’t take much to ensure we ARE…
1. Appreciation
2. Respect
3. Consistency

I can attest to how much more good than harm it does BOTH of us to ‘just give it up’. Lucky for me, I have someone who makes sure it’s doing more good than harm, and I don’t mind one bit!