|
Post by saarinista on Nov 22, 2020 9:33:21 GMT -5
tesseract Again, with all the "appointments" your wife has the time and money to pursue, it seems to me her energy might be better spent just relaxing and letting you fuck her, if I mat be so blunt. Why is that so difficult for her to do or accept? All these specialists are, to me, a bit of a waste. Why not just have sex? That's a lor sexier than getting a hormone check. Again, all women have to do is to acquiesce.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 22, 2020 10:40:37 GMT -5
“ Again, all women have to do is to acquiesce.”
Only if the man would be ok with starfish sex or the woman’s being in pain or regarding him with revulsion. Remember the “my husband makes my skin crawl” post. Sure, some women might acquiesce then get turned on but that may not be the case with the refusers whose partners end up here.
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Nov 22, 2020 13:28:33 GMT -5
After reading all of your responses, the only thing that stands out physical wise about your W is her menstrual problems? The rest sounds phycological? Has the subject of "greysexual" been discussed or looked into?
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 22, 2020 15:13:19 GMT -5
Women can have sex without being totally turned on. That's a fact. Now I'm not saying that's the BEST way to do or have sex, but all you have to do if you are a woman is be compliant. Men have to be turned on to have sex. Don't they? Women can fake it. Here's what I learned about your suggestion for women "just to go along until their interest is engaged". After a couple 3 or 4 "talks" with my then W I mentioned how she seemed to always enjoy the intimacy and to reach an orgasm. She conceded that she wasn't interested initially but after things were well on their way she began to enjoy the experience. "So why don't you mentally engage at the onset if you find the experience enjoyable? I asked. She didn't have an answer and her willingness to have sex never improved, avoiding intimacy as much as she could. Quarterly was the best she could do. You may actually have a relevant point, but if the woman is adamant that she doesn't want to allow things to even start, it's a mute point. In the singles world, and with more men than women - there is a difference between having sex because someone is just horny, and having sex because you are really into that person. I have certainly been more inclined to say "yes" in situations where I felt less invested exploring a long term thing, when I was feeling generally horny and/or experimental (particularly closer to the epicentre of my separation, when I didn't have a lot of emotional bandwidth to jump right into something serious, but had needs that had been unmet for a long time.). I can think of no evidence to suggest that "horny vs really invested in one partner due to a unique attraction" should work differently in a marriage. If I happen to be married to someone with whom I see no future, or to whom I'm pissed off, or bored, or otherwise contemptuous of, or be otherwise uninvested - I may still feel generalized desire and have sexual needs, irrespective of my partner. I suspect that's the case with a lot of this "amnesia" and reluctance. Technically, ex-Mrs Apocrypha had a very tough time reaching orgasm even by herself. Across years of learning and paying attention, improving etc, by the time we got married, I could reliably get her there every single time - sometimes with remarkable speed. If you are good in bed and attentive, plus married over a long period of time, you can acquire expertise over another's sexual response. The problem isn't so much about the sexual act itself or the pleasure it can reliably deliver; the problem is about what the sexual act means or promises in the context in which it occurs. The conversation fixates on the desire and the objective facts around sex and the partner's ability to provide physical pleasure that the other partner seems to enjoy. The dissonance happens because they still seek to avoid it. It's likely because the pleasure itself isn't the source of the aversion - it's what it means, when it comes from you, or when it happens in the context of a marriage to you, or in a marriage in general. I might be able to have physically enjoyable sex with someone who I don't like or in a situation in which I don't want - like with my prison guard (or ex wife, for that matter). But if I don't feel familiar with them in that regard or don't want to for other reasons - then I'm going to avoid the situations in which I have sex, irrespective of the pleasure.
|
|
|
Post by worksforme2 on Nov 22, 2020 16:34:58 GMT -5
I can think of no evidence to suggest that "horny vs really invested in one partner due to a unique attraction" should work differently in a marriage. If I happen to be married to someone with whom I see no future, or to whom I'm pissed off, or bored, or otherwise contemptuous of, or be otherwise uninvested - I may still feel generalized desire and have sexual needs, irrespective of my partner. I suspect that's the case with a lot of this "amnesia" and reluctance. The problem isn't so much about the sexual act itself or the pleasure it can reliably deliver; the problem is about what the sexual act means or promises in the context in which it occurs. The conversation fixates on the desire and the objective facts around sex and the partner's ability to provide physical pleasure that the other partner seems to enjoy. The dissonance happens because they still seek to avoid it. It's likely because the pleasure itself isn't the source of the aversion - it's what it means, when it comes from you, or when it happens in the context of a marriage to you, or in a marriage in general. I might be able to have physically enjoyable sex with someone who I don't like or in a situation in which I don't want - like with my prison guard (or ex wife, for that matter). But if I don't feel familiar with them in that regard or don't want to for other reasons - then I'm going to avoid the situations in which I have sex, irrespective of the pleasure. This is an apt description of what I think was a good part of how my marriage went south. Her menopause played a significant role in the situation but after our separation I gave things a lot of thought. I tried to replay her behavior over and over to "why chase" it for the last time. When it really started becoming an issue was after I had lost my job due to the company closing the doors. I was 63. Trying to find employment in my field at my level was impossible. There probably were 100 applicants for every job opening and there were few openings. I finally concluded she no longer saw me as an alpha male, so mating with me was more long the lines of slumming for her. Her body language was easy enough to read in hindsight. The combination of menopause and loss of status was something I just could not overcome.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Nov 22, 2020 16:59:50 GMT -5
Something struck my funny bone: Sexless during the honeymoon because of constipation. (not funny ha ha, but funny weird). When I was studying education and psychology way back in the 70s we used to take the mickey out of Freud. I think the expression 'anally retentive' goes back to Freud. He expands that to other personality markers. He also postulated that going to the toilet is the first sexually lustful experience of the infant ... leading to the in-joke that I still tell people on their way to the loo "have fun!". {snort} Practically no-one gets it.
I have personal experience of two women who can/could not go to the toilet once out of their home, and often when at home. Guess what. They could not really let go of their emotion, their sexuality any more than their coproliths. Holding it all in. Interesting? Maybe they should learn to 'loosen up' but I find it also goes with strong neurotic armour ... Does this offer any solutions? No, I don't think so. But it may offer a perspective on the future. I know I will see this as a red flag in future.
As for "feeling like the janitor around here, just good for changing tap washers and lightbulbs" - that was what I verbatim said to my wife back in '09. Heh. Know what that feels like. Unfortunately I was deprived of the joy (or the 'albatross around the neck') of having some children around. Knowing what I know now, 22 years in, 17 years of sexlessness, having a wife who feels sorry about it, like yours, but doesn't do diddly squat about resolving the situation because other than a vague feeling of guilt there's nothing to motivate her (and yes, I think she genuinely has lost all interest in sex - so I can't reasonably expect wild passionate rooting from her - never been on the cards, see paragraph 1 here); despite the fact that she's my best friend and a great flatmate, I should've kicked her to the curb as a wife 17 years ago. I've wasted 17 years of passion, 17 years of giving and receiving love freely. I have a female body at hand that I can hug, touch, kiss - but I never know how it's being received, if that smile is one of derision or one of genuine enjoyment. I have a decent partnership, and I don't expect to find passionate love (again). So here I am, and here I stay. But not without regrets looking back, and sometimes I wonder if I should not stop taking my meds and eat myself to death, a'la "La Grande Bouffe".
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Nov 22, 2020 17:05:03 GMT -5
Women can have sex without being totally turned on. That's a fact. Now I'm not saying that's the BEST way to do or have sex, but all you have to do if you are a woman is be compliant. Men have to be turned on to have sex. Don't they? Women can fake it.
Men CAN fake it, believe me. You know that thing about women faking orgasm? Men do it ...
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Nov 22, 2020 17:26:05 GMT -5
Women can have sex without being totally turned on. That's a fact. Now I'm not saying that's the BEST way to do or have sex, but all you have to do if you are a woman is be compliant. Men have to be turned on to have sex. Don't they? Women can fake it.
Men CAN fake it, believe me. You know that thing about women faking orgasm? Men do it ...
No, I DIDN'T know there was such a thing as a fake erection. How does that work?
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Nov 22, 2020 17:40:00 GMT -5
Women can have sex without being totally turned on. That's a fact. Now I'm not saying that's the BEST way to do or have sex, but all you have to do if you are a woman is be compliant. Men have to be turned on to have sex. Don't they? Women can fake it.
Men CAN fake it, believe me. You know that thing about women faking orgasm? Men do it ...
This is true, men do fake orgasms, a male friend told me. I was flabbergasted. And then a bit made up on the point of gender equity alone! Faking is a fool’s errand for both genders. Emotionally dishonest, and guaranteeing you re visit what didn’t work last time. It’s the journey not the destination surely.
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Nov 22, 2020 19:05:05 GMT -5
We ask an awful lot of traditional marriage.
We ask that it provide a lifetime exclusive source of material support, procreation and parenting of children, and that it provide exclusive sexual contact between the participants.
That's an awful lot to ask of a choice made, generally at fairly young age, especially for women who wish to bear children. Of necessity, women who want to have children must attract and choose a man by the time they're thirty or so or you're out of time. But with today's lifespans, people will continue to grow and change long beyond the time when they select a spouse.
In my experience, young men and women are not necessarily interested in marrying one another based on character. They marry each other because they seem cute or likely to make money. But those aren't the qualities that necessarily predict a lifetime of sexual and emotional compatibility.
Moreover not everyone is interested in marrying everyone else. For example, I had just one offer, when I was 35. I decided to marry because he asked, he is a good human, there was some compatibility AND he wanted to have sex, although it wasn't great. But at that point, I realized my odds of finding perfection were quite low. I decided it was better to give it the old College try than to be alone. It worked for a while, until life got crazy, and he stopped being interested. I never turned him down. I was not a starfish. I tried to do interesting things, but he wasn't into interesting sex. Frankly, for a long time I thought things would eventually restart. They I decided well, who cares. Then I met people who made me realize that I'M not dead, but the relationship was, and not just the sex.
But. Leaving even a childless, blah marriage is financially and emotionally difficult, for me at least. Remarrying older is not easy, either. Heck, even having an affair is difficult in pandemic. And Affairs are not the be-all-and-end-all either.
Not sure what my point is here... I'm just saying.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Nov 22, 2020 20:16:51 GMT -5
Men CAN fake it, believe me. You know that thing about women faking orgasm? Men do it ...
No, I DIDN'T know there was such a thing as a fake erection. How does that work?
Question to Radio Yerevan: "Do carrots help with erectile dysfunction?" Radio Yerevan answers "Yes, but attaching them can be difficult".
Seriously though? A semi erect penis works just fine, if you know what to do. Some guys may keep a 'steel rod of an erection' for hours and hours, some of us begin to flag a bit after half an hour, or an hour and a half - depending on the day and the phases of the moon ... and probably will revive in the course of events if actually engaged in the act. Meanwhile, you make do rather than roll off (or crawl off from under) leaving your partner hanging. Just a bit of technique. Also, digits and tongue. My tongue is a lot more resilient than my peter, but it also gets tired and painful after a couple of hours.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Nov 22, 2020 20:24:18 GMT -5
Men CAN fake it, believe me. You know that thing about women faking orgasm? Men do it ...
This is true, men do fake orgasms, a male friend told me. I was flabbergasted. And then a bit made up on the point of gender equity alone! Faking is a fool’s errand for both genders. Emotionally dishonest, and guaranteeing you re visit what didn’t work last time. It’s the journey not the destination surely.
I recall a couple of times. Once, I was so completely exhausted I could not go on. Once I was so flushed, I thought my head would explode with the heat. She was there a while ago, and wanted me to come too ... only I couldn't. So I groaned a bit when I reached a mini plateau and collapsed. Hardly emotionally dishonest - at least I didn't feel it that way. Just exceptional circumstances not worth talking about because -> too completely shagged out. Heh. Long time ago. {looks wistful}
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Nov 22, 2020 23:00:48 GMT -5
Saarinista, once my W was going on and on about something that was happening in South Carolina politics. I tried to get her mentally back to the sex I was trying to have with her and trying to make an emotional connection work. This happened several times so this one time I decided I had enough of the South Carolina political BS and just grunted like I had an "O." She was on top and then got off of me to pee. Sex was over. I was about half hard with all of the political shit talk. Like who can do anything about a state 2,000 miles away? No I cant fake an erection but I can do something to signal an end to a love making session when it becomes one sided and a place for my W to do one of her emotional dumps on me.
So is that faking it or just sidestepping reality to avoid hurting her feelings?
Worksforme2 (re job loss) I finally concluded she no longer saw me as an alpha male,..
Something like that played out in my marriage. My W had to get a job and then she didn't like sex very much.
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Nov 22, 2020 23:19:21 GMT -5
South Carolina politics? Wow she's drinking the Kool-aid! Oops-sorry to any drinking South Carolina political Kool aid, but seriously. Regardless of your views, Lindsey Graham's sex appeal has seen better days. He's just a real turn off.
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Nov 23, 2020 0:07:48 GMT -5
Saarinista, it was during Obama's last election and my W was concerned how many seats in government were going to be Republican and how many seats were going to be Democrats. She is still this way but i don't listen to her speculations. It was never about individuals, just which side gained or lost seats in government.
|
|