Opinions on sex - bear with me

[Thurlow]

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?

I don't need the approval of women on the internet to feel ok about my sexual choices. I was quite happily doing these acts long before the internet (and the easy availability of porn) came along.
I feel good about my choices and I want other women to know that if they want to do the same things, it does not make them desperate dogs.

A key point of the very eloquent OP, was to question why some women feel the need to judge other women who partake in these acts? Why do women who say they enjoy these acts get insulted and told they don't know their own mind? This is the part that I don't understand.

Why don't you just ignore it and move on?

Because I don't think slut shaming should be ignored.

The 'gatekeeper' idea implies that people have a right to sex and the person who says no is unreasonably blocking their way.
No-one has the right to have sex as and when they want it. However, it is a perfectly reasonable expectation that in a relationship, there would be sexual activity unless there has been a clear discussion to agree otherwise.

It is not unreasonable for one person to want sex with their partner. There may be times when it is completely inappropriate and pressure shouldn't happen, but if A wants sex more than B, that doesn't make A wrong or unreasonable. If B is refusing all the time or just giving in begrudgingly, that is as unreasonable as if A was pestering.
How many times does A have to ask before it is deemed to be unreasonable?
How long does B have to refuse for before it is deemed to be unreasonable?
B has every right to refuse permanently, but they need to be honest about that so A can make a decision as to whether they want to remain in a sexless relationship.

Sex is not the be-all and end-all of a good relationship, but it is often an important part. Very few relationships survive long term with no physical side unless that has been agreed by both parties.

Refusing is absolutely not as unreasonable as pestering.
I have every right to decide at all times what happens to my body.
I have absolutely no right whatsoever to pester someone to let me use their body.

Also you say 'there may be times when pressure shouldn't happen.' Pressure should never happen, no one should ever be pressured into sex.

I said refusing all the time.

If you consider sex or intimacy to be someone "using" your body then why woild you be in a romantic relationship at all?

Sparrowhawk please do not misquote me!
I did NOT say:
"'there may be times when pressure shouldn't happen.'"
I said:
"There may be times when it is completely inappropriate and pressure shouldn't happen"

"Pressure shouldn't happen" stands independently.
It should not happen - simple.

If you're pressuring someone then clearly you do want to use their body,as you don't care if they want it or not. Mutual loving sex is not about using anyone.

So Logical do you think a woman only has the right to refuse aex sometimes, regardless of how she feels?

sex

In English law there is always a right to refuse sex in a marriage. However if you change a marriage from sexy to sexless you shouldn't be surprised if you end up on the receiving end of a divorce petition.

Of course.

Dione, Thurlow and Sparrowhawk have been all sounded the most reasonable and mature in this debate.

There just seems to be quite a negative judgemental attitude to women who dl refuse sex - as though they're being unreasonable. Surely a person can't help it if they simply don't want sex?

What I worry about is that women end up having sex they don't want in order to prevent a man from straying/leaving. The message should always be to have sex only if you want to. If your partner leaves, they leave. Forcing yourself to have sex isn't a solution.

A woman has the right to refuse sex whenever she chooses, however, if she refuses all the time, it is likely to become unreasonable in terms of the relationship.

Having the right to do or not do something doesn't mean it is reasonable.

A man has the right to refuse to change nappies, doesn't make it reasonable for him to do so.

So you think refusing to care for your child is on a par with refusing to have sex?

Do you see sex as a duty and requirement?

Posie
I am taking all of your aggression and giving back pure unadulterated unconditional love.

If a woman persistently refuses sex, then she has to realise that it is going to have an impact on her relationship. It is not unreasonable for the man to then reconsider if he wants to remain in a sexless relationship.

There have been many threads with the genders reversed where the man's sex drive has disappeared and the woman feels neglected - women have usually been encouraged to reconsider the relationship if he isn't prepared to do something to improve things.

I don't think it's helpful to just say that you can refuse sex all you want - he can manage without sex, without acknowledging that this is likely to be a big problem in the relationship and you need to decide if you value the relationship enough to try to do something about it. That doesn't mean having sex when you don't want it, it means putting some effort into to fixing the problem. There are things you can do to improve your sex life but they require effort. If you are not prepared to put that effort in, then the least you can do is let your partner know that this is how things are going to be from now on so he can decide what he wants to do. But I do think it is very disrespectful to your partner to refuse to put any effort in and just shun his every approach.

Do you see sex as a duty and requirement?
No, I see it as an important part of a loving relationship.

I see sex as a chore which is best to get out of the way as quickly and efficiently as possible (every second Friday)

I totally agree with you. I have never seen anybody on MN say that a partner, man or woman has to put up long term with zero sex. But I think comparing refusing sex to refusing to look after children really odd - even if a couple break up children still need to be looked after, it has nothing to do with the relationship.

So you think refusing to care for your child is on a par with refusing to have sex?
Ok, refusing to do the dishes, refusing to cook, refusing to show affection, refusing to buy you a birthday present....etc

The point is, anyone has the right to refuse to do anything in a relationship, but it does not necessarily make it reasonable to do so.