Male desire/ sexual rights

And the behaviour stems in part from the widespread societal belief that for men sex is a need in the same way food and water are needs and thus something they're entitled to. Women are not socialized to believe that we're entitled to sex in the same way.

Some really good points being made here.

Identity politics strongly pushes the boundary on what is appropriate for one person to demand as entitlement from another: conforming to validation of a personal construction rather than their own perceived reality, the presence of their body despite their own discomfort, the loss of privacy and dignity to benefit another's desires. It separates society into the givers and the takers, it's a philosophy that cannot work for everyone equally as for anyone to have such 'rights' there must be compulsion for others compelled to provide them, whether or not they consent.

It's not an accident that issues of consent, age of consent, acceptance of any and all sexual behaviours, porn, incels and queer culture is all tied up with it, it's all around the same essential idea. There are those with entitlements, and there are those without entitlements who need to get on with providing. No different to the good old fashioned view of wifely duty to put aside personal feelings and provide sex as a duty out of respect for the male birthright.

Put down in those stark terms, it's ugly stuff.

This isn't evidence of an innate difference between male and female sexual desire; but it it is evidence of the effects of socialisation.

It's not either/or. Nature and nurture interact in complex ways, so you could have a natural tendency that is either increased or decreased by socialisation.

Plus, a heterosexual man getting turned on by boobs-n-butt isn't a sign of socialised dominance, any more than a straight women getting turned on by nice muscles or a deep voice is a sign that she's succumbed to patriarchal submission. Sometimes a boner is just a boner.

The problem is when that boner is matched with entitlement and selfishness, and used as an excuse for appalling behaviour. It's not the desire that's wrong, but the behaviour.

Or, pretty much what Naturalbornkiller said.

Deydo, I'm sure there are. I was thinking about this issue specifically from a feminist perspective which is why I posted here.

The same applies. Nobody has the right to somebody else's body and nobody has to live in a sexless marriage.
In Britain today, we can separate and divorce.
Women in other eras and locations weren't so lucky.

I think the natarive that men must have their sexual needs met, conditions men to be more selfish and demanding with their sexual needs.

Women have sexual desire too, but we've never been told we need to have it forefilled. Quite the opposite.

Men are demanding because they are told they have a right to be. They are just as capable of women of ignoring their sexual urges or meeting their own needs. Plenty of decent men do just that.

We need to push the narrative the sex is a nice bonus to life or relationships, for both females and males. Its not a right and its not needed. It's because men are told its their right they become aggressive when told they can't have it. Look at incels.

Men are more likely to enjoy sex without emotional attachment, more turned on by visual cues, more likely to have fetishes.

This isn't evidence of an innate difference between male and female sexual desire; but it it is evidence of the effects of socialisation.
Men are encouraged to think in terms of a hierarchy and place themselves at an emotional distance. They are encouraged to use porn, to 'other' women, and to dominate us.

If this was about the need for sexual release then masturbation wouldn't be seen as unmanly.

There are a lot of things that underlie couples working through these things that complicate them I think. On the face of it, she's not that interested in sex, and he is, but it may also be that they value it differently apart from that. Lots of people who lose their libido are unhappy about it. Sex is also associated with affection, being attractive. And he may feel like his wife is just unconcerned about his sex drive.

I think in terms of culture, the husband here is more the cultural norm, we tend to say that sex is something that is important through your whole life, it's much more unusual to hear people talking about sex as something that people might think about giving up as they get older. That's not always been true, but a lot of people think that is because people used to be prudes.

But a problem in negotiating these things in a marriage is that if the couple just feels differently, there isn't really a winner on the face of it. Someone will end up compromising. In a lot of cases both may.

The writer's framing is indicative of the mindset that he's entitled to sex. Saying that his wife "wants" a desire free old age - it sounds more like a desire free old age is in fact what she has, which he's choosing to see as a choice she's made, as if she could magic up a libido that may not exist and would do so if she cared about him.

No one has a right to have sex with anyone else but sex is a 'normal' expectation within a marriage and I think it's perfectly understandable that someone would wish to leave a sexless relationship.

The word right can be used in different ways. We can talk about the right to adequate food - if there is no food, you still aren't getting any right or no right.

I'm not sure about using the term with sex though. We give people a lot of freedom around sex, but also some constraints, they have to be willing, also of age, have mental capacity. Sometimes even with these things in place we may not allow it where one person is in a position of trust, or is something like an employer. Incest is still illegal in many places.

We've been moving toward removing more and more legal constraints to sex for the past 60 years or so, but there still is a recognition that it's not always a simple matter of a private agreement.

Everyone has the right to sex with a willing partner.

No one has a right to sex.

Willing is something another person makes the decision to do; they can't be controlled or provided. No matter how many essays incels write trying to intellectually justify it.

Yes, male entitlement and need for sex is seen culturally as valuable and a 'need' in the way that female needs of any kind never are, and it's culturally fetishized.

However the idea of right to sex (and to rape your wife if she won't give it up willingly) is gone, and women no longer train their daughters to lay back and think of England and do their duty for their man like it or not; as is 'til death us do part no matter how unhappy you are. Did you want to discuss whether after x years' commitment to a marriage if one partner no longer wants sex the other partner has a duty to demonstrate their love by accepting this and staying in a sexless marriage whether or not they want to?

Basic emotional and behavioural responsibility: if you're in a relationship you are no longer happy in then you take responsibility for your feelings, leave and find a relationship that does fulfil you. As opposed to blaming or coercing your partner to do something they don't want to.

Everyone has the right to sex with a willing partner.

This is an oxymoron. If a willing partner is required (as it should be) then sex cannot be a right. The only sex one can have a right to without compromising the rights of others is with oneself.

The court case mentioned in the OP has nothing to do with this question. It was really about an entirely different issue, and quite a serious one too. It shouldn't be lumped in to this.

I'm not sure the question of sexual access within marriage is really best characterised as a rights issue. In many ways a marriage is about a voluntary curtailment of rights, I agree not to act as a private individual only but for the good or the relationship and the good of the other person in the relationship. That can apply to sex, where I live, choosing a job, what I spend money on. I don't think that can be mediated at the level of rights. When it stops operating on that basis, in many ways the marriage is over.

When I see people talking about how they need sex though, and how if their spouse won't/can't have it any more, they have a "right" or "need" to get sex elsewhere, I see this in modern life as coming out of a fairly specific set of ideas that have been pushed by some groups about sex. They tend to say things like sex is natural, a human need, part of being a healthy adult. A surprising amount of that is in the background when kids learn about sex too, either through things like the media (even sitcoms seem to have people hopping in or out of bed with each other like rabbits) even in school there an be a lot of banging on about sex being natural. And the other side of that is that there is little in the way of discussion or examples of sexual continence that are shown as very worthy, not a lot of value given to self control sexually and even less concrete advice or practice of sexual self control, which like all kinds of self-disapline is something that is in part learned. At best, it's seen as a necessary thing if you can't find a wiling partner, making the best of necessity.

I'm always interested when people discuss this how many people are honestly unaware that choosing to not have sex is something that people could do long term even if they still have a lot of desire - they tend to think people who do choose it are somehow less interested in sex. Or who really believe that living in that way would be completely horrible and make life not worth living. That has to be something culturally learned.

OTOH, there is a certain sneeriness towards male virgins or an assumption that men who turn down sex are odd in some way

It is a popular trope that middle aged women are somehow denying middle aged males sex. However, it is quite common for men's libido to go awol, then it seems it is the woman's responsibility to spice it up by dressing up and 'introducing sex toys' etc. I never see anything about men wiggling around in budgie smugglers/Calvin Klines and using a rabbit on himself to turn his wife on.

The willing partner is crucial. No-one has the right to intervene in a private sexual experience between two willing partners. Having sex is a basic human need. It is cruel to forbid it.

That doesn't mean willing partners must be provided.

Supporters of prostitution say that the person being paid for sex is a willing partner, otherwise she (it is usually she) wouldn't sell her service. Opponents of prostitution say that the person being paid for sex is not a willing partner as her consent has been coerced from her by need, not choice.

A relationship is more than just consensual sex. If sex no longer works in a relationship, then the terms of the relationship have changed. The partners need to recognise this and either together modify the terms of their relationship, or end it. Anything else would be unfair to one or other of them.

Acceptance not acceptable

OTOH, there is a certain sneeriness towards male virgins or an assumption that men who turn down sex are odd in some way.

I do think that male and female desire is different. Men are more likely to enjoy sex without emotional attachment, more turned on by visual cues, more likely to have fetishes. Obviously there are exceptions, but I think this holds on average.

Desire isn't good or bad in itself, but can be expressed in good or bad ways. I think what's missing in our society is a belief in self-control as a virtue and an acceptable that "you can't always get what you want".

Absolutely agree with you OP

@JellySlice do you really mean that? If everyone has the right to sex with a willing partner it would involve everyone being provided with one.

I think everyone has the right to desire sex and also the right to leave a relationship openly and honestly if it doesn't meet their perceived needs. No one owes anyone sex and no one has tights over anyone else's body.

I read that letter at the weekend. It sounded like a disgruntled customer writing to the manufacturer to complain that his sex doll had malfunctioned.

I do think that the partner who doesn't want sex should have an honest conversation with the one wanting it.
And be prepared for the possibility that the relationship will end or to allow the partner to seek sex elsewhere.

In any case, I don't know how often a partner decides they don't want to have sex anymore at all, at least without health or relationship problems. It might be that sex is unsatisfactory or that they aren't happy with their partner.