To feel sad by this article on marital sex

[SoddingCupcakes]

www.huffingtonpost.com/meg-conley/five-reasons-you-should-h_b_5647291.html

Sent to me by a male friend (that, in itself, deserves an eye roll). I can't pinpoint the exact reason for the depth of sadness this article triggers. Thoughts are:

1. It's unsisterly. Something doesn't sit right about a woman telling all other women what they should be doing for their menz.

1. It does not account for physiological differences between the sexes (men do not endure pregnancy, childbirth and lactation, and all that those things do to a woman's body and her sex drive).

1. There are other ways to show affection.

1. Every night??

1. The insidious way the article tries to dress its advice in a cloak of female empowerment.

Forgot to add that the generalisation that women are complicated creatures and men's needs are so much easier to fulfil annoyed me too.

Men only need food, sex and someone to pay them attention/soothe their weary brow after a hard day.

Whereas women need ...what ... Someone to pay them attention after a hard day and pull their weight. Yes, food and sex too. But actually for me, that's about it.

So either I'm a man (nope, just checked, definitely not a man) or women's needs aren't actually any different from men's.

The only thing I find amazing is that anyone is taking this claptrap seriously. It was a slow news day presumably.

oh I misread title and was wondering what "martial sex" might involve

itsbetterthanabox

You seem surprised that people would find those terms derogatory.

Boneyback can you explain why they are derogatory?

itsbetter

"menz" is designed to belittle and disparage any response.
i.e "its all about the menz", "here comes the menz", "here are the menz to give us their opinion".

As for terms around the "sisterhood", "unsisterly" etc. it would depend on how it is used, "so much for the sisterhood" etc. is use to belittles someone who does not agree with the poster or th eperson posting believes that they should be supported because of their gender.

Op , send your friend penelopegarcias response!

EVERY NIGHT? My DH gets back ache from our once a week sesh...he couldn't cope with every night bless him.

I just told my dh about this article and asked him 'would you want sex every day'
His response:
'With you?'

(He was joking)

I think the opposite is true, actually. If you have a relationship where you don't feel you need to have sex every night then that itself is a sign of a strong relationship. 1-3 times a week is more than enough for most couples.

There are nights when I can barely muster the energy to climb into bed, never mind having to go through the emotional and physical motions of sex.

Every night might be fine for a few years. However, I'd be highly suspicious of any claim of daily sex after 20 years of marriage.

Boney. Menz is not used to do that. Menz is used to combat the social norm that men's experiences are the most important, the normal and women's are secondary. It is used because whenever women try and discuss female oppression they are shouted down that men's experience are the same or more important.
Sisterly was not used in a negative way. The article is clearly misogynistic and used sexist stereotypes and doing that is un sisterly aka not feminist aka bad for women as a class.

I agree that article is using stereotypes, but we will have to disagree on the use of "menz"

Just asked DP and he said he wouldn't want sex everyday, just once or twice a week. Which suits me perfectly! We both work long hours so just aswell.

I think in this case "menz" is just re-in forcing the idea that sex is just another chore you do for your husband's sake, and something he needs to earn after giving you something you really (allegedly) want as woman i.e. help with the washing-up and a nice cuddle in front of the telly.

Some of the attitudes on this thread are far more dated than anything that was in the article.

There was only one small mention in it of doing it for your man- the most of it was about improving your sex life for your own sake. Yet that's what people have jumped on because on MN there's seen something anti-feminist, or "giving in", about having an enjoyable sex life with one of the menz.

They need to be fed, they need to be appreciated, and they need to have sex. That is it. Really.

Maybe your partner, love, but there's a heck of a lot more to my dh.

If you want your husband to act like a man, you need to treat him like a man.

Dh is a man, whether he's shagged that day or not.

that smiling boy is still in love with and needs his smiling girl.

Aww. He needs to shag his girl every night. Aww, so sweet.

I thought menz was slang for menstruation!

It didn't make me sad at all. It's a load of rubbish. I agree with the general sentiment that more sex = good. But apart from that, sexist claptrap.

Annoying bit where she says having sex with her husband keeps her in touch with who she was pre kids-that women are reliant on men and sex to stop them getting bogged down with the kids and housework.

Shes a sahm with probably one child. Not very busy. No experience of multiple pregnancies