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?

Jeez. .. Some women like sex, and some like talking about it.. What's freaky is that some people here feel inadequate next to more open people but project this uncomfortableness onto the person talking about sex as if they intend your feelings of inadequacy. Fascinating, but scary.

Interesting what different people take from reading threads, isn't it?

Not suggesting you're wrong logical btw, more that what I got was that the lack of sex was just a symptom of a general lack of ability to adult within the relationship.

So, interesting.

Ah, so anyone that doesn't gleefully relate stories of various sexual acts is inadequate and projecting?

I agree. Scary.

You have to be neutral. Some people are asexual (more than apparently are gay even in the UK and it doesn't surprise me). Others want it every day. In general men seem to want it more than women which is a major issue in many relationships.

At some point and in some contexts, sexual openness in conversations is actually sexual harassment and bullying.

The 'cool girl' label may just be a way of avoiding labelling a form of sexual harassment for what it is.

In other contexts, it is necessary to be very open about sex to give someone else advice, but in those circumstances, surely the best interests of the person receiving the advice are what matters.

Palmer we're saying the same thing - the lack of sex (and porn use) are symptoms of other problems in the relationship.
I think lots of couples have a lack of ability to adult in a relationship, because what that really means is be able to discuss difficult things and talk about their feelings without blaming or arguing.

The point is, it is his right to not have sex, but it is not reasonable for him to expect to continue not having sex, without it having a negative effect on the relationship.

Absolutely nobody on this thread has said that someone has to put up with their partner refusing sex long term. Absolutely no one. Everyone has said, repeatedly that a person has a right to refuse sex but it is likely to affect the relationship. This ha! Got you! example of the semen-tissue manchild demonstrates nothing. That woman, as we all said multiple times, doesn't have to put up with the lack of sex, or any of her partner's awful behaviour. He is not required to have sex with her however.

I agree Sparrowhawk. Nobody has said that people have to put up with anything in a relationship.

Nobody has denied the existence of relationships where people are made unhappy by lack of sex.

I am however arguing against compulsory sexuality as our basis for understanding relationships. There are people who have non sexual romantic relationships for the whole or part of the relationship, and both people are happy with that.

No-one has said that sex is compulsory within a relationship, but a sexless relationship can only realistically work when both partners are happy with that arrangement. The threads that get posted about on MN, the decision isn't mutual. Women get treated very differently to men on here when they don't want to have sex.

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

Unless you add, for me or for some people, that is compulsory sexuality. It isn't an important part of a loving relationship for everyone.

'why would someone who doesn't like having sex be in a relationship in the first place ?'

Compulsory sexuality. Why in 2016 does that question even need to be asked?

I think sparrow you and I both know that if you removed the bit about him (allegedly) wanking on a daily basis, and liking computer games, then you wouldn't be so harsh on him. The OP describes him as very affectionate and says she loves him very much. The man is getting an absolute pasting on there because he is...a man. This is obvious. No one has suggested that he feels under pressure, or that any of the reasons he has actually given are believable even when the OP has suggested she's not sure. Furthermore, no has suggested anything other than leaving him because he is "useless".

Back to this thread, I believe this is what the OP had in mind when she speaks of the gendered responses to a lack of sex. She's spot on, and your determined assertions that his behaviour is "awful" is just more hyperbole.

almond If my husband stopped wanting sex with me then I would leave him. If a man ever posts on here saying that his wife doesn't want to have sex with him, he gets a very different response.

itll

What's the issue you have with my comment?

Gosh I've forgotten how unnecessarily aggressive MN can be

Are we really saying if a woman posted about her girlfriend not wanting intimacy but watching heaps of porn and leaving tissues around people would be different?

'The one thing that sets a romantic relationship apart from all others is intimate touch.'

We can call that one compulsory physical intimacy, as Dione didn't specify sex and says she means something different by intimacy.

What gets me is the finger-wagging tone of the posts saying 'it's fine to refuse sex, but don't expect your partner to stick around.' The very strong implication there is that women need to keep their men happy (with sex) or - horror!- they'll be deserted. Yes a partner may leave due to lack of sex, it happens. At no point should any woman be forcing herself to have sex in order to keep a man.

I do agree with you Sparrow.. and she shouldn't be surprised either if (for some and in some cases) this means the end of the relationship.

And consequently, the assumption that if you're not really into sex, you can't enter a real relationship, don't deserve one, and anyone who ever loved you back would be harmed by your aberrant sexual orientation.

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.

"and how willing" that should read

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.

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.

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?

What difference does it make? Man/woman

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

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.