Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Opinions on sex - bear with me

443 replies

Thurlow · 06/02/2016 19:59

A couple of threads on MN over the past few weeks have got me thinking seriously about some (or maybe just some MNs) opinions relating to sex. This isn't meant to be a TAAT or an attack on their opinions. But something about some of the opinions aired, or perhaps more of a general belief, has got me quite confused.

One was the airing, by several posters/people, of the opinion that any woman who says she enjoys partaking in a particular sex act is merely a "cool girl". In essence, they can't actually really enjoy it - they only think they do because porn and/or men have convinced them that they do. It struck me as... some women believing that other women cannot, in some way, be trusted to explore their own sexuality. This is hardly a completely weird sex act we're talking about. But there seem to be women who believe any woman who enjoys certain sexual acts - anal, facials etc - cannot possibly be doing it because they genuinely enjoy it, for whatever reason (physical, emotional i.e. submission etc).

Another was a very heated debate - that I was tempted to post this on, but thought a new thread on this board might be better - as regards situations where women don't feel like having sex with their partner. Now I'm not in any way advocating that anyone should ever have to engage in any form of sexual activity if they don't want to. No way. No one ever should.

But what struck me was that for almost all people in relationships, sex is one of the main things that differentiates your romantic relationship from a very close platonic relationship. For most people in a monogamous relationship, sex is the one thing you do only with your partner - whereas many people may also be as emotionally close to a friend or family member. Sex is also seen by many people as the real Big One when it comes to infidelity. Your partner having sex with someone else is generally unforgivable. It's one of the worst things anyone can do to anyone else. Equally, everyone hopes that their partner finds them attractive and wishes to have sex with them. Someone being told that they are no longer attractive to their partner is an equally terrible thing within a relationship.

Yet on this thread about not having sex when you feel like, there was a very strong feeling from many posters that a husband (in this scenario) who asks his wife for sex, who attempts to initiate sex, is being unreasonably demanding. Completely unreasonably demanding. A sex pest, to some posters. That it is so out of order for a husband to fancy the idea of having sex with his wife. There was discussion of "pawing" in relation to a man making moves on a woman. (I will stress I completely agree with the general sentiment that if you're knackered after being with kids all day, you should completely be able to say "nope, too tired", and also that any respectful partner will just accept that). He would be totally out of order for making any kind of move towards physical intimacy. Hugging, touching, attempting to kiss, things that are surely what most people do to show affection and perhaps start to initiate sex, were just "pawing" and were demanding.

I know I'm waffling but I'm also trying to work out for myself what many of these opinions made me feel.

So - if we hope the person that we have chosen to build our life together with finds us sexually attractive, and wants to be intimate with us in a physical way, because physical and sexual intimacy is one of the main things that differentiates a partnership from a friendship... Why do many women see it as wrong that a man might hope to have sex with his wife? (Leaving aside for a brief moment men who don't take no for an answer). Why is it so wrong that a man might touch a woman, hug or kiss in an attempt to see whether their partner might like to have sex?

And why do some women seem to believe (again, just judging by comments) that any man who would like to have sex is, essentially a sex pest? As if women don't feel like that too? Which tied in, in my mind, with that whole "cool girl" concept in relation to women liking anal sex, for example.

I'm not sure I've explained this properly but I've come away from MN over the past few weeks feeling that a lot of women don't seem to agree with the simple idea that both men and women have libidos and sexual tastes: men just want to "have sex", rather than be intimate with their partner; and women just put up with it when they feel they ought too, and should have a liking for anything other than "making love".

Does that make sense to anyone? Has anyone else felt like this?

OP posts:
PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 17:40

Not on all, no.

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 17:36

There's no assumption of sexual desire on dating sites ?

HelpfulChap · 08/02/2016 17:35

Thank you.

almondpudding · 08/02/2016 17:35

'Parallel universe stuff indeed. What would you assume were the intentions of a man who kept buying you gifts and asking to spend time with you ?'

Why would I need to make assumptions? I'd ask him or work it out from context!

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 17:34

HC... with that post I find you aptly named.

HelpfulChap · 08/02/2016 17:33

Whenever I buy flowers for my DW almost everyone assumes it is beacause I am a) in the dog house b) hoping to get lucky.

In fact 99% of the time it is just a small way to show her I love her.

Not sure if that has anything to do with the thread which I enjoyed reading but 90% of which has gone over my head as usual.

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 17:33

My mother is newly single after a forty year marriage, many many people on dating sites are looking for companions, there's no presumption of sexual desire or ability. These are conversations people have to have to draw boundaries.

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 17:31

arghh - come off it of course.

almondpudding · 08/02/2016 17:31

But they're aware that it doesn't have to include sex.

Because we already have a phrase to refer to relationships that by definition include sex.

That would be a sexual relationship.

And if your issue here is one of you really, really needing the phrase romantic relationship to mean 'one in which the people are definitely going to or have, or have had sex at some point, because people can't handle the concept of romance not involving sex in some relationships' let's taboo the word romantic for the sake of this conversation.

So in loving relationships with our partners, some people have sex and some people don't. From the inception of the relationship, different couples have different attitudes to sex and whether they want it, how often, what kind, whether they are okay or not okay with their partner having sex with others and so on.

And whatever decisions people come to about sex, that is absolutely fine, as long as it is consensual and discussed s part of the relationship.

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 17:30

Also - is not the assumption of sexual desire towards them by men, part of what causes various posters on this forum, abject panic ? Is that also viewed as a problem wrt. "compulsory sexuality" ?

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 17:24

Oh come of it almond. You seriously believe that no one would be confused to discover that romantic activity has nothing to do with sexual attraction and is in no way to be considered an expression of sexual desire ?

Parallel universe stuff indeed. What would you assume were the intentions of a man who kept buying you gifts and asking to spend time with you ?

Dervel · 08/02/2016 17:19

The Oxford English Dictionary also defines romantic as sexual as (one) of its meanings. I would also venture that to most people the "everyday" meaning of a romantic long term relationship will include sex.

almondpudding · 08/02/2016 17:11

I'm not talking about a whole load of complex philosophical concepts of love from classical philosophy.

I am talking about the everyday (and dictionary) definition between sexual and romantic relationships.

Some people are in relationships that are both sexual and romantic.
Some people are in relationships that are sexual but not romantic.
Some people are in relationships that are romantic but not sexual.

Dervel · 08/02/2016 17:06

Actually it's highly confusing almond we conflate several concepts and types of "love" with just the one word for it. Where context is supposed to provide clarity.

Eros in Greek being erotic love, but not merely lust in and of itself is being confused with Philia, Storge etc.

You're not wrong but we're all coming at this with divergent concepts of what love even means and thus at cross purposes.

almondpudding · 08/02/2016 16:50

Romantic means conducive to or characterised by the expression of love.

Again, not confusing.

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 16:48

Although in RL when a friend confided that her new (less than six months) BF would rather cuddle, and they were both in their late twenties, I did suggest it could be the beginning of the end. That at that stage people can't usually keep their hands off each other, and that perhaps the past experiences he'd had with men was more significant than she realised.

She's now having his baby, still hardly having sex.... I think the baby is a good way for him not to admit he's gay.

She's had loads of casual asexual relationships, sex is very important to her.

I've no idea what she's doing.

There's no way, even if it meant the end, that if I was compelled to have sex with DH for any other reason than I wanted to that I would stay married. NO WAY>

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 16:42

I wasn't referring to that thread, I don't really do threads about threads.

I also find the "what should I do in my own relationship" questions rather baffling, I'm not sure anyone really listens anyway.

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 16:42

almond perhaps you and I have a different definition or idea of "romantic"....

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 16:40

Well - it depends on what you mean posie. What i was also getting it was that there was no suggestion on the relationships post that the mans lack of interest in sex could be attributed to the either the reasons he gave or because of the "ebb and flow" of sex in a LTR. Indeed, i was suggesting that were you to go on there and reply to the effect that the OP ought to be aware of the ebb and flow you would be in a minority of 1.

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 16:38

What difference does it make? Man/woman

I've not really noticed any gendered advice, but then I'm not on here much.

PosieReturningParker · 08/02/2016 16:36

itll ^I think most sex lives have ebb and flow without notice or conversation because it's not conscious. Either partner has s right to a conversation about any aspect of their relationship.^ me

You ^^An example of what the OP refers to can be found right now on the relationships forum. Without copying and pasting, this gist of it is this :

A man does not seem to want sex with his wife, and has stated that he feels unattractive and is stressed out at work, has been painted as a hopeless loser, an inveterate wanker and someone who is totally unsuitable for the poster to consider being in any sort of a long term relationship with.

Perhaps you could head over there and point out that it is probably just the "ebb and flow" and that you hope that OP does not pester her husband or make him feel under any pressure to have sex with her posie ?

There have been many threads over the years about how the response to a poster complaining about lack of sex is gendered.^^

What was wrong with my comment about ebb and flow?

almondpudding · 08/02/2016 16:36

I think it is pretty straightforward and not from a parallel universe!

There are all kind of romantic relationships and a variety of asexual people. Some choose to have sex and some do not.

I am sure there are websites about asexuality that explain in detail for people who aren't aware of all of this.

itllallbefine · 08/02/2016 16:28

Posie Not a woman posting about her girlfriend a MAN (shudder) posting about his wife. That was the context.

At no point should any woman be forcing herself to have sex in order to keep a man.

That would be her choice and she can do as she sees fit, depending on how much she actually dislikes it. What's being repeatedly pointed out is that if you do not want to have sex then the cost of that may well be the end of the relationship. So in that context she may choose to have sex. If she told her partner "I don't like having sex with you and I only do it to keep you happy" then I expect that would also lead to the demise of the relationship.

almond I don't understand what you are on about. If two people choose to have a sexless relationship then that is a choice they both must make. For all but a handful of people, the idea of a lifetime without sex is ridiculous. Choosing at a young age to lead a sexless life, not because you are not a sexual person, but because you loved someone who was asexual (love for most people also containing a large element of sexual attraction) would indeed be harmful in my opinion, do you disagree with that ? One would assume the asexual person would not make the sexual one feel guilty about their occasional desires etc.... parallel universe stuff.

Dervel · 08/02/2016 16:21

"and how willing" that should read

Dervel · 08/02/2016 16:19

How does that follow? I don't get it. If you are asexual, be upfront and be in relationships with like minded people. Same as if you have relatively high libido.

Nobody "deserves" a relationship anymore than they deserve sex. It's all down to voluntary associations between individuals and willing those individuals are willing to get close to one another.