Male desire/ sexual rights

[onlydigestivesinthetin]

I stumbled across this piece in the Guardian over the weekend: older man bemoaning the fact that his wife no longer wants sex with him, with the implication that this either 'forces' him to have affairs or he will have to leave her in order to have what he sees as his right to a sex life.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/apr/18/my-life-in-sex-my-wife-wants-a-desire-free-old-age-but-i-still-see-her-as-my-sexual-partner

The article and most of the responses reminded me of the judge who declared that it was a husband's fundamental right to have sex with his wife:

www.theguardian.com/law/2019/apr/03/english-judge-says-man-having-sex-with-wife-is-fundamental-human-right

And then of various articles about men rating brothels and the women they abuse in them:

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/disturbing-sex-work-website-men-20574557

And it made me think of all the autogynophiles abandoning their wives and children to pursue their sexual kink who may, oddly enough, never have sex with anyone else again in their pursuit to make themselves into the object of their desire.

I know this is just feminism 101 – that we live in a society based around testosterone, where the male sexual urge is regarded as sacrosanct and women are still expected to service their male partners' sexual needs. And yes, I fully expect a few women to respond this that they love sex and are always ready for it, any time, any where. But what about the millions of us who can't say that?

I've looked through the Guardian seeking a response that doesn't basically affirm a man's right to have sex and can see very few. There are a couple of clearly feminist responses early on, but after that everyone politely acknowledges that a man has his urges and he needs to express them with another human being. Is the Guardian weeding out anyone who says that sex isn't a human right or is this an indication that the majority of people accept the fundamental right of men to have sex somehow, some way, with anyone they can?

What would you, women of Mumsnet feminism chat, say to the man in the Guardian?

What I would say to the older man in the Guardian upset about his wife wanting to make the marriage a sexless one is to accept it or divorce. It’s not that he has any right to sex, but that when he agreed to marry her it was with the understanding that sex would be part of the marriage. Now she’s wants to change the marriage and not have sex any more, which is ok too but she can’t force him to agree. So he has the choice to agree or end the marriage.

I agree with Goosefoot that the judge statement and case are not really relevant to this because the man and his wife BOTH wanted to have sex and were consenting, but the wife’s caregivers had determined her to be incapable of consent by dubious means. This meant that if they did have sex, the husband would be charged with statutory rape. The judge was starting from a position that it is assumed that man and wife have a fundamental right to have sex with each other if/when they want to and that the caregivers had the burden to prove that the wife was truly incapable of consent. He was saying who has to prove what to win the case.

I don’t really agree with your description of society in regards to testosterone and so on. Feminism 101 tends to invoke a lot of mythos about the bad old days when the reality was and is much more nuanced and complex.

I think a partner of either sex is perfectly entitled to decide they don't want to stay in a sexless relationship, and leave that relationship

This. I do NOT agree with forcing, coercing, threatening, or using prostitutes.

However, sex i important to me and I could not stay in a sexless marriage. I would do everything I could to fix the issue first and be supportive of my partner. However, if my partner just refused to get help and simply said - thats it, no more sex, I would probably end the relationship.

Sex isnt just the physical to me- its everything, its intimacy, closeness, feeling someone is attracted to me etc.
I need that and I am not going to apologise for that.

Forgot to say, I'm a woman, but I dont see why men would feel any differently to what I have expressed above and I dont think that makes them wrong.

What I would say to the older man in the Guardian upset about his wife wanting to make the marriage a sexless one is to accept it or divorce. It’s not that he has any right to sex, but that when he agreed to marry her it was with the understanding that sex would be part of the marriage. Now she’s wants to change the marriage and not have sex any more, which is ok too but she can’t force him to agree. So he has the choice to agree or end the marriage.

I think this is just true as far as it goes, if he's unwilling to accept the situation, he has essentially two options.

However, I think it's worthwhile to turn this around, because it impacts on this business of no one feeling pressured (and I am not sure everyone understands that word to mean the same thing) to have sex.

From the wife's POV, clearly she can refuse sex, and tell him why she feels that way and so on. But it's also his right to not accept that and leave. But, what if she really wants the marriage to carry on, and doesn't want to divorce? Surely that is a reasonable and valid thing for her to consider?

If she does want that, it seems that her only real option is to consider some sort of compromise about their sex life as a couple. So how can she square that with the proposed principle that there should be no pressure in that area? The very fact that she can decide one thing, and her husband is free not to agree, and yet she may still value the marriage, means that there will be pressure. This could equally be true in the other direction, with the husband feeling pressure to acquiesce to something that he didn't initially agree to or want.

To me this says that the idea that there should be no pressure is really just inadequate to the reality of relationships.

@Goosefoot

Really good point.

What if the wife is financially dependent on him, doesn't have her own pensions or income. What if she has no other friends or family. His choice to leave because she won't put out is suddenly putting her under immense pressure to have sex she doesn't want.

I guess I was looking at the relationship from the point of view that if she doesn't want sex, she's probably not that invested in the relationship and would be equally happy on her own. Which was a really wrong assumption to make. Also reinforced the fact that I have been conditioned to think that a wife that loves her husband wants to have sex with him.

Yeah, the idea that people who love their spouse will necessarily be interested in sex is just not true. There are people who just don't have a high libido who get married because they want kids, they love the person, but they do it knowing the sexual element is not evenly felt.

There was a time when magazines like Cosmo spent a lot of time reassuring people that you could go on having sex until you were old, while you were pregnant, as sson as you like after the baby is born. These days it seems like many people need to be informed that many people lose interest in sex at various times, without not caring about their spouse.

I agree Goosefoot.

I am finally getting around to reading the Guardian article linked by the OP, rather than commenting on "issues in general".

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/apr/18/my-life-in-sex-my-wife-wants-a-desire-free-old-age-but-i-still-see-her-as-my-sexual-partner

There are some things in it that I find rather questionable!

"My wife and I married when we were in our early 20s. We enjoyed our sex life, though I never felt she enjoyed it as much as I did."

Note:
husband seems to regard sex as something that they do separately-together, if you get my drift, ie. that it does not seem to have occurred to him that the nature of his involvement might have some bearing on the fact that he "never felt she enjoyed it as much as I did". Never?? They have been married 40+ years - I think he knows!

"Her menopause began when she was 50. Hot flushes were the main symptoms, accompanied by restless nights, irritability and a declining interest in sex. She decided not to take HRT, mainly because she was anxious about the increased risk of breast cancer. I suspect she was also quite happy to let nature take its course and enjoy a desire-free old age."

Where does he get the idea that taking HRT after menopause re-awakens or jump-starts an enthusiasm for sex and that not taking HRT results in "a desire-free old age"?

"By the time we were 60, her interest in sex had declined to almost nothing. What I found difficult was her response to my continued enthusiasm. She quite liked a friendly cuddle, but any tendency for my touch to become a caress, or my hands to approach her erogenous zones, would be met with irritation and an abrupt dismissal. She referred to my touch as “tickling”, or worse, as “groping” or “mauling”. If she caught me looking at her when she was dressing or undressing, she would become angry and accuse me of looking at her as a “sex object”.

She has always been a feminist, and I have always supported her views concerning equality of education, opportunities, work and pay for men and women. However, she is also my sexual partner, and therefore the woman I desire, not a sex object."

Given his earlier statement about feeling his wife has never enjoyed sex (ie. with him!) as much as he has enjoyed sex with her in 40+ years of marriage, I struggle with this: " . . . she is also my sexual partner, and therefore the woman I desire, not a sex object"

It really does not sound like there has been a "sexual partnership" and much more that he "desired" her as a "sex object".

This seems more like a transaction than a partnership: support for feminist views in exchange for unenthusiastic and possibly unwilling sex.

I would love to hear her side of the story!

"I have had three short-lived affairs during the last 10 years, which all ended because the women involved refused to “share” me. But how can I possibly abandon my best friend, the mother of my children, co-owner of our family home, sharer of mutual friends? I still love her. I just want a reasonable sex life. Is that an impossible daydream?"

Right now I am hoping that her side of the story features a "fancy man", a lesbian lover and secret stash of fancy vibrators that whizz merrily when he is out of the house

I wonder what her "impossible daydream" is?

It might be that she knows about his affairs and hopes he will have another one and leave her alone because she regards him as her "best friend, the (father) of my children, co-owner of our family home, sharer of mutual friends"?

At no point does it seem to occur to him that she is not necessarily hoping for a "desire-free old age" and that her rejection of his sexual advances is something that he ought at least to consider might be "personal".

I feel very unsympathetic to his plight from the way he has described things but it is impossible to understand what is going on in that relationship without knowing her side of the story.

It is weird that he doesn't want to masturbate unless he can use her as a masturbatory tool. He clearly knows he has been masturbating for 40 years.

These kinds of letters are always pretty limited given that you only have one side of the story, you can't ask questions, and they also often edit the letters.

I think he sounds like a complete dick really. If he was wiling to have affairs before I'm not sure why he'd hesitate now. But it might well be that his wife has always had a lower sex drive and it lessened after menopause. The irritation about touch he describes sounds exactly like my experience at times when my hormones are making my libido low - it's almost comparable to restless leg syndrome.

Comparing a husband and wife of 40 years to men rating women in a brothel is rather nasty I think onlydigestivesinthetin.

You said earlier on about the trafficking of women and prostitution and this is a massive issue, I agree. but the details of a couples sex life if not the same as random men abusing women.

MoleSmokes "It really does not sound like there has been a "sexual partnership" and much more that he "desired" her as a "sex object".

That seems like a massive jump on your part to assume that.

Do you not accept his take on life that he enjoyed sex with his wife more than she enjoyed sex with him? I'm afraid I think that is pretty much a standard reality of life for a lot of couples. I'd say there were probably many biological and psychological reasons why this would be true.

I think it might be good to unpick why that is, rather than assume it's not true.

What I'd want to say to this man is that probably his situation is not that unusual. But that he doesn't need to stay in a sexless marriage.

I don't like people having affairs, but I don't blame him and I wouldn't blame a woman in a similar situation for having an affair.

"This seems more like a transaction than a partnership: support for feminist views in exchange for unenthusiastic and possibly unwilling sex." I think you are reading into it. Rather than him doing things to gain sex I think he might be pointing out that he has been supportive of his wife. So maybe he feels a bit betrayed. I think woman can often feel betrayed too. There is a human interest element to the story which this diagnosis of this man's letter seems to miss.

I feel very sorry for him and I find the nasty responses on here very cruel and I am pretty certain if the situation were reversed it would be a different story.

I don't think your speculation is any more accurate or appropriate than anyone else's, Italiangreyhound.

I don't think him enjoying sex more than her is particularly rare either.

We often see the (unrealistic IMHO) opinion on here that the husband should unconditionally love his wife no matter his fat she gets, but you can be assured that in most cases the man won't be enjoying sex as much when it's with a fat women who was formerly slim.

Obv, it runs both ways and only the other day on here I saw women saying that they'd be repulsed if their hubby porked it, but usually it's women who seem to have this deluded believe that attraction is unconditional.

What if the wife is financially dependent on him, doesn't have her own pensions or income. What if she has no other friends or family.

Is a relationship a commitment to financially provide for a partner ad infinitum? For example, if someone in the trans widow discussion had a partner who was financially dependent on them, would they be obliged to financially provide for their partner through their transition and beyond or has the nature/content of the relationship changed sufficiently that it's quite reasonable to leave their new 'girlfriend' to make their own way?

Fascinating thread about the importance/obligations of sex within marriages...

I just wonder with this man, is he genuinely seeking help to resolve his problem and nurture his marriage into something fulfilling for them both, or deep down does he know what he wants to do and just wants other people to excuse it?

We will never know, but I hope his wife is ok.

What if the wife is financially dependent on him, doesnt have own pension and income. What if she has no other friends or family.

Not sure that's relevant. No one has to stay in a sexless or otherwise miserable marriage just to provide their spouse with an income, home comforts or a social life.

If he's always suspected he enjoyed sex more than she did, it doesn't say much for his ability to communicate with her emotionally or sexually.

If your sexual partner isn't getting as much out of sex as you are, and your instinct is to have affairs and whinge about her eventually going off the idea altogether, I don't think she is the one who needs to examine her behaviour.

I'd say it doesnt say much for their ability to communicate with each other. It does take two. Or possibly she tried and he wasnt listening, although I think a big issue traditionally is that women were brought up to believe that sex was something they had to tolerate rather than something they should actively enjoy.

If you know for 40 years that the person you're having sex with is enjoying it less than you are, and you don't appear to have made any effort to address that imbalance, then I think you have only yourself to blame if that person eventually loses interest in having sex with you entirely. I wonder if this man's poor wife has ever had an orgasm with him.

Men arent the gatekeepers of sexual pleasure. If she wasnt orgasming perhaps she should have initiated a conversation about that pretty early on. Would you put up with 40 years of crappy sex before turning off the tap? Would it be solely your husband's fault if you did?

Not sure that's relevant. No one has to stay in a sexless or otherwise miserable marriage just to provide their spouse with an income, home comforts or a social life.

We're talking about a couple in their 60s here. Married 40 years. Marriage was a very different commitment back then and grounded in the belief that a man financially supports his wife. My mother for one doesn't have her own pension because she has been in a marriage contract thsr said her husband would provide for her in old age.

I'm not saying a man has to financially support his wife. I'm saying I'm the context of this senairo, the wife may feel under a lot of pressure to provide him with sexual gratification that she doesn't want to provide because she is dependent on him. As a woman in her 60s her option are also very limited on cresting her own income stream.

Also the man who let's assume is providing the finance in the marriage in this scenario, does want to stay in the marriage and we assume continue financially supporting his wife. I was referring to whether the wife would want to have the marriage brake up.

I would indeed initiate a conversation, but a. I'm of a different generation, b. we don't really know much about the background of this couple, there are all kinds of factors that make that easier to do or less so, and c. if her husband cared about the fact that she wasn't enjoying sex he also could have addressed that issue in a more productive way than. That he chose not to indicated, again, that he didn't consider her pleasure as being a necessary component of their sex life.

It's amazing how many people will bend over backwards to excuse men being selfish in bad.

Or bed, even. There's a percentage of the population who won't even entertain the possibility that he might be doing anything bad by being perfectly happy to have sex with someone who he's always known isn't enjoying it nearly as much as he is.

Men arent the gatekeepers of sexual pleasure. If she wasnt orgasming perhaps she should have initiated a conversation about that pretty early on. Would you put up with 40 years of crappy sex before turning off the tap? Would it be solely your husband's fault if you did?

No one's saying its her husbands fault she went off sex are they. I thought we were talking about a mans entitlement to sex and the normalisation of man's expectancy to have his wife forfil his desires, even if she doesn't want too, or feels pressured to do so, so thsr he doesn't leave her or have affairs.

Also he says she didn't enjoy it as much as him. Doesn't really mean much. She could really, really like it, but he could really, really, really like it.

Although looking at the full picture I do get the impression she might be in a lie back and thing of England marriage. Or maybe she went of sex due to his affairs?