Wife Suddenly Prefers Handjob to Intercourse
Fred
wife's sexual interest. In the past she was only interested in having
straight intercourse. She has always enjoyed proceeding intercourse
with long slow foreplay--with me gently fingering her while she slowly
cups and massages my penis with her fingers and palm. She has always
liked to continue to tease my penis until I am begging her to get on
top of me and allow me to enter her. She would then stop and get on
top and control our lovemaking until we were both ready to come. She
would then increase her rythym until we reach nearly simultaneous
orgasms. I have sometimes enjoyed a good handjob, and have probably
encouraged it when she was not in the mood for intercourse or during
her period.
However, recently, she has started teasing me past the point of no
return--causing me to ejaculate without offering me the chance to
enter her. When I complain she says she is sorry--she didn't mean to
get me so close. She has also made comments about not wanting to deal
with the mess since she showers before bedtime. I've offered to use a
condom to eliminate the mess, but she says she doesn't like the feel
of a condom.
Unfortunately, this is happening nearly every time I want to have sex.
I have also noticed her sometimes fingering herself to orgasm after
she rolls over pretends to be sleeping. She is very subtle, but if I
get up close to her I can tell this is what she is doing.
Do you think she is just loosing interest in me or is maybe having an
affair. Should I believe "don't want the mess" argument? I am
getting very sexually frustrated, but I love my wife and could never
go to someone else to service my needs. I have tried talking to her
about it, but she insists that she still loves me and that I shouldn't
mind the handjobs if I really love her.
I am not sure what to try next.
Tom Allen
Fred <fr...@ywl.com> informed us:
| However, recently, she has started teasing me past the point of no
| return--causing me to ejaculate without offering me the chance to
| enter her. When I complain she says she is sorry--she didn't mean to
| get me so close. She has also made comments about not wanting to deal
| with the mess since she showers before bedtime. I've offered to use a
| condom to eliminate the mess, but she says she doesn't like the feel
| of a condom.
I have soome thoughts on this, but the first thing that you need to do
is sit down with her in a non-sexual context (i.e., over dinner, say)
and discuss this. Print out your post for her to read if it helps to
open up the conversation.
| Unfortunately, this is happening nearly every time I want to have sex.
| I have also noticed her sometimes fingering herself to orgasm after
| she rolls over pretends to be sleeping. She is very subtle, but if I
| get up close to her I can tell this is what she is doing.
This would seem to inddicate that either she's enjoying this quite a bit
(and is maybe a bit embarrassed by it) or that she really doesn't want
to bother with sex and is just taking the edge off. Is your lovemaking
still passionate? Does she bring you off as quickly as possible or does
she make a game of it? Does she try to make it pleasurable for you? Do
you reciprocate by giving (or offering) to give her ahnd jobs? Does your
orgasm signal the end of the sex, or do you keep going?
|
| Do you think she is just loosing interest in me or is maybe having an
| affair. Should I believe "don't want the mess" argument? I am
| getting very sexually frustrated, but I love my wife and could never
| go to someone else to service my needs. I have tried talking to her
| about it, but she insists that she still loves me and that I shouldn't
| mind the handjobs if I really love her.
|
| I am not sure what to try next.
You can explain that it' s not a matter of "love" or "shouldn't mind".
The issue is that your sexual needs are being intentionally derailed.
That's not fair. Sure, lots of guys would love to get even the amount of
attention that you are, but they're not you, are they? For her to insist
that you should not mind one thing as a replacement for something else,
without any prior discussion about it is inconsiderate. However, the
fact that you're still making love is a good sign - you just need to get
to some agreement. OTOH, if she's just bringing you off to get you to
sleep ASAP, then it's probably a sign of a deeper relationship problem.
From a practical standpoint, having a warm towel near the bed would help
to "deal with the mess". Personally, I get the heebie-jeebies when a
woman tells me that, but that's just me. I tend to believe that women
like to use that as an excuse when they run out of headaches.
My final thought on this is that if she tends to be more aggressive (you
wrote that she used to tease you and then get on top and "control" youru
lovemaking), it's possible that she is displaying more dominant behavior
and is using this as a technique to assert more sexuaal control over
you. This in itself might be a good thing, although it would be more
appropriate if the two of you discussed it openly.
Tom
suzeeq
>
> In news:748abbcc.04070...@posting.google.com,
> Fred <fr...@ywl.com> informed us:
>
> | However, recently, she has started teasing me past the point of no
> | return--causing me to ejaculate without offering me the chance to
> | enter her. When I complain she says she is sorry--she didn't mean to
> | get me so close. She has also made comments about not wanting to deal
> | with the mess since she showers before bedtime. I've offered to use a
> | condom to eliminate the mess, but she says she doesn't like the feel
> | of a condom.
>
> I have soome thoughts on this, but the first thing that you need to do
> is sit down with her in a non-sexual context (i.e., over dinner, say)
> and discuss this. Print out your post for her to read if it helps to
> open up the conversation.
I'd suggest waiting until after dinner. It's possible the subject could
lead to emotional distress and it's not a good thing to have while
you're trying to eat.
But by all means, it's something you two should discuss. The rest of
Tom's post contains some good suggestions.
sue
::ALIUS::
> wife's sexual interest. In the past she was only interested in having
> straight intercourse. She has always enjoyed proceeding intercourse
> with long slow foreplay--with me gently fingering her while she slowly
> cups and massages my penis with her fingers and palm. She has always
> liked to continue to tease my penis until I am begging her to get on
> top of me and allow me to enter her. She would then stop and get on
> top and control our lovemaking until we were both ready to come. She
> would then increase her rythym until we reach nearly simultaneous
> orgasms. I have sometimes enjoyed a good handjob, and have probably
> encouraged it when she was not in the mood for intercourse or during
> her period.
It's possible that she might have gotten bored, espcially since she
seems to be the one in control. Why don't you try something else in
bed?
> However, recently, she has started teasing me past the point of no
> return--causing me to ejaculate without offering me the chance to
> enter her. When I complain she says she is sorry--she didn't mean to
> get me so close. She has also made comments about not wanting to deal
> with the mess since she showers before bedtime. I've offered to use a
> condom to eliminate the mess, but she says she doesn't like the feel
> of a condom.
I'm not trying to be insensitive here, but do you seriously mean to
say that you cannot stop her before you come? I get the sense that
your acting as if you have been taken advantage off. As Tom suggested
there might be something else going on here, but I think your angry at
not having an orgasm the 'usual' way you two seemed to have been used
to.
> Unfortunately, this is happening nearly every time I want to have sex.
> I have also noticed her sometimes fingering herself to orgasm after
> she rolls over pretends to be sleeping. She is very subtle, but if I
> get up close to her I can tell this is what she is doing.
You get up close to her, but do you say anything? Next time she does
it, just ask her what she's doing and if you can 'help'. Maybe that is
what she wants. Maybe not. She's not clarvoient...so if your not sure
just ask--tactfully.
> Do you think she is just loosing interest in me or is maybe having an
> affair.
I think if she was cheating, she might avoid you sexually all
together.
Should I believe "don't want the mess" argument?
Did she mind the mess before?
::ALIUS::
> > | return--causing me to ejaculate without offering me the chance to
> > | enter her. When I complain she says she is sorry--she didn't mean to
> > | get me so close. She has also made comments about not wanting to deal
> > | with the mess since she showers before bedtime. I've offered to use a
> > | condom to eliminate the mess, but she says she doesn't like the feel
> > | of a condom.
> >
> > I have soome thoughts on this, but the first thing that you need to do
> > is sit down with her in a non-sexual context (i.e., over dinner, say)
> > and discuss this. Print out your post for her to read if it helps to
> > open up the conversation.
>
> I'd suggest waiting until after dinner. It's possible the subject could
> lead to emotional distress and it's not a good thing to have while
> you're trying to eat.
I also think you should not discuss this around the dinner table,
with all the sharp objects around <g>
Joel
> I am not sure what to try next.
Try communication.
--
Beer Gogglers
experience, I personally prefer non-intercourse sex now and then. I
could go a few weeks with just handjobs and/or blowjobs. She's the
same way. We just take a break from PIV once in a while.
I would DEFINITELY discuss it with her though!!
On 7 Jul 2004 09:26:18 -0700, fr...@ywl.com (Fred) wrote:
>Over the past several months ...
Delila
"Beer Gogglers" <no...@fakeisp.com> wrote in message
news:g7mpe0ldkku9bg2ef...@4ax.com...
> Well, her age could have a lot to do with it. But speaking from
> experience, I personally prefer non-intercourse sex now and then. I
> could go a few weeks with just handjobs and/or blowjobs.
Yeah, I hear a lot of men wouldn't mind just bjs all the time. :(
D.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Tom Allen
Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
| "Beer Gogglers" <no...@fakeisp.com> wrote in message
| news:g7mpe0ldkku9bg2ef...@4ax.com...
| > Well, her age could have a lot to do with it. But speaking from
| > experience, I personally prefer non-intercourse sex now and then.
| I > could go a few weeks with just handjobs and/or blowjobs.
|
|
| Yeah, I hear a lot of men wouldn't mind just bjs all the time. :(
Sure, but the point is that he's not one of them. It's odd that he
writes as if they have a sensual love life, but he seems hesitiant to
talk to her. OTOH, he did write that he has tried talking to her and
seems not to get much of a response. At any rate, it does raise a good
question for discussion.
If your partner gave you all the sex you wanted, but in a form that was
*not* what you'd prefer, how long do you think you'd be satisfied?
For example, how long would the men or women here be able to live on
hand or oral sex if you'd prefer PIV? Does intent matter? For example,
if it were the result of an accident, would that make a difference? How
about if your partner just suddenly developed an aversion to ____?
Tom
Fred J Keller
wrote:
>
>I have soome thoughts on this, but the first thing that you need to do
>is sit down with her in a non-sexual context (i.e., over dinner, say)
>and discuss this. Print out your post for her to read if it helps to
>open up the conversation.
>
>
We'll I going to start the conversation during a nice intiment dinner
I have planned for tonight. I try to bring up the subject in as
non-threating a way as I can. I'm keeping my fingers and toes
crossed.
F
Sarah
>If your partner gave you all the sex you wanted, but in a form that was
>*not* what you'd prefer, how long do you think you'd be satisfied?
>
>For example, how long would the men or women here be able to live on
>hand or oral sex if you'd prefer PIV? Does intent matter? For example,
>if it were the result of an accident, would that make a difference? How
>about if your partner just suddenly developed an aversion to ____?
My partner gives me lots and lots of lovely PIV, but he has a bit of
an aversion to cunnilingus.
ABout every four or five months this really starts to upset me, and I
tell him so. Then in another month I blow up, and he gets around to
giving me some, and then we get back to enjoyable PIV.
So... I reckon I'd be satisfied with a sex act that was not what I
prefer for about four or five months :)
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
Fred J Keller <fr...@ywl.com> informed us:
Well, hopefully it went well. I've got my fingers crossed for ya!
Tom
A man said to his wife "I demand
a screwing, it would feel so grand."
But his wife simply said
"I'm sorry, my Fred,
but you'll have to take matters in hand."
Daniel L. Snyder
Considering one of the other threads, you might not want to keep your
toes crossed!
Alexis
wrote:
>
>If your partner gave you all the sex you wanted, but in a form that was
>*not* what you'd prefer, how long do you think you'd be satisfied?
>
>For example, how long would the men or women here be able to live on
>hand or oral sex if you'd prefer PIV? Does intent matter? For example,
>if it were the result of an accident, would that make a difference? How
>about if your partner just suddenly developed an aversion to ____?
>
>Tom
>
Hmmmm.... Who knows why I've stayed in an on-again, off-again
relationship just like that for a long time. I guess I stay because
we're good friends and I'm too lazy to go out and meet somebody else.
But he would be happy with only a steady diet of bj's; and when we do
have PIV, he goes right to it... almost no foreplay. So I'm a bit
bored and disatisfied a lot of the time. There are those rare "moods"
of his however where we have marathon PIV, sometimes anal, and then he
makes an effort to stimulate my clitoris continuously. So maybe it's
the element of potential surprise that keeps me around...I don't
always know what to expect. (What I loved about our love-making in
the beginning of the relationship was that it was virtually
non-stop... morning, noon and night... and though sore most of the
time I really loved it. The only man I've known who was that...
well... "energetic"... ) <g> But alas all good things must come to an
end...
Now as far as your question about being in an accident...that's a
whole different ball game. What was that old Kenny Rogers song,
"Ruby... don't take your love to town," about an injured Vietnam vet
whose wife ran around because he couldn't satisfy her. In THAT case,
sex would be totally secondary... if he couldn't do PIV then I
certainly wouldn't go elsewhere for it. That's when one puts their
selfish needs aside and does what's best for their partner. I would
think that, given some imagination though, something can always be
worked out.
Anything else you want to know? <g>
Alexis
Alexis
> <snip of stream>
> Now as far as your question about being in an
> accident...that's a whole different ball game. What
> was that old Kenny Rogers song, "Ruby... don't take
> your love to town," about an injured Vietnam vet
> whose wife ran around because he couldn't satisfy
> her. In THAT case, sex would be totally secondary...
> if he couldn't do PIV then I certainly wouldn't go
> elsewhere for it. That's when one puts their selfish
> needs aside and does what's best for their partner. I
> would think that, given some imagination though,
> something can always be worked out.
> Anything else you want to know? <g>
Wow... sorry for the stream of consciousness in this post. I just
tried Agent for the first time and it seemed to have removed most of
my breaks.
Maybe I should give Mozilla a try; Tom's new posts are looking pretty
good..!
Alexis
suzeeq
> Hmmmm.... Who knows why I've stayed in an on-again, off-again
> relationship just like that for a long time. I guess I stay because
> we're good friends and I'm too lazy to go out and meet somebody else.
> But he would be happy with only a steady diet of bj's; and when we do
> have PIV, he goes right to it... almost no foreplay. So I'm a bit
> bored and disatisfied a lot of the time. There are those rare "moods"
> of his however where we have marathon PIV, sometimes anal, and then he
> makes an effort to stimulate my clitoris continuously. So maybe it's
> the element of potential surprise that keeps me around...I don't
> always know what to expect. (What I loved about our love-making in
> the beginning of the relationship was that it was virtually
> non-stop... morning, noon and night... and though sore most of the
> time I really loved it. The only man I've known who was that...
> well... "energetic"... ) <g> But alas all good things must come to an
> end...
That tends to happen when relationships are new. See the thread on 2-3
times a week being normal for certain age groups....
sue
Delila
"Alexis" <Alexis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6e6ue0puludeg5f74...@4ax.com...
>
> But he would be happy with only a steady diet of bj's;
That's what I said in an earlier post (which never showed up here, btw.)
suzeeq
>
> "Alexis" <Alexis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:6e6ue0puludeg5f74...@4ax.com...
> >
> > But he would be happy with only a steady diet of bj's;
>
> That's what I said in an earlier post (which never showed up here, btw.)
>
> D.
I thought I saw it...
sue
Sarah
>
> "Alexis" <Alexis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:6e6ue0puludeg5f74...@4ax.com...
> >
> > But he would be happy with only a steady diet of bj's;
>
>
> That's what I said in an earlier post (which never showed up here, btw.)
Um.. yes it did.
Message ID <40ed4...@corp.newsgroups.com>
"Beer Gogglers" <no...@fakeisp.com> wrote in message
news:g7mpe0ldkku9bg2ef...@4ax.com...
> Well, her age could have a lot to do with it. But speaking from
> experience, I personally prefer non-intercourse sex now and then.
I
> could go a few weeks with just handjobs and/or blowjobs.
Yeah, I hear a lot of men wouldn't mind just bjs all the time. :(
D.
--
Sarah
Norton
> "Beer Gogglers" <no...@fakeisp.com> wrote in message
>news:g7mpe0ldkku9bg2ef...@4ax.com...
> > Well, her age could have a lot to do with it. But speaking from
> > experience, I personally prefer non-intercourse sex now and then. I
> > could go a few weeks with just handjobs and/or blowjobs.
> Yeah, I hear a lot of men wouldn't mind just bjs all the time. :(
Well, not *all* the time, but they are nice.... ;-)
Norton.
Anonymous Jack
> Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> wrote:
>>
> > Yeah, I hear a lot of men wouldn't mind just bjs all the time. :(
>
> Well, not *all* the time, but they are nice.... ;-)
>
>
> Norton.
Y'know, my mind flashed on this image - a women permanently attached
onto my penis.
Talk about distracted drivers :-)
"Well, officer, I was eating a burger and talking on the cell phone
while getting a blowjob..."
Would that create a hostile work environment?
So, I'll agree with Norton - not *all* the time.
More frequently, heck yes!
Delila
"Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:2l5tgmF...@uni-berlin.de...
>
> For example, how long would the men or women here be able to live on
> hand or oral sex if you'd prefer PIV? Does intent matter? For example,
> if it were the result of an accident, would that make a difference? How
> about if your partner just suddenly developed an aversion to ____?
It depends on how good the relationship is in other regards. A
relationship that was based mostly on sex would certainly suffer, but one
that's based on much more than sex should be able to adjust. For me, sex
isn't of paramount importance anyway.
Delila
"Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:2blre0d5etg56magc...@4ax.com...
>
> My partner gives me lots and lots of lovely PIV, but he has a bit of
> an aversion to cunnilingus.
>
> ABout every four or five months this really starts to upset me, and I
> tell him so. Then in another month I blow up, and he gets around to
> giving me some, and then we get back to enjoyable PIV.
If your partner clearly does not enjoy going down on you, why do you put a
guilt trip on him to do so? I find this just as selfish and wrong as a guy
constantly asking his woman to give him oral if he knows damn well she
doesn't like to do it. Is there no way you could be happy without this? I
just don't get it.
Sarah
> If your partner clearly does not enjoy going down on you, why do you put a
>guilt trip on him to do so?
But I don;t "put a guilt trip on him"
Putting a guilt trip on someone involves, IMO, acting dishonestly in
order to get a desired result.
I don't put on an act.
Having my partner not want to give me oral sex affects me in many
different ways. here are some of them:
I feel undesired.
I feel unloved.
I feel as though he finds my genitals (which are an important part of
my self) disgusting.
I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction he
desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from me some
of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
I feel resentful
I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
In short, having this particular sexual need of mine unmet damages our
relationship by making me extraordinarily unhappy.
So I tell him (as all individual who value their relationships should,
IMO, do) how unhappy I am and why I am unhappy.
He listens to this. If he feels guilty, that's his choice. I certainly
don't want him to.
Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
going down, or having a happy partner.
> I find this just as selfish and wrong as a guy
>constantly asking his woman to give him oral if he knows damn well she
>doesn't like to do it.
The key word here is "constantly"
I don't pester my partner throughout the year for oral sex.
He knows I like it very much indeed, and that I have some emotions
tied up in how I feel about it. And about three times a year I let him
know that my not being given this sexual activity is making me
unhappy.
Has there never been anything (not necessarily sexual) which you
wanted your husband to do which he really disliked doing?
How about washing the dishes?
Going to Christmas dinners with your family?
Changing a nappy?
Watching a "Chick Flick"?
Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something he
dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels, and
*asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
He's free to say "no"
> Is there no way you could be happy without this?
Well, if you look at it one way, I *am* happy without it for 362 days
of the year. And 366 on leap years.
But no, I could not be happy in a sexual and romantic relationship
where oral sex was totally forbidden me. Never.
I could give up PIV sex much more easily.
If my partner decided he could never perform oral sex on me again, the
relationship would have to end.
>I just don't get it.
I know.
I'm sorry it's so difficult for you to see how some of us feel, but I
think it's great you're sticking around and asking questions. If I
haven't answered something you wanted to know, please ask me again,
because I'd really love you to be able to see things from my (and your
husband's, perhaps) perspective.
--
Sarah
Sarah
Tom Allen
| "Delila" <aqu...@widomaker.com> said:
Sarah, I'm going to pick at your argument a bit, just for the sake of
clarity.
| | If your partner clearly does not enjoy going down on you, why do
| | you put a guilt trip on him to do so?
|
| But I don;t "put a guilt trip on him"
|
| Putting a guilt trip on someone involves, IMO, acting dishonestly in
| order to get a desired result.
|
| I don't put on an act.
One *could* imagine that virtually any situation in which one partner
says "I want you to___" can end up with the other feeling guilty. Let's
not use this term.
| I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction he
| desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from me some
| of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
| I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
Sarah: suppose you tell him this and he responds "Fine. Didn't mean that
much to me anyway." ? Are you left without a carrot (carrot/stick
approach)?
| Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
| going down, or having a happy partner.
But, isn't that emotional blackmail?
| Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something he
| dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels, and
| *asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
|
| He's free to say "no"
Right. He's free to refuse at the expense of an unhappy partner. How do
you express that unhappiness? Stomping around the house? Pouting?
Withholding other sex? Leaving your wet hose over the shower rack?
| | Is there no way you could be happy without this?
|
| Well, if you look at it one way, I *am* happy without it for 362 days
| of the year. And 366 on leap years.
Once every four months? That's all? THat doesn't sound like much to keep
you happy ;-)
Tom
illecebra
Hash: SHA1
Delila wrote:
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| news:2l5tgmF...@uni-berlin.de...
| >
| > For example, how long would the men or women here be able to live on
| > hand or oral sex if you'd prefer PIV? Does intent matter? For example,
| > if it were the result of an accident, would that make a
difference? How
| > about if your partner just suddenly developed an aversion to ____?
|
|
| It depends on how good the relationship is in other regards. A
| relationship that was based mostly on sex would certainly suffer, but one
| that's based on much more than sex should be able to adjust. For me, sex
| isn't of paramount importance anyway.
|
| D.
That's what it comes down to in the end... how much do the people
involved value the sexual component for their relationship. Personally,
I find it extremely sad when a person who values sex very highly and one
who cares very little about it inflict themselves upon one another.
Unfortunately, for some reason unknown to me, when it comes to sex, most
people expect their partner to just adapt. Regardless of what else the
relationship is founded on, some people need the sexual connection to go
along with it.
Susan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA9ohNpPapZfe+hZ0RAhpvAJ4oDtAf2IlZ23brp8Gvj2uk24l7LACgoTJ6
ysMZ8R3Waat6+iPWwJ7Qu5M=
=H0SB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sarah
>"Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
>news:il8cf0tplip9ltqqn...@4ax.com
>| "Delila" <aqu...@widomaker.com> said:
>
>Sarah, I'm going to pick at your argument a bit, just for the sake of
>clarity.
Fine, Tom. I'm ready :)
|
>| I don't put on an act.
>
>One *could* imagine that virtually any situation in which one partner
>says "I want you to___" can end up with the other feeling guilty. Let's
>not use this term.
I didn;t like the term to begin with, so I am most happy to let it go.
I believe the choice of one partner to feel guilty is just that; a
choice.
>| I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction he
>| desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from me some
>| of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
>
>| I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
>
>Sarah: suppose you tell him this and he responds "Fine. Didn't mean that
>much to me anyway." ? Are you left without a carrot (carrot/stick
>approach)?
I didn;t say I *do* withhold it, Tom.
I feel like it. But I don't "withhold sex" or "cut him off," mostly
because I believe that that is a Wrong Thing To Do. but also cos Sex
Rocks.
>| Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
>| going down, or having a happy partner.
>
>But, isn't that emotional blackmail?
*blinks*
Is it?
If your partner wants to go to the beach, and you'd rather go to the
park, and she tells you that, since you have not been to the beach in
four months, and you've been to the park once a week during that time,
if you insist on going to the park and not going to the beach, she
will be unhappy, is that emotional blackmail?
(Yay for run-on sentences!)
>| Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something he
>| dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels, and
>| *asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
>|
>| He's free to say "no"
>
>Right. He's free to refuse at the expense of an unhappy partner. How do
>you express that unhappiness?
>Stomping around the house?
Nope.
>Pouting?
*grins* I only EVER pout in jest.
Unhappiness is far to serious for silly posturing like pouting.
>Withholding other sex?
Do I LOOK like a fool? I love sex. I love sex with my partner.
Just because one really would prefer to go to the beach doesn't mean
one can't have a damn good time at the park, now does it?
>Leaving your wet hose over the shower rack?
Well, I don't wear pantyhose, only occasional socks.
And to be perfectly honest, my partner wouldn't notice if I left a
used walrus in the bathroom, as long as I'd killed all the spiders.
I express my unhappiness be saying things like
"The fact that you haven;t gone down on me since the beginning of
February is starting to upset me. I'm getting very unhappy. I'm
feeling unloved and undesirable"
But I still want to go to the park, damnit :)
>| | Is there no way you could be happy without this?
>|
>| Well, if you look at it one way, I *am* happy without it for 362 days
>| of the year. And 366 on leap years.
>
>Once every four months? That's all? THat doesn't sound like much to keep
>you happy ;-)
About four months is as far as I get before I get so unhappy I have to
say something.
Personally I'd love oral sex every day - preferably while I drink
champagne with strawberries in it and just after my back massage - but
I can *cope* with once in four months - three times a year - or so.
Feel free to pick back, Tommy old son :)
*hugs n stuff*
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
Sarah <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> informed us:
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> said:
|
|| "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
|| news:il8cf0tplip9ltqqn...@4ax.com
||| "Delila" <aqu...@widomaker.com> said:
||
|| Sarah, I'm going to pick at your argument a bit, just for the sake of
|| clarity.
|
| Fine, Tom. I'm ready :)
So I hear.
|| One *could* imagine that virtually any situation in which one partner
|| says "I want you to___" can end up with the other feeling guilty.
|| Let's not use this term.
|
| I didn;t like the term to begin with, so I am most happy to let it go.
|
| I believe the choice of one partner to feel guilty is just that; a
| choice.
Instead of using the word "guilt", let's redefine what we're trying to
say. When your partner wants something from you that you don't want to
do, you start processing a lot of emotional conditions, a list, if you
will, and at the end of it you decide if you're better off giving in or
not based on what you see are the consequences. If you decide to give in
but are not happy about it, then you give grudgingly and often assign
the word "guilt" to that motivation.
||| I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction he
||| desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from me
||| some of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
||
||| I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
||
|| Sarah: suppose you tell him this and he responds "Fine. Didn't mean
|| that much to me anyway." ? Are you left without a carrot
|| (carrot/stick approach)?
|
| I didn;t say I *do* withhold it, Tom.
I saw that. I asked what if told him that you *feel like* withholding
sex.
| I feel like it. But I don't "withhold sex" or "cut him off," mostly
| because I believe that that is a Wrong Thing To Do. but also cos Sex
| Rocks.
Damn, and so do *you*, Sarah!
So, why is it a Wrong Thing To Do? (the capital letter emphasis reminds
me of the Milne Pooh stories. I read those to my daughter)
||| Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
||| going down, or having a happy partner.
||
|| But, isn't that emotional blackmail?
|
| *blinks*
|
| Is it?
If he has to be concerned with living (or not) with a happy Sarah, he'd
probably pick doing a thing rather than face the consequences of living
with an unhappy Sarah. But if there are no physical consequences (i.e.,
yelling and screaming, hitting, leaving, pissing in his beer, etc.),
then the consequences are emotional.
Perhaps blackmail or extortion are too strong for what I'm trying to
convey. What's a notch down from extortion? Coercion?
| If your partner wants to go to the beach, and you'd rather go to the
| park, and she tells you that, since you have not been to the beach in
| four months, and you've been to the park once a week during that time,
| if you insist on going to the park and not going to the beach, she
| will be unhappy, is that emotional blackmail?
|
| (Yay for run-on sentences!)
Well, for me, yes. That's probably because part of my self-image
includes being a good "provider"; not necessarily the breadwinner, but
providing certain... perquisites for the relationship. I *want* to make
my partner happy, and a suggestion that I'm not doing so causes me to
re-evaluate my performance.
(I suspect by the time this post is finished I'm going to agree with
you, BTW. Writing this out is making me re-think my original position.)
||| Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something
||| he dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels,
||| and *asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
|||
||| He's free to say "no"
||
|| Right. He's free to refuse at the expense of an unhappy partner. How
|| do you express that unhappiness?
|
|| Stomping around the house?
|
| Nope.
|
|| Pouting?
|
| *grins* I only EVER pout in jest.
|
| Unhappiness is far to serious for silly posturing like pouting.
This statement nearly knocked me over. You're absolutely right.
Unhappiness should be dealt with by addressing the issues instead of
hiding behind guilt-provoking behaviors. Or as WC Fields might have
said, one needs to take the bull by the tail and face the situation.
That said, I understand that previous patterns of behavior in other
relationships make it difficult for people to do this. Is it because we
all want our partners to be happy, so we pick and choose the time,
place, and words with which we address those issues, if at all? Is it
because we will push those thoughts out of our mind to avoid
confrontation? Well, certainly not everyone does that, but it seems that
quite a few people do, moreso as they become more invested in the
relationship.
|| Withholding other sex?
|
| Do I LOOK like a fool? I love sex. I love sex with my partner.
When they perfect cloning would you please send me a DNA sample?
Okay, that's biting off your nose to spite your face. Admittedly, not
everyone takes that stance; they use their partner's enjoyment as
blac,... er,... leverage. And that gets to my carrot & stick comment.
What if your partner did not care enough about doing this one thing?
Since so often our actions are based on what we believe to be the
consequences of previous actions, I'd think that no/few consequences
would make your partner less likely to give in.
| Just because one really would prefer to go to the beach doesn't mean
| one can't have a damn good time at the park, now does it?
One could have a good time at a third option, too.
| I express my unhappiness be saying things like
|
| "The fact that you haven;t gone down on me since the beginning of
| February is starting to upset me. I'm getting very unhappy. I'm
| feeling unloved and undesirable"
|
| But I still want to go to the park, damnit :)
Understood.
I see that I'm working on two levels here because I hadn't sorted it out
in my mind when I started this. On one hand, if you'd expressed that to
me I'd probably apologize for being so negligent and forgetfull and make
a date right then. OTOH, I wonder about a partner who would be less
cooperative. I guess that you would eventually decide that such a
partner might not be worth the aggravation.
|| Once every four months? That's all? THat doesn't sound like much to
|| keep you happy ;-)
|
| About four months is as far as I get before I get so unhappy I have to
| say something.
It's interesting that you notice how you feel on this.
| Personally I'd love oral sex every day - preferably while I drink
| champagne with strawberries in it and just after my back massage - but
| I can *cope* with once in four months - three times a year - or so.
That could be expensive - especially when the berries are out of season.
How about a can of Fresca and a Maraschino cherry?
Tom
The berries and Champagne that you get
Seem to make you excited and wet.
And the thought of your thighs
and the sound of your sighs...
(Excuse me, I'm starting to sweat!)
Sarah
>Sarah <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> informed us:
>| Fine, Tom. I'm ready :)
>So I hear.
*baps Tom*
>| I believe the choice of one partner to feel guilty is just that; a
>| choice.
>Instead of using the word "guilt", let's redefine what we're trying to
>say. When your partner wants something from you that you don't want to
>do, you start processing a lot of emotional conditions, a list, if you
>will, and at the end of it you decide if you're better off giving in or
>not based on what you see are the consequences. If you decide to give in
>but are not happy about it, then you give grudgingly and often assign
>the word "guilt" to that motivation.
*shrug*
I can agree with that, but I don;t see your point.
I'm sorry.
>| I didn;t say I *do* withhold it, Tom.
>
>I saw that. I asked what if told him that you *feel like* withholding
>sex.
Oh, ok.
Hmm...
"Darling, the fact that you don;t go down on me makes me feel like not
going down on you, in a sort of revenge thing.Even though I wouldn;t
do that, I hate feeling that way. And I know you wouldn't really care
that much anyway. It's extraordinarily frustrating."
Yes, we really *do* talk like that.
>| I feel like it. But I don't "withhold sex" or "cut him off," mostly
>| because I believe that that is a Wrong Thing To Do. but also cos Sex
>| Rocks.
>
>Damn, and so do *you*, Sarah!
*dimples and bows*
>So, why is it a Wrong Thing To Do? (the capital letter emphasis reminds
>me of the Milne Pooh stories. I read those to my daughter)
I probably picked the habit of Initial Capping words in Important
Phrases from Milne :)
Why is it Wrong to use sex or lack of it as a punishment?
How about "everything"?
Firstly, between two equal partners (which, IMO, sexual and romantic
partners *must* be, if the relationship is to be workable) there
should never be any question of punishments. Only a person with power
over another person can dole out punishments.
Secondly, sex is a wonderful, joyous thing. If one uses it as a
punishment, that tarnishes its bright shininess.
Thirdly, if one restricts sexual access to oneself as a punishments,
it allows resentment to smoulder, not only in the punished, but in the
punisher.
Fourthly, sex can be a way to bust through the emotional fog of an
unresolved issue. After the two of you have had a session of nice,
hard (even aggressive) sex, finished with a couple of ace orgasms,
things feel better. You like one another more. And it's much easier to
talk about a problem with some you like rather than with someone whom
you;re resenting the hell out of.
>||| Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
>||| going down, or having a happy partner.
>||
>|| But, isn't that emotional blackmail?
>|
>| *blinks*
>|
>| Is it?
>
>If he has to be concerned with living (or not) with a happy Sarah, he'd
>probably pick doing a thing rather than face the consequences of living
>with an unhappy Sarah. But if there are no physical consequences (i.e.,
>yelling and screaming, hitting, leaving, pissing in his beer, etc.),
>then the consequences are emotional.
Perhaps we have different definitions of the word "blackmail," Tom
To me, blackmail is to get something you want but which the other
person wants to not give you, with threats (actually with threats of
exposing a crime or shameful activity, but, for simplification, just
"threats" will do for now)
Now, when I want A and my partner wants B, we each tell one another.
Neither of us says "If I don;t get what I want your life will become a
misery" explicitly or implicitly, so there is no threat.
There is, however, a load of honest communication.
Do you feel it would be better for me to lie about how I feel, rather
than to impress on my partner just how important a particular sexual
activity is to me, and how the lack of it affects me emotionally?
>Perhaps blackmail or extortion are too strong for what I'm trying to
>convey. What's a notch down from extortion? Coercion?
Discussion. Open and honest communication.
>| If your partner wants to go to the beach, and you'd rather go to the
>| park, and she tells you that, since you have not been to the beach in
>| four months, and you've been to the park once a week during that time,
>| if you insist on going to the park and not going to the beach, she
>| will be unhappy, is that emotional blackmail?
>|
>| (Yay for run-on sentences!)
>Well, for me, yes. That's probably because part of my self-image
>includes being a good "provider"; not necessarily the breadwinner, but
>providing certain... perquisites for the relationship. I *want* to make
>my partner happy,
Yes, but that's probably (at least partly) because you have been in
the position of being the partner who Wants More in your sexual
relationship.
You don;t have a problem with giving your wife anything she wants,
sexually, because goshdarnit, you want it too. And a lot more.
It's just hit me how very very odd it is that you are the person
engaging me on this particular subject, because you have been in my
very position - albeit the sexual service we desire from our spouses
is different.
How fascinating :)
>and a suggestion that I'm not doing so causes me to
>re-evaluate my performance.
And the strong suggestion my partner is not doing the things that make
*me* happy causes him to re-evaluate *his* performance. See?
>(I suspect by the time this post is finished I'm going to agree with
>you, BTW. Writing this out is making me re-think my original position.)
It's wonderful, isn;t it, the way talking carefully about something
makes one think really really hard about what one thinks and why one
thinks it.
I think that *that* is the point really :)
>|| Pouting?
>|
>| *grins* I only EVER pout in jest.
>|
>| Unhappiness is far to serious for silly posturing like pouting.
>
>This statement nearly knocked me over. You're absolutely right.
>Unhappiness should be dealt with by addressing the issues instead of
>hiding behind guilt-provoking behaviors. Or as WC Fields might have
>said, one needs to take the bull by the tail and face the situation.
Shoulder to the wheel, nose to the grindstone, and back against the
wall? :)
>That said, I understand that previous patterns of behavior in other
>relationships make it difficult for people to do this.
Absolutely. But "difficult" should mean "don't try"
>Is it because we
>all want our partners to be happy, so we pick and choose the time,
>place, and words with which we address those issues, if at all? Is it
>because we will push those thoughts out of our mind to avoid
>confrontation? Well, certainly not everyone does that, but it seems that
>quite a few people do, moreso as they become more invested in the
>relationship.
I think that quite often, people only think of the immediate future
(If I complain he'll be hurt/upset/angry/embarressed), rather than the
longer term (If I don;t address this issue NOW it will build up out of
all proportion and I will be filled with rage/hurt/frustration in such
a way as to damage our relationship).
>|| Withholding other sex?
>|
>| Do I LOOK like a fool? I love sex. I love sex with my partner.
>
>When they perfect cloning would you please send me a DNA sample?
Heh. OKies :)
>Okay, that's biting off your nose to spite your face. Admittedly, not
>everyone takes that stance; they use their partner's enjoyment as
>blac,... er,... leverage.
Partners should *be* partners. There should never be any question of
blac..er...leverage or punishment between them.
>And that gets to my carrot & stick comment.
>What if your partner did not care enough about doing this one thing?
As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked performing
cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it, then the
relationship would have to end.
Some people insist that their partner read certain books, or vote for
a certain political party, or never wear fur, or don;t smoke, or
believe in a particular god.
I insist that my partner be comfortable enough with cunnilingus to
provide me with it at least three times a year.
>Since so often our actions are based on what we believe to be the
>consequences of previous actions, I'd think that no/few consequences
>would make your partner less likely to give in.
I don;t understand what you mean here, I'm sorry.
Please try again.
>| Just because one really would prefer to go to the beach doesn't mean
>| one can't have a damn good time at the park, now does it?
>
>One could have a good time at a third option, too.
Yes indeed. There are so many wonderful restaurants in the city, but
you still have your favourite, don;t you :)
>Understood.
>I see that I'm working on two levels here because I hadn't sorted it out
>in my mind when I started this. On one hand, if you'd expressed that to
>me I'd probably apologize for being so negligent and forgetfull and make
>a date right then. OTOH, I wonder about a partner who would be less
>cooperative. I guess that you would eventually decide that such a
>partner might not be worth the aggravation.
Well, I can see how that would work. Personally, I have decided that
my particular partner *is* worth the aggravation. And yes, if my
partner told me that he wanted me to give him some sexual service, I
would be, as you said, making a date right then.
This would be partly because I wish to please him, and partly because
if he wants something sexual, it's going to on my list of Sexual Stuff
I Like Or Would Like To Try.
There's also the fact that making my partner horny is a HUGE turn on
for me. Nothing gets me hotter than knowing I am arousing him.
>| About four months is as far as I get before I get so unhappy I have to
>| say something.
>
>It's interesting that you notice how you feel on this.
I think it's important to know how one feels about all sorts of
things. Our relationship is five years old. My own sexual experiences
stretch back another 16 years before that.
I've had plenty of time to see what I like, and what I don't like and
what I must have.
>That could be expensive - especially when the berries are out of season.
>How about a can of Fresca and a Maraschino cherry?
Never had the first, don;t like the second.
Try again :)
I would write a lim'rick for you
But it's sad even though it is true
that I can't make them rhyme
and scan at the same time
So you'll just have to be content that I spend an hour and a half
writing this post for you.
*grin*
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> said:
|
| | | Fine, Tom. I'm ready :)
|
| | So I hear.
|
| *baps Tom*
A little lower and to the left next time.
| | off giving in or not based on what you see are the consequences. If
| | you decide to give in but are not happy about it, then you give
| | grudgingly and often assign the word "guilt" to that motivation.
|
| *shrug*
|
| I can agree with that, but I don;t see your point.
|
| I'm sorry.
Just me thinking out loud. I'm now wondering about the concept of guilt;
where it comes frome, what it's comprised of, how it operates, etc.
| | I saw that. I asked what if told him that you *feel like*
| | withholding sex.
|
| Oh, ok.
|
| Hmm...
|
| "Darling, the fact that you don;t go down on me makes me feel like not
| going down on you, in a sort of revenge thing.Even though I wouldn;t
| do that, I hate feeling that way. And I know you wouldn't really care
| that much anyway. It's extraordinarily frustrating."
|
| Yes, we really *do* talk like that.
Okay. I'm with ya so far. I like it. It sounds like those model
dialogues from those books on Transactional Analysis and all that.
| | So, why is it a Wrong Thing To Do? (the capital letter emphasis
| | reminds me of the Milne Pooh stories. I read those to my daughter)
|
| I probably picked the habit of Initial Capping words in Important
| Phrases from Milne :)
Those were the first books that I remember as a kid. Those and the Cat
in the Hat. And I'm glad that jacqui didn't get me started on the
Disney'd Pooh.
| Why is it Wrong to use sex or lack of it as a punishment?
|
| How about "everything"?
|
| Firstly, between two equal partners (which, IMO, sexual and romantic
| partners *must* be, if the relationship is to be workable) there
| should never be any question of punishments. Only a person with power
| over another person can dole out punishments.
I agree. It's interesting to see this written out in such a simple basic
fashion, though.
Unexpected, like.
| Secondly, sex is a wonderful, joyous thing. If one uses it as a
| punishment, that tarnishes its bright shininess.
And for those people who enjoy sex, it punishes themselves as well.
| Thirdly, if one restricts sexual access to oneself as a punishments,
| it allows resentment to smoulder, not only in the punished, but in the
| punisher.
Yes, and for different reasons. Besides shutting down one more pathway
to intimacy, it makes the punisher aware of *doing* the punishing, of
offsetting the balance of equality. I'm wondering about those people
(typically women, but not always) who need the emotional connection in
order to open themselves up to sexual intimacy.
| Fourthly, sex can be a way to bust through the emotional fog of an
| unresolved issue. After the two of you have had a session of nice,
| hard (even aggressive) sex, finished with a couple of ace orgasms,
| things feel better. You like one another more. And it's much easier to
| talk about a problem with some you like rather than with someone whom
| you;re resenting the hell out of.
Is this "make-up sex", or are you talking about easing the tension?
| | If he has to be concerned with living (or not) with a happy Sarah,
| | he'd probably pick doing a thing rather than face the consequences
| | of living with an unhappy Sarah. But if there are no physical
| | consequences (i.e., yelling and screaming, hitting, leaving,
| | pissing in his beer, etc.), then the consequences are emotional.
|
| Perhaps we have different definitions of the word "blackmail," Tom
|
| To me, blackmail is to get something you want but which the other
| person wants to not give you, with threats (actually with threats of
| exposing a crime or shameful activity, but, for simplification, just
| "threats" will do for now)
That's why I reconsidered that word. But yes, I'm talking about a
threat. Even a threat of withholding something (not necessarily sex) is
a foreseen consequence and can be a motivator.
| Now, when I want A and my partner wants B, we each tell one another.
| Neither of us says "If I don;t get what I want your life will become a
| misery" explicitly or implicitly, so there is no threat.
|
| There is, however, a load of honest communication.
I'm still with you.
|
| Do you feel it would be better for me to lie about how I feel, rather
| than to impress on my partner just how important a particular sexual
| activity is to me, and how the lack of it affects me emotionally?
Hell no. I thought I was clear on that part.
| | Well, for me, yes. That's probably because part of my self-image
| | includes being a good "provider"; not necessarily the breadwinner,
| | but providing certain... perquisites for the relationship. I *want*
| | to make my partner happy,
|
| Yes, but that's probably (at least partly) because you have been in
| the position of being the partner who Wants More in your sexual
| relationship.
Oooh.
| You don;t have a problem with giving your wife anything she wants,
| sexually, because goshdarnit, you want it too. And a lot more.
Right. Double right.
| It's just hit me how very very odd it is that you are the person
| engaging me on this particular subject, because you have been in my
| very position - albeit the sexual service we desire from our spouses
| is different.
|
| How fascinating :)
That's because despite my cool, debonair, and witty online personna, in
real life I'm a thoughtful, introspective guy. When I work through
certain issues on one level I often will revisit them on another. It's
just a way to give myself a reality check, or at least, to see that my
thinking is still valid.
Hope I haven't thrown you off by this ;-)
| | and a suggestion that I'm not doing so causes me to
| | re-evaluate my performance.
|
| And the strong suggestion my partner is not doing the things that make
| *me* happy causes him to re-evaluate *his* performance. See?
Like a new piece of plate glass.
| | (I suspect by the time this post is finished I'm going to agree with
| | you, BTW. Writing this out is making me re-think my original
| | position.)
|
| It's wonderful, isn;t it, the way talking carefully about something
| makes one think really really hard about what one thinks and why one
| thinks it.
|
| I think that *that* is the point really :)
For me, it's essential. I like to pick at things to see how they work,
even my own psyche. It keeps me off the streets.
| | | Unhappiness is far to serious for silly posturing like pouting.
I left this in because it's worth repeating.
| | That said, I understand that previous patterns of behavior in other
| | relationships make it difficult for people to do this.
|
| Absolutely. But "difficult" should mean "don't try"
I'll bet you meant to write 'shouldn't mean "don't try" '
| | Is it because we
| | all want our partners to be happy, so we pick and choose the time,
| | place, and words with which we address those issues, if at all? Is
| | it because we will push those thoughts out of our mind to avoid
| | confrontation? Well, certainly not everyone does that, but it seems
| | that quite a few people do, moreso as they become more invested in
| | the relationship.
|
| I think that quite often, people only think of the immediate future
| (If I complain he'll be hurt/upset/angry/embarressed), rather than the
| longer term (If I don;t address this issue NOW it will build up out of
| all proportion and I will be filled with rage/hurt/frustration in such
| a way as to damage our relationship).
I think you're correct. But then, I also think that some people will
themselves to not think about the long term because they can't see that
far ahead.
| | Okay, that's biting off your nose to spite your face. Admittedly,
| | not everyone takes that stance; they use their partner's enjoyment
| | as blac,... er,... leverage.
|
| Partners should *be* partners. There should never be any question of
| blac..er...leverage or punishment between them.
|
| | And that gets to my carrot & stick comment.
| | What if your partner did not care enough about doing this one thing?
|
| As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked performing
| cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it, then the
| relationship would have to end.
Okay, so I understood your postion after all.
| Some people insist that their partner read certain books, or vote for
| a certain political party, or never wear fur, or don;t smoke, or
| believe in a particular god.
|
| I insist that my partner be comfortable enough with cunnilingus to
| provide me with it at least three times a year.
Let me take a side road here: Are you waiting for him to volunteer? Or
do you ask him periodically for some cl, only to be put off? Or are you
somewhat exaggerating in order to make a point? What if you asked, say,
once a month, would he oblige? If we're going down too personal a road,
you don't have to answer; I was just trying to figure out how this
worked. I guess I'm thinking of it in terms of... hmm. Okay, some women
want flowers. But if they have to *remind* their husbands/bfs to buy
them, then it's "not the same"; they want the spontaneous gesture, which
they see as some kind of proof of love, caring, etc. I just wondered if
this was the same kind of thing with you.
| | Since so often our actions are based on what we believe to be the
| | consequences of previous actions, I'd think that no/few consequences
| | would make your partner less likely to give in.
|
| I don;t understand what you mean here, I'm sorry.
|
| Please try again.
It's too late now. I'll work on this.
| | | Just because one really would prefer to go to the beach doesn't
| | | mean one can't have a damn good time at the park, now does it?
| |
| | One could have a good time at a third option, too.
|
| Yes indeed. There are so many wonderful restaurants in the city, but
| you still have your favourite, don;t you :)
I get your point.
| | Understood.
| | I see that I'm working on two levels here because I hadn't sorted
| | it out in my mind when I started this. On one hand, if you'd
| | expressed that to me I'd probably apologize for being so negligent
| | and forgetfull and make a date right then. OTOH, I wonder about a
| | partner who would be less cooperative. I guess that you would
| | eventually decide that such a partner might not be worth the
| | aggravation.
|
| Well, I can see how that would work. Personally, I have decided that
| my particular partner *is* worth the aggravation. And yes, if my
| partner told me that he wanted me to give him some sexual service, I
| would be, as you said, making a date right then.
|
| This would be partly because I wish to please him, and partly because
| if he wants something sexual, it's going to on my list of Sexual Stuff
| I Like Or Would Like To Try.
Ah, the Caps again <g>
| There's also the fact that making my partner horny is a HUGE turn on
| for me. Nothing gets me hotter than knowing I am arousing him.
Yes, we understand each other.
|
| | | About four months is as far as I get before I get so unhappy I
| | | have to say something.
| |
| | It's interesting that you notice how you feel on this.
|
| I think it's important to know how one feels about all sorts of
| things. Our relationship is five years old. My own sexual experiences
| stretch back another 16 years before that.
|
| I've had plenty of time to see what I like, and what I don't like and
| what I must have.
Just checking.
| | That could be expensive - especially when the berries are out of
| | season. How about a can of Fresca and a Maraschino cherry?
|
| Never had the first, don;t like the second.
|
| Try again :)
Okay...
And thank you for taking the time
For the post and the non-scanning rhyme.
But if a pop and a cherry
is too ordinary,
How 'bout Ginger Ale and a lime?
Tom
Delila
>
>
> Do you feel it would be better for me to lie about how I feel, rather
> than to impress on my partner just how important a particular sexual
> activity is to me, and how the lack of it affects me emotionally?
I don't know, I just cannot imagine how a particular sex act could be so
important to you that you'd be miserable if you didn't get it. Aren't there
lots of things in general we'd like/love to have but can't for various
reasons, and we just learn to live with(out) it? We accept, we'll never have
this or that and go on with our lives, instead of obsessing over it. That's
very unhealthy in my opinion.
>
> And the strong suggestion my partner is not doing the things that make
> *me* happy causes him to re-evaluate *his* performance. See?
I personally wouldn't want the pressure (again) of being responsible for
someone else's sexual happiness. It's way too much stress. I mean, if that's
the biggest problem you have, consider yourself lucky.
>
> Partners should *be* partners. There should never be any question of
> blac..er...leverage or punishment between them.
Exactly. So acting like a spoiled child when your partner won't do this or
that to you is just plain silly.
>
> As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked performing
> cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it, then the
> relationship would have to end.
Oh boy! <sigh>
> I insist that my partner be comfortable enough with cunnilingus to
> provide me with it at least three times a year.
Try the shower massage head. :) It's much better. :)))
>
> There's also the fact that making my partner horny is a HUGE turn on
> for me. Nothing gets me hotter than knowing I am arousing him.
To me, this got exhausting after a while. I wouldn't want a partner who's
constantly 'drooling' over me.
Sarah
>"Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
>Just me thinking out loud. I'm now wondering about the concept of guilt;
>where it comes frome, what it's comprised of, how it operates, etc.
Interesting question.
I have no answers for you at this point.
>| Why is it Wrong to use sex or lack of it as a punishment?
>|
>| How about "everything"?
>|
>| Firstly, between two equal partners (which, IMO, sexual and romantic
>| partners *must* be, if the relationship is to be workable) there
>| should never be any question of punishments. Only a person with power
>| over another person can dole out punishments.
>
>I agree. It's interesting to see this written out in such a simple basic
>fashion, though.
>Unexpected, like.
Etraordinarily important, though, I reckon.
>| Secondly, sex is a wonderful, joyous thing. If one uses it as a
>| punishment, that tarnishes its bright shininess.
>
>And for those people who enjoy sex, it punishes themselves as well.
Yep. I addressed that next.
>| Thirdly, if one restricts sexual access to oneself as a punishments,
>| it allows resentment to smoulder, not only in the punished, but in the
>| punisher.
>
>Yes, and for different reasons. Besides shutting down one more pathway
>to intimacy, it makes the punisher aware of *doing* the punishing, of
>offsetting the balance of equality.
I hadn;t considered that aspect. Thank you.
> I'm wondering about those people
>(typically women, but not always) who need the emotional connection in
>order to open themselves up to sexual intimacy.
While I don;t require emotional imtimacy in order to enjoy sex, I
certainly enjoy it *ore* if that intimacy is there. Sometimes "I don;t
want to have sex with you" must mean "I am so hurt by what has
happened that my sexual responses cannot function right now"
Another good and interesting point. Thanks.
>| Fourthly, sex can be a way to bust through the emotional fog of an
>| unresolved issue. After the two of you have had a session of nice,
>| hard (even aggressive) sex, finished with a couple of ace orgasms,
>| things feel better. You like one another more. And it's much easier to
>| talk about a problem with some you like rather than with someone whom
>| you;re resenting the hell out of.
>
>Is this "make-up sex", or are you talking about easing the tension?
Not talking about make-up sex. I've not had a bad enough disagreement
with my partner that we've not been having sex. I imagine it would be
a little like You've Been Away So Long And We Agreed Not To Masturbate
Until You Got Home sex.
Which rocks :)
>| To me, blackmail is to get something you want but which the other
>| person wants to not give you, with threats (actually with threats of
>| exposing a crime or shameful activity, but, for simplification, just
>| "threats" will do for now)
>
>That's why I reconsidered that word. But yes, I'm talking about a
>threat. Even a threat of withholding something (not necessarily sex) is
>a foreseen consequence and can be a motivator.
I think we have to consider motivation here.
If you say to your wife "I really want to go with you to the ice-cream
parlour (subtext: if you don;t allow me to, I will be unhappy)" that
*cannot* be the same thing as your daughter saying to you "If you
don;t take me to the ice-cream parlour I will hold my breath until I
turn blue(no subtext)". Can it?
There is a difference between a reaction and a punishment.
Argh! I have all these ideas, but none of them have told me what words
to use in order to express them! It's frustrating.
>| Do you feel it would be better for me to lie about how I feel, rather
>| than to impress on my partner just how important a particular sexual
>| activity is to me, and how the lack of it affects me emotionally?
>
>Hell no. I thought I was clear on that part.
I was pretty certain you didn;t feel that way, but I thought it was
worth asking the question.
>| | Well, for me, yes. That's probably because part of my self-image
>| | includes being a good "provider"; not necessarily the breadwinner,
>| | but providing certain... perquisites for the relationship. I *want*
>| | to make my partner happy,
>|
>| Yes, but that's probably (at least partly) because you have been in
>| the position of being the partner who Wants More in your sexual
>| relationship.
>
>Oooh.
>
>
>| You don;t have a problem with giving your wife anything she wants,
>| sexually, because goshdarnit, you want it too. And a lot more.
>
>Right. Double right.
>
>
>| It's just hit me how very very odd it is that you are the person
>| engaging me on this particular subject, because you have been in my
>| very position - albeit the sexual service we desire from our spouses
>| is different.
>|
>| How fascinating :)
>
>That's because despite my cool, debonair, and witty online personna, in
>real life I'm a thoughtful, introspective guy. When I work through
>certain issues on one level I often will revisit them on another. It's
>just a way to give myself a reality check, or at least, to see that my
>thinking is still valid.
>
>Hope I haven't thrown you off by this ;-)
Not at all.
What happened, actually, was I thought to myself "look! Here's a chap
who has BEEN IN MY VERY OWN SHOES and is devil's advocating for me.
This is a wonderful opportunity to discuss this in ways which may
actually help me make my relationship even better than it is!"
It was an exciting revelation.
>For me, it's essential. I like to pick at things to see how they work,
>even my own psyche. It keeps me off the streets.
Tom the streetwalker. In red vinyl and stilettos. *grins*
>| | That said, I understand that previous patterns of behavior in other
>| | relationships make it difficult for people to do this.
>|
>| Absolutely. But "difficult" should mean "don't try"
>
>I'll bet you meant to write 'shouldn't mean "don't try" '
You;d win that bet :)
I proofread before I posted, then I read it again, and I *still*
didn't see that.
>| I think that quite often, people only think of the immediate future
>| (If I complain he'll be hurt/upset/angry/embarressed), rather than the
>| longer term (If I don;t address this issue NOW it will build up out of
>| all proportion and I will be filled with rage/hurt/frustration in such
>| a way as to damage our relationship).
>
>I think you're correct. But then, I also think that some people will
>themselves to not think about the long term because they can't see that
>far ahead.
... I cannot comprehend that. I am trying.
How can one *not* think of what might happen if one does *this8 rather
than *that*?
How can one not see that certain actions today can jeopardise one's
relationship next month or next year?
But then, I don;t understand how people can go on having too many
babies and cutting down trees, either.
>| As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked performing
>| cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it, then the
>| relationship would have to end.
>
>Okay, so I understood your postion after all.
It feels almost as thought you're feeling disappointed in me here. DO
you find my position wrong? Bad? Strange? Interesting?
>Let me take a side road here: Are you waiting for him to volunteer? Or
>do you ask him periodically for some cl, only to be put off?
If I actually climb up and sit on his face I can gets me some oral
lovins. But only perfunctory and grudging ones.
Saying "Will you go down on me now" has either a similar result, or a
"no" reply. Slightly more likely to be no than yes.
If I say "I'd love some oral soon, say in the next week or so" he
looks delighted, agrees with a smile and forgets all about it.
>Or are you
>somewhat exaggerating in order to make a point?
I absolutely am not exaggerating. I've thought about this a lot, and
the figures I've given is the figures that happen.
>What if you asked, say,
>once a month, would he oblige? If we're going down too personal a road,
>you don't have to answer; I was just trying to figure out how this
>worked.
Basically, I would prefer oral sex once a day. He would prefer oral
sex 0th a day. We've negotiated, and discovered that, on the strengths
of how much we want or don;t want it, that about once every four moths
is the optimum for us.
I get ungrudged, fairly enthusiastic oral sex three days a year (and
yes, I would *far* prefer not to have to ask) and he gets 363 days a
year of not having to give any.
>I guess I'm thinking of it in terms of... hmm. Okay, some women
>want flowers. But if they have to *remind* their husbands/bfs to buy
>them, then it's "not the same"; they want the spontaneous gesture, which
>they see as some kind of proof of love, caring, etc. I just wondered if
>this was the same kind of thing with you.
It's is, a little. It's much more like this with regard to lovemaking
in general than with cl though. (thanks for that nice contraction. cl
is so much easier to type than cunnilingus)
I want to be desired by the man I love.
I want to be made aware of that desire.
I want those two things *more* than I want the physical sensations of
sex of any kind.
With cl there certainly is an aspect of Waiting For A SPontaneous
Gesture, but there's also a large physical component.
One can simulate PIV sex pretty well with a number of appliances. I'm
sure the same is true for PIA.
But there is nothing else that can give one the same sensations as a
warm, wet, soft, loving tongue sliding over and around and between
one's labia.
Nothing.
>| Please try again.
>It's too late now. I'll work on this.
Left this in so you won;t forget :)
>And thank you for taking the time
>For the post and the non-scanning rhyme.
>But if a pop and a cherry
>is too ordinary,
>How 'bout Ginger Ale and a lime?
"A ginger and lime", she declaimed
"Is something for which I have maimed
Yet if found making strife
Between you and your wife
I'm afraid *I'm* the one who'd be blamed."
"In fact" she cried, clutching her hanky
Even though I am *known* to be stanky
When I got in a tub
with a chap - for a scrub!
his mean looking wife became cranky!"
"So you see" she went on with a tear
in her eye but her voice still quite clear
"It's because I've refrained
I avoid being brained
Or bashed up, or stabbed with a spear"
"Dear Tom," she concluded at last
"It would seem to be terribly fast
should I choose to recline
with you, ginger and lime,
So for now I'll just let you slip past"
--
Sarah
Sarah
>
> "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> > Do you feel it would be better for me to lie about how I feel, rather
> > than to impress on my partner just how important a particular sexual
> > activity is to me, and how the lack of it affects me emotionally?
> I don't know, I just cannot imagine how a particular sex act could be so
>important to you that you'd be miserable if you didn't get it. Aren't there
>lots of things in general we'd like/love to have but can't for various
>reasons, and we just learn to live with(out) it? We accept, we'll never have
>this or that and go on with our lives, instead of obsessing over it. That's
>very unhealthy in my opinion.
I hardly think requiring something which causes no pain or revulsion
three times a year counts as obsessing.
> > And the strong suggestion my partner is not doing the things that make
> > *me* happy causes him to re-evaluate *his* performance. See?
> I personally wouldn't want the pressure (again) of being responsible for
>someone else's sexual happiness. It's way too much stress. I mean, if that's
>the biggest problem you have, consider yourself lucky.
You've indicated in past posts you are not necessarily a monogamous
person. I *am* a monogamous person, and so is my partner. If we are to
have a life together, we *must* be responsible for our own and each
other's sexual happiness.
And don;t worry, I certainly do consider myself extraordinarily lucky
indeed. I have the best relationship I know about.
In case you thought I brought this subject up out of the blue, I
remind you that I, in fact, only mentioned this in answer to a general
question form another poster. He asked:
"If your partner gave you all the sex you wanted, but in a form that
was *not* what you'd prefer, how long do you think you'd be
satisfied?"
I simply brought up my particular situation in response to this
question.
> > Partners should *be* partners. There should never be any question of
> > blac..er...leverage or punishment between them.
> Exactly. So acting like a spoiled child when your partner won't do this or
>that to you is just plain silly.
I find this remark highly offensive.
In what way, precisely, do you believe my behaviour mirrors that of a
spoiled child?
> > As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked performing
> > cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it, then the
> > relationship would have to end.
> Oh boy! <sigh>
So your saying you refuse utterly to give your partner oral sex, and
that that is a prerequisite f your having a successful relationship is
OK, but my saying I utterly insist on receiving oral sex three times a
year as a prerequisite of my happy relationship isn't??
Delia "I need a boyfriend who *isn't* interested in oral sex"
Sarah "I need a boyfriend who *is* interested in oral sex"
I think you need to re-examine your thoughts here. That seems
extremely hypocritical to me.
> > I insist that my partner be comfortable enough with cunnilingus to
> > provide me with it at least three times a year.
> Try the shower massage head. :) It's much better. :)))
It's much better FOR YOU.
And you don't enjoy cunnilingus, so how do you imagine you are in a
position to judge what would be better for me?
I don't enjoy a massaging shower head at all. I'm glad it's good for
you.
> > There's also the fact that making my partner horny is a HUGE turn on
> > for me. Nothing gets me hotter than knowing I am arousing him.
> To me, this got exhausting after a while. I wouldn't want a partner who's
>constantly 'drooling' over me.
You know why that is?
It's because we're all different. We all have different things we
enjoy, require, dislike and cannot abide.
Just because my preferences are different from yours is no reason to
be rude to or dismissive of me.
Thank you.
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
Sarah <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> informed us:
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> said:
|
|| "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
|
|| Just me thinking out loud. I'm now wondering about the concept of
|| guilt; where it comes frome, what it's comprised of, how it
|| operates, etc.
|
| Interesting question.
|
| I have no answers for you at this point.
Wasn't really looking for any I guess. Just musing.
||| Thirdly, if one restricts sexual access to oneself as a punishments,
||| it allows resentment to smoulder, not only in the punished, but in
||| the punisher.
||
|| Yes, and for different reasons. Besides shutting down one more
|| pathway to intimacy, it makes the punisher aware of *doing* the
|| punishing, of offsetting the balance of equality.
|
| I hadn;t considered that aspect. Thank you.
|
|| I'm wondering about those people
|| (typically women, but not always) who need the emotional connection
|| in order to open themselves up to sexual intimacy.
|
| While I don;t require emotional imtimacy in order to enjoy sex, I
| certainly enjoy it *ore* if that intimacy is there. Sometimes "I don;t
| want to have sex with you" must mean "I am so hurt by what has
| happened that my sexual responses cannot function right now"
|
| Another good and interesting point. Thanks.
TV shows make light of this all the time, but there is some truth to it.
While you in particular would prefer to have great sex, there are many
for who "can't function right now" will drag out for days, weeks, or
much longer.
Also, there are many for whom "can't function now" seems to mean "can't
function until you make it up to me by doing ___." And there's where we
touch on the blackmail, extortion, coercion thing again. Sometimes they
need to do that particular thing, other times they need to do something
else. Sometimes they just need to talk it out.
|| Is this "make-up sex", or are you talking about easing the tension?
|
| Not talking about make-up sex. I've not had a bad enough disagreement
| with my partner that we've not been having sex. I imagine it would be
| a little like You've Been Away So Long And We Agreed Not To Masturbate
| Until You Got Home sex.
|
| Which rocks :)
Right on! Been there. Done that. Got the scratch marks.
|| That's why I reconsidered that word. But yes, I'm talking about a
|| threat. Even a threat of withholding something (not necessarily sex)
|| is a foreseen consequence and can be a motivator.
|
| I think we have to consider motivation here.
|
| If you say to your wife "I really want to go with you to the ice-cream
| parlour (subtext: if you don;t allow me to, I will be unhappy)" that
| *cannot* be the same thing as your daughter saying to you "If you
| don;t take me to the ice-cream parlour I will hold my breath until I
| turn blue(no subtext)". Can it?
No, and this refers to that statement that punishment is something that
can only be done by unequals.
| There is a difference between a reaction and a punishment.
|
| Argh! I have all these ideas, but none of them have told me what words
| to use in order to express them! It's frustrating.
LOL - yes, between that and the slowdown from typing it can be
frustrating, but we're making progress.
||| It's just hit me how very very odd it is that you are the person
||| engaging me on this particular subject, because you have been in my
||| very position - albeit the sexual service we desire from our spouses
||| is different.
|||
||| How fascinating :)
||
|| That's because despite my cool, debonair, and witty online personna,
|| in real life I'm a thoughtful, introspective guy. When I work through
|| certain issues on one level I often will revisit them on another.
|| It's just a way to give myself a reality check, or at least, to see
|| that my thinking is still valid.
||
|| Hope I haven't thrown you off by this ;-)
|
| Not at all.
|
| What happened, actually, was I thought to myself "look! Here's a chap
| who has BEEN IN MY VERY OWN SHOES and is devil's advocating for me.
| This is a wonderful opportunity to discuss this in ways which may
| actually help me make my relationship even better than it is!"
|
| It was an exciting revelation.
There are a lot of parallels. I have a definite need for some
non-vanilla play, but more to the point, I have a need to know that my
partner can *accept* this need and respond positively. That might mean
she could match me, or it might mean that she can play along with xx
frequency and enjoy it; or if not enjoy it, then at least enjoy the
effect that it has on me.
And you're correct that I was intentionally taking the opposite side
because I'm mentally working out some issues in that department.
|| For me, it's essential. I like to pick at things to see how they
|| work, even my own psyche. It keeps me off the streets.
|
| Tom the streetwalker. In red vinyl and stilettos. *grins*
Dammit, did I accidentally post my diary again?
| I proofread before I posted, then I read it again, and I *still*
| didn't see that.
I've stopped proofing except for some of the more glaring errors.
||| I think that quite often, people only think of the immediate future
||| (If I complain he'll be hurt/upset/angry/embarressed), rather than
||| the longer term (If I don;t address this issue NOW it will build up
||| out of all proportion and I will be filled with
||| rage/hurt/frustration in such a way as to damage our relationship).
||
|| I think you're correct. But then, I also think that some people will
|| themselves to not think about the long term because they can't see
|| that far ahead.
|
| ... I cannot comprehend that. I am trying.
|
| How can one *not* think of what might happen if one does *this8 rather
| than *that*?
|
| How can one not see that certain actions today can jeopardise one's
| relationship next month or next year?
When I wrote that I was thinking about people who tend to avoid the
conflict because they can only see the problem and not a resolution, or
what life will be like after the resolution.
| But then, I don;t understand how people can go on having too many
| babies and cutting down trees, either.
Yer preachin' to the choir, sister.
||| As I have said (in a pervious post) if my partner disliked
||| performing cunnilingus on me so much that he could not ever do it,
||| then the relationship would have to end.
||
|| Okay, so I understood your postion after all.
|
| It feels almost as thought you're feeling disappointed in me here. DO
| you find my position wrong? Bad? Strange? Interesting?
Oh geez, you want *feedback*, too?
Sarah, I have wrestled with this one for a long time. At one time I did
not agree, but as I got older I find that I do. Sometimes, though, what
gets wrapped up in it is the matter of degree to which I beleive, or
rather, the extent to which I would stand on principle. And that of
course depends on how much I need or want something in a relationship,
and the consequences of ending a relationship because of those wants or
needs.
I'm putting myself in your shoes for a moment. Would I end my marriage
if my wife would not give me OS? Hmm.
I'd feel that she would be neglecting a large part of what I consider
intimate relations (I can just see Delila flipping over this); and as I
value such intimacy highly I would feel sad and neglected. I would feel
as if a part of me were unattractive to her. On the flip side, I would
also wonder about the consequences for ending that relationship. What
would happen with my child? My living arrangements? My usenet access?
And like so many other people, I would question myself as to whether my
desires were enough to break up a relationship that works in other
areas.
|| I guess I'm thinking of it in terms of... hmm. Okay, some women
|| want flowers. But if they have to *remind* their husbands/bfs to buy
|| them, then it's "not the same"; they want the spontaneous gesture,
|| which they see as some kind of proof of love, caring, etc. I just
|| wondered if this was the same kind of thing with you.
|
| It's is, a little. It's much more like this with regard to lovemaking
| in general than with cl though. (thanks for that nice contraction. cl
| is so much easier to type than cunnilingus)
|
| I want to be desired by the man I love.
|
| I want to be made aware of that desire.
|
| I want those two things *more* than I want the physical sensations of
| sex of any kind.
|
| With cl there certainly is an aspect of Waiting For A SPontaneous
| Gesture, but there's also a large physical component.
|
| One can simulate PIV sex pretty well with a number of appliances. I'm
| sure the same is true for PIA.
Yes, I see that. And unlike someone who says "Well, just go get it
somewhere else", you want the sensation of being loved and appreciated
by your partner because it's something that you want to share. Not only
is it pretty darn hot to see your partners' excitement, it's also hot to
know that your partner is hot exciting you.
| But there is nothing else that can give one the same sensations as a
| warm, wet, soft, loving tongue sliding over and around and between
| one's labia.
|
| Nothing.
Is it getting warm in here?
||| Please try again.
|
|| It's too late now. I'll work on this.
|
| Left this in so you won;t forget :)
Still working.
Oh Sarah, I see you've demurred
on the offer that you had inferred.
Perhaps some other time
we'll have ginger and lime,
You've only to give me the word.
Tom
(I can't imagine how long you must have spent on that one!)
Norton
> "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
>news:2blre0d5etg56magc...@4ax.com...
> >
> > My partner gives me lots and lots of lovely PIV, but he has a bit of
> > an aversion to cunnilingus.
> >
> > ABout every four or five months this really starts to upset me, and I
> > tell him so. Then in another month I blow up, and he gets around to
> > giving me some, and then we get back to enjoyable PIV.
> If your partner clearly does not enjoy going down on you, why do you put a
>guilt trip on him to do so? I find this just as selfish and wrong as a guy
>constantly asking his woman to give him oral if he knows damn well she
>doesn't like to do it. Is there no way you could be happy without this? I
>just don't get it.
> D.
Delila: what you are talking about are two people trying
to negotiate their way through some differences.
You see, people do not stay the same. Things that I wanted
sexually at 18 are not always the things that I want now.
Now I want some things I'd never heard of when I was 18.
What am I to do? Go through life being stuck with the
ideas I had as an 18-year old?
What happens is that folks talk to their partners. If
their partner thinks it a good idea, then that's that.
If their partner doesn't think it particularly wonderful
but is willing to try it, that's good too.
But if their partner responds with an "I just don't get it",
that's apt to put a strain on the relationship in the long.
run.
We all appreciate your own personal likes and dislikes.
But sex (usually) involves at least two people.
See the problem?
Of course, one solution is if he wants oral sex and you
don't want to provide it, get a third woman involved who
would provide it.
One might end up with a *very* happy partner... ;-)
Norton.
Delila
>
> But I don;t "put a guilt trip on him"
>
> Putting a guilt trip on someone involves, IMO, acting dishonestly in
> order to get a desired result.
No, putting a guilt trip on someone can take different forms. You seem to
be acting like a moping child.
>
> I don't put on an act.
>
> Having my partner not want to give me oral sex affects me in many
> different ways. here are some of them:
>
> I feel undesired.
>
> I feel unloved.
Oh, cry me a river. This sounds utterly ridiculous and cliche to me,
sorry.
>
> I feel as though he finds my genitals (which are an important part of
> my self) disgusting.
>
> I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction he
> desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from me some
> of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
>
> I feel resentful
>
> I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
Then do it. But on the other hand, that's pretty immature, isn't it?
>
> In short, having this particular sexual need of mine unmet damages our
> relationship by making me extraordinarily unhappy.
>
> So I tell him (as all individual who value their relationships should,
> IMO, do) how unhappy I am and why I am unhappy.
>
> He listens to this. If he feels guilty, that's his choice. I certainly
> don't want him to.
How do you expect him to feel?
>
> Then he makes a decision based on what is more pleasant for him. Not
> going down, or having a happy partner.
>
> > I find this just as selfish and wrong as a guy
> >constantly asking his woman to give him oral if he knows damn well she
> >doesn't like to do it.
>
> The key word here is "constantly"
>
> I don't pester my partner throughout the year for oral sex.
The fact that you ask him three times (?) a year is really the same. He
already knows "Oh, the time's getting near, it's been three or four months,
now I'll have to do that again, or she'll mope around". How much of a
turn-on can that be?
>
> He knows I like it very much indeed, and that I have some emotions
> tied up in how I feel about it. And about three times a year I let him
> know that my not being given this sexual activity is making me
> unhappy.
>
> Has there never been anything (not necessarily sexual) which you
> wanted your husband to do which he really disliked doing?
>
> How about washing the dishes?
Yeah, early in our marriage, I asked him to do the dishes a few times.
He'd always do a lousy job, leave a huge puddle on the floor, the dishes
weren't clean, etc. So I just did it myself. Since I didn't work outside the
home, I thought, well, I shouldn't really be asking him to do that, anyway.
I actually like doing dishes, it relaxes me. He used to make me iron his
uniforms. I hated doing it, but did it, but also didn't do a very good job,
first because it was a major pain in the neck, and also I'm not a good
ironer. Eventually he got the hint and had them ironed on post. See?
>
> Going to Christmas dinners with your family?
I'm from germany, so that's happened only once. My 'family' has since
disowned me (10 years ago - long story), so that issue is moot.
>
> Changing a nappy?
He didn't like changing our son, but our daughter he didn't mind. She was
born eight years after our son and he was older and more mature then.
>
> Watching a "Chick Flick"?
I've never made him watch one of those, since I don't watch them myself.
>
> Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something he
> dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels, and
> *asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
>
> He's free to say "no"
Oh, okay. But then you shouldn't mope, either. :)
>
> But no, I could not be happy in a sexual and romantic relationship
> where oral sex was totally forbidden me. Never.
That's sad.
>
> I could give up PIV sex much more easily.
Are you serious?? PIV is less important to you than oral?
>
> I'm sorry it's so difficult for you to see how some of us feel, but I
> think it's great you're sticking around and asking questions. If I
> haven't answered something you wanted to know, please ask me again,
> because I'd really love you to be able to see things from my (and your
> husband's, perhaps) perspective.
I'm trying.
Tom Allen
news:40f96...@corp.newsgroups.com
| "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
| news:il8cf0tplip9ltqqn...@4ax.com...
| >
| > But I don;t "put a guilt trip on him"
| >
| > Putting a guilt trip on someone involves, IMO, acting dishonestly
| in > order to get a desired result.
|
|
| No, putting a guilt trip on someone can take different forms. You
| seem to be acting like a moping child.
Oh, Delila, Delila, Delila. What *are* we going to do with you? Nowhere
did Sarah indicate that she mopes around. In fact, in the discussion
that I had with her it was pretty clear that she meets these problems
with a clear and direct (and hopefully tactful) approach that I find
quite refreshing. She doesn't appear to play games or to expect her
partner to read her mind.
| > Having my partner not want to give me oral sex affects me in many
| > different ways. here are some of them:
| >
| > I feel undesired.
| >
| > I feel unloved.
|
|
| Oh, cry me a river. This sounds utterly ridiculous and cliche to me,
| sorry.
How are those empathy classes working for ya?
Sarah expressed that there is something that she'd like very much for
her partner to do. She expressed how she feels when he doesn't do it.
And you expressed... disdain for her feelings on the subject?
Look, we've already established that sex in general and oral in
particular is not something very interesting to you (despite the fact
that you've been hanging around here for the last couple of weeks). You
would prefer never to fellate anone ever again. Okay, Sarah is cool with
that, I'm cool with that, and everybody else is cool with that. Why is
it such a stretch for you to understand that there are *some* things
that are just as important to *other* people?
| > I feel that it is unfair that he gets all the sexual satisfaction
| he > desires (including frequent oral sex), while withholding from
| me some > of the sexual satisfaction I desire.
| >
| > I feel resentful
| >
| > I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
|
|
| Then do it. But on the other hand, that's pretty immature, isn't it?
And she pointed out that she does *not* do that because it would be
stupid and self-defeating.
| > He listens to this. If he feels guilty, that's his choice. I
| certainly > don't want him to.
|
| How do you expect him to feel?
Actually, I think that this is a fair question. She may not expect him
to feel anything, of course; she may just want him to agree to some cl,
preferably while she's sipping champagne with strawberries.
| > I don't pester my partner throughout the year for oral sex.
|
| The fact that you ask him three times (?) a year is really the
| same. He already knows "Oh, the time's getting near, it's been three
| or four months, now I'll have to do that again, or she'll mope
| around". How much of a turn-on can that be?
I don't think that anyone can sanely interpret 3x a year to be
"pestering" (IMO, of course), and as long as he throws himself into his
work, she may not care.
| > Has there never been anything (not necessarily sexual) which you
| > wanted your husband to do which he really disliked doing?
| >
| > How about washing the dishes?
|
|
| Yeah, early in our marriage, I asked him to do the dishes a few
| times. He'd always do a lousy job, leave a huge puddle on the floor,
| the dishes weren't clean, etc. So I just did it myself. Since I
| didn't work outside the home, I thought, well, I shouldn't really be
| asking him to do that, anyway. I actually like doing dishes, it
| relaxes me.
What if each time he did the dishes, you came up behind him as he was
almost done, nibbled his neck and told him how nice it was for him to do
that for you, and that even though you were tired now, that he could
look forward to a little "appreciation" later? Oh, and by the way, could
you make sure to mop up the floor so nobody slips? <nibble nibble>
Thanks so much, stud <kiss kiss>.
Honey.
Vinegar.
Flies.
Your choice.
| He used to make me iron his uniforms. I hated doing it,
| but did it, but also didn't do a very good job, first because it was
| a major pain in the neck, and also I'm not a good ironer. Eventually
| he got the hint and had them ironed on post. See?
"Got the hint?" Now who's being deceptive?
Okay, let's try this again: Honey, I can't iron for sh*t, we both know
that, and it's frustrating as hell, and I'd rather spend the 45 minutes
snuggling with you. <nibble nibble> Can you drop these off at the base
to be done? <smooch>
| > Going to Christmas dinners with your family?
|
| I'm from germany, so that's happened only once. My 'family' has
| since disowned me (10 years ago - long story), so that issue is moot.
Wasit because you were rude and dismissive to them, too?
<bites tongue>
Sorry, it just slipped out.
| > But no, I could not be happy in a sexual and romantic relationship
| > where oral sex was totally forbidden me. Never.
|
| That's sad.
No, that's Sarah. And like you, Sarah has some sexual preferences that
she has, over the course of xx years decided that she wanted in a
relationship; periodic oral worship of her yoni being one of them, and
she probably made that clear at the start of her relationship. /Just
like you/ would probably make it clear that you will *not* be orally
worshiping any lingam. Preference *for* something vs preference for
*not* something. She hasn't insulted you, why would you make fun of her?
Tom
Sarah
> You've Been Away So Long And We Agreed Not To Masturbate
>| Until You Got Home sex.
>Right on! Been there. Done that. Got the scratch marks.
*Mrrrls and stretches*
I gots me some of that last night, along with some unexpected, unasked
for, enthusiastic and highly effective oral lovin's
/me happy.
--
Sarah
Bossdivb3
BJ's are ok and the new standard practice in my relationship is that I
get one after showering every morning. Not necessarily to orgasm but a
loving touch to start the day. My significant other does not prefer
oral but manual manipulation. She gets it (or, oral) when ever she
wants. The trick is to say what you want. If the relationship of
strong, mutually respectful and accomodating, it will show up. If
not, it won't and some decisions need to be made accordingly.
Bob (7/17)
suzeeq
Yay, Sarah!!!
sue
Sarah
Delia, trying to have a conversation with you is getting more and more
frustrating. It seems you;re not actually *listening* to anything
anyone is telling you.
Most regular posters to ssg are here for any one or more of the
following reasons. Some of us (including me) are here for all of them.
*To discuss a subject about which they feel interest or passion with
other people who share that interest or passion.
*To teach other people - to share knowledge they've gained over (often
many) years of experience with sexuality from their own points of
view.
*To learn about different aspects of sexuality from others' experience
and experiences.
*To relax in the company of people who will not judge them harshly for
their choice of sexual lifestyle.
I can't see that you fit into any of these categories, and to be
honest, your reasons for wanting to be here continue to baffle me. As
I keep repeating, I do hope you stay, and learn to listen and
appreciate that other's points of view, while not being your point of
view, are valid in their own rights.
But, as has been said here before, it seems (from your posts) as
though you lack the ability to see the world from any POV but your
own, and that makes trying to discuss anything with you
extraordinarily disconcerting. I believe and hope that it's just lack
of practice, and that one day something will go "click" and you will
suddenly see that people can be different from you without being
perverted or bad.
Nevertheless, I will try (again) to explain how I feel. Try hard to
put yourself in my position. Imagine you are me, feeling the things I
feel, wanting, not necessarily the same things I want, but wanting
*something* your partner is less than enthusiastic about giving you on
a regular basis.
Can you imagine that? Try hard. Close your eyes and try to think of
something that you can *imagine* wanting. It would probably be a good
idea to forget the subject is oral sex, because of your extraordinary
prejudice about oral sex of any kind.
OK, if you're trying hard, let's begin.
> "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote
> No, putting a guilt trip on someone can take different forms. You seem to
>be acting like a moping child.
No, I am acting like an honest adult with sexual desires.
A moping child is aware that their status is not equal with that of
their parent. A moping child uses emotional manipulation - usually out
of proportion with what they actually feel - in order to influence
that parent. A moping child might burst into tears, or say "You;re so
mean to me" or "I hate you" A moping child might break something that
is meaningful to you. A moping child might refuse to eat, then say
"I'll starve to death and then everyone will come to my funeral and
they'll all know how MEAN you are and THEn you'll be sorry!"
If I were a manipulative adult I might well do some of the things Tom
suggested earlier in the thread. I might stamp about slamming doors. I
might refuse to speak to my partner. I might refuse to have sex with
my partner. I might stop serving him meals - or make sure the meals I
*did* serve were not to his taste. I might "forget" to wash his
favourite pants.
But I am not either a moping child or a manipulative adult. I am an
honest adult, so I always try to resolve every troublesome situation
honestly.
Much as I am (and have been) doing with our conversation, if you think
about it.
What an honest adult does when they are in a situation they find
unpleasant or intolerable is to tell their partner (or whoever is in
the situation with them) what the problem is and what steps they think
that person could take to make the situation more balanced again. Then
(assuming their partner is also an honest adult) they listen to what
their partner's response is. There may be several of these dialogues
before the situation is resolved to both partners' satisfaction.
It took my partner and me the best part of four years to get our
sexual needs balanced in a way that suits us both. It was a lot of
hard work for both of us. What we (both) got out of those almost four
years of hard work is a relationship where *either* of us, if we find
any of our needs (not only sexual) not being met, *knows* we can
safely (without the risk of temper tantrums such as you seem to be
accusing me of) discuss the problem, offer ideas as to a solution,
listen to our partner's ideas, and finally, find a workable solution
which is enjoyable for *both of us*.
> Oh, cry me a river. This sounds utterly ridiculous and cliche to me,
>sorry.
I'm sorry you feel the need to belittle the emotions I feel. I have
not mocked any of your stated ideas or emotions.
It is absolutely true that not getting the sexual attention one
desires from ones beloved partner makes one feel desolate. Read ssg
for a year and you will hear from around 15 husbands whose wives no
longer give them the sexual attention they wish for.
These men, with almost no exception, express feelings of aloneness, a
lack of feeling loved, rejection, ugliness, sadness, humiliation.
It is a normal, general (although I suppose not universal) reaction to
sexual rejection by a beloved partner.
Cry yourself a river.
> > I feel like withholding oral sex from him.
> Then do it. But on the other hand, that's pretty immature, isn't it?
Yes indeed, it *would* be immature to act in a spiteful manner.
It would also go against one of the most important things I believe
about relationships which are romantic and sexual. Partners must be
equals. A deliberate withholding of things one partner enjoys simply
to "make them suffer" is not the act of an equal. It's an act which
asserts power over the other individual, and so it is not something
which is *permissible* in an adult, honest relationship.
> > He listens to this. If he feels guilty, that's his choice. I certainly
> > don't want him to.
> How do you expect him to feel?
Guilt is an useless emotion. It doesn't benefit anyone (except those
looking for some sort of petty revenge), and as such, I have no use
for it.
I don't "expect" my partner to feel particular ways, so I cannot
answer your question as you would like - however, I *can* tell you how
I would feel should my partner come to me and tell me I had not been
meeting one of his sexual needs.
I'll think one up which shouldn;t be offensive to you (and is
incidentally also something which I *do* tend to forget to do).
Suppose my partner comes to me while we're cooking dinner and says
"Sarah, you know I love you and you make me really happy, but just
lately I have been feeling unhappy.
You know how I just love it when you bite the back of my neck? Well,
it seems to me that you haven't done that in a long while. It makes me
feel you aren't thinking about how I feel and what I like, and that
makes me sad"
When he said that I would feel immediate remorse.- that is, sadness
for having done something that makes my partner sad. This is different
from guilt because guilt implies that my action (or in this case)
inaction) was a morally wrong thing.
There is nothing morally wrong with not biting one's partner on the
back of the neck. There is nothing morally wrong with not giving one's
partner any freely agreed upon sexual service.
There is not even anything morally wrong with forgetting that a
particular sexual act is of great importance to one's partner.
So. I feel a flash of remorse. Then I'd give him a kiss - probably on
the end of the nose. I'd say "I'll keep that in mind, and I'm sorry
I've made you sad" and I would make sure by the end of the day that I
had indeed bitten on his neck just as much as he would like me to.
In the next week or so the conversation would stick in my mind and I
would remember that, yes, this is something my partner really really
enjoys, and feels sad if I don't give him. So it would be likely I
would bite him on the neck quite often.
As time went on I, being human, am likely to let the conversation
slide into the back of my mind until it isn't constantly reminding me.
From time to time I would remember to bite my partners neck, but
sometimes I would forget he especially enjoys it.
And eventually there would come a time when my partner comes to me
while we're cooking dinner and says "Sarah, you know I love you and
you make me really happy, but just lately I have been feeling unhappy.
You know how I just love it when you bite the back of my neck? Well,
it seems to me that you haven't done that in a long while. It makes me
feel you aren't thinking about how I feel and what I like, and that
makes me sad"
And the cycle would begin again.
Is this making sense to you at all?
> > I don't pester my partner throughout the year for oral sex.
> The fact that you ask him three times (?) a year is really the same. He
>already knows "Oh, the time's getting near, it's been three or four months,
>now I'll have to do that again, or she'll mope around". How much of a
>turn-on can that be?
On first reading, this assertion of yours is absolutely ridiculous.
But you seem to be a fairly intelligent woman - even if your world
view is *vastly* different from mine - and I tried very hard to
understand where you are coming from.
I think you are under a misapprehension.
My partner does not feel about oral sex the same way you do.
The idea does not revolt or disgust him. He does not feel that if I
ask him for oral sex I am somehow a manhating woman with a desire to
humiliate him.
It's just not something he, personally, enjoys terribly much.
It's also a little physically difficult for him - his tongue is rather
short and his jaw tends to get sore when he gives it his best.
Because he doesn't enjoy it terribly much, and because it's not
something he desires *for himself* it's very easy for him to forget
that it exists. It slips his mind.
If he hated oral sex he would not be a person I would fall in love
with; his world view would be - like yours - too different from mine
for such closeness to happen.
> > Has there never been anything (not necessarily sexual) which you
> > wanted your husband to do which he really disliked doing?
> > How about washing the dishes?
> Yeah, early in our marriage, I asked him to do the dishes a few times.
>He'd always do a lousy job, leave a huge puddle on the floor, the dishes
>weren't clean, etc. So I just did it myself.
His manipulation of you was very effective.
"She wants me to do something I wish not to do. If I do a bad job of
it she won't persist."
This is very much the spoiled child behaviour you accused me of early
in the post to which I am replying.
> He used to make me iron his
>uniforms. I hated doing it, but did it, but also didn't do a very good job,
>first because it was a major pain in the neck, and also I'm not a good
>ironer. Eventually he got the hint and had them ironed on post. See?
And here you;ve manipulated him right back.
"He wants me to do something I wish not to do. If I do a bad job of it
he won't persist."
I am not trying to get at you, or poke fun at you.
I am asking you to see that each of you was actually involved in
manipulating the other.
What if your husband had said to you, when you asked him to wash the
dishes "I really hate washing dishes. Is there something else I could
do for you instead?"
Would you have accepted and offered him a job more suitable to his
temperament?
And wouldn;t that have saved a lot of wet floors, and dishes you hard
to rewash yourself?
And what if you had said to your husband "I hate ironing. If you get
your shirts ironed elsewhere, I'd be happy to do something else for
you"?
> > Is it selfish or wrong of one to ask one's partner to do something he
> > dislikes doing, if one are simply telling him the way one feels, and
> > *asking*, *requesting*, that he do it?
> > He's free to say "no"
> Oh, okay. But then you shouldn't mope, either. :)
You're completely correct.
Adult, honest, equal partners should never mope.
That's why I don't.
> > But no, I could not be happy in a sexual and romantic relationship
> > where oral sex was totally forbidden me. Never.
> That's sad.
Heh. Funny, I think it's sad for someone not to be able to be happy in
a relationship which includes oral sex.
Funny old world, isn't it?
> > I could give up PIV sex much more easily.
> Are you serious?? PIV is less important to you than oral?
I am indeed serious.
PIV sex, while a lovely, lovely thing, is less important to me than
oral sex.
Try to understand that this can actually be so. Really, think about
it. See if you can accept that I am a normal, healthy, happy woman
(probably a little older than yourself) who honestly feels this way.
I'm real.
> > I'm sorry it's so difficult for you to see how some of us feel, but I
> > think it's great you're sticking around and asking questions. If I
> > haven't answered something you wanted to know, please ask me again,
> > because I'd really love you to be able to see things from my (and your
> > husband's, perhaps) perspective.
> I'm trying.
I know you are, and I appreciate it.
I think you have a lot of guts, staying around in a place where it
seems no-one shares your veiw point, where everyone seems to be
attacking you.
That's part of why I keep answering your posts - and I appologise for
how long this one is - I think if you're willing to put in the effort
to understand, I should certainly be willing to put in the effort to
try to help you.
Best of luck,
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
/me jealous...
Tom
Norton
>Bob (7/17)
I think you've said something very important. You say
"The trick is to say what you want.", and I agree fully.
Men sometimes have some trouble with this because they
don't want to say such things in front of their decent
respectable wives.
But women have, in my experience, far more difficulty in
this. Not because they are innately more "decent". That's
for sure wrong. It is, I think, because they are socialized
NOT to want sex and if they do, NOT to want it openly, and
if they have to want it openly, for God's sake never, they
are trained, say anything explicit. Just hint.
So along with all the men and women out there who have,
over the years, diverged from each other in their wants
and desires, we sometimes have the saddest thing of all.
She wants him to to X, he'd *love* to do X, but neither
of them will say so.
Norton.
Norton
>*Mrrrls and stretches*
>/me happy.
GREAT!!!
Perhaps he reads SSG?
Norton.
Sarah
>Perhaps he reads SSG?
No, he's not interested in reading here, mostly cos he knows I post
(and what my pseudonym is) and doesn't want to see me telling our
intimate details to the world.
I guess he just loves me.
*beam*
And, of course, absence makes the ardor 'arder.
--
Sarah
Jacques Michel
(snip)
> I can't see that you fit into any of these categories, and to be
> honest, your reasons for wanting to be here continue to baffle me. As
> I keep repeating, I do hope you stay, and learn to listen and
> appreciate that other's points of view, while not being your point of
> view, are valid in their own rights.
>
> But, as has been said here before, it seems (from your posts) as
> though you lack the ability to see the world from any POV but your
> own, and that makes trying to discuss anything with you
> extraordinarily disconcerting. I believe and hope that it's just lack
> of practice, and that one day something will go "click" and you will
> suddenly see that people can be different from you without being
> perverted or bad.
>
(snip)
>
> I think you have a lot of guts, staying around in a place where it
> seems no-one shares your veiw point, where everyone seems to be
> attacking you.
>
> That's part of why I keep answering your posts - and I appologise for
> how long this one is - I think if you're willing to put in the effort
> to understand, I should certainly be willing to put in the effort to
> try to help you.
>
<armchair psychologist>
I really think Delilah has what is called a phobia. This means that
she both cannot think rationally about the object of her phobia and is
fascinated by it. The problem is that the particular object that
causes problems (oral sex) is... charged with social prejudice, I
would say. That blurs the line.
Unfortunately, there is not much that can be done against phobias with
rational arguments.
</armchair psychologist>
But it is nice of you to try.
Norton
>>Perhaps he reads SSG?
>No, he's not interested in reading here, mostly cos he knows I post
>(and what my pseudonym is) and doesn't want to see me telling our
>intimate details to the world.
>I guess he just loves me.
There's no beating *that*!!!
>*beam*
Oh yes. And I'd bet he is too!
>And, of course, absence makes the ardor 'arder.
And juicier too...
:-)
Norton.
Tom Allen
Sarah, i just wanted to revisit something, if you don't mind.
|||
||| Unhappiness is far to serious for silly posturing like pouting.
I liked that line so much I just had to leave it in.
|| Is it because we
|| all want our partners to be happy, so we pick and choose the time,
|| place, and words with which we address those issues, if at all? Is it
|| because we will push those thoughts out of our mind to avoid
|| confrontation? Well, certainly not everyone does that, but it seems
|| that quite a few people do, moreso as they become more invested in
|| the relationship.
|
| I think that quite often, people only think of the immediate future
| (If I complain he'll be hurt/upset/angry/embarressed), rather than the
| longer term (If I don;t address this issue NOW it will build up out of
| all proportion and I will be filled with rage/hurt/frustration in such
| a way as to damage our relationship).
Okay, let's say that you've discovered that you have an issue with...
something. It's important to you, so much so that you realize that it's
going to affect your happiness in the future if you don't get some kind
of resolution.
OTOH, you also know (or are 99% certain) that your partner will feel
very strongly about this issue, and perhaps react negatively, in the
sense that he might not want to accomodate you with this. How do you
initiate these kinds of conversations?
For example, let's go back to the cl several times a year. Let's say
that early in your relationship you didn't realize that you would really
miss having cl at least once every month or two. At some point you start
to recognize this need in yourself, but also during that time you've had
indications from him that cl wan't his cup of tea, or perhaps he
regarded it as a bit of a squick (perhaps you've overheard him mention
this to his mates or he's made offhand comments about it). You now
realize that you've got the potential for a disagreement, so you want to
perhaps bring it up in such a way that's not going to make him react out
of feeling pressured or defensive. How do you go about this? Any
thoughts on what the conversation (or next several) would look like?
Tom
Delila
>
>
> Sarah expressed that there is something that she'd like very much for
> her partner to do. She expressed how she feels when he doesn't do it.
> And you expressed... disdain for her feelings on the subject?
I'm sorry, I just do not get this, at all, thry as I might.
>
> Look, we've already established that sex in general and oral in
> particular is not something very interesting to you (despite the fact
> that you've been hanging around here for the last couple of weeks). You
> would prefer never to fellate anone ever again. Okay, Sarah is cool with
> that, I'm cool with that, and everybody else is cool with that. Why is
> it such a stretch for you to understand that there are *some* things
> that are just as important to *other* people?
Like I said in an earlier post, if that's your biggest problem, you're
very lucky.
>
> What if each time he did the dishes, you came up behind him as he was
> almost done, nibbled his neck and told him how nice it was for him to do
> that for you, and that even though you were tired now, that he could
> look forward to a little "appreciation" later? Oh, and by the way, could
> you make sure to mop up the floor so nobody slips? <nibble nibble>
> Thanks so much, stud <kiss kiss>.
That's not my style.
>
> Honey.
> Vinegar.
> Flies.
I know about the honey/vinegar/flies thing and use it in other situations
sometimes.
>
> "Got the hint?" Now who's being deceptive?
Deceptive? How was I being deceptive? It's not like I told him before we
got married that I loved ironing.
>
> Wasit because you were rude and dismissive to them, too?
No, because I told them the truth. :)
>
> No, that's Sarah. And like you, Sarah has some sexual preferences that
> she has, over the course of xx years decided that she wanted in a
> relationship; periodic oral worship of her yoni being one of them, and
> she probably made that clear at the start of her relationship. /Just
> like you/ would probably make it clear that you will *not* be orally
> worshiping any lingam. Preference *for* something vs preference for
> *not* something. She hasn't insulted you, why would you make fun of her?
I'm not making fun of her, *I* just don't understand how someone can see
oral sex as *that* important. But I guess many people do. Oh, and I'm
impressed that you know the words 'yoni' and 'lingam'.
Sarah
>Oh, and I'm
>impressed that you know the words 'yoni' and 'lingam'.
I guess it's a common human prejudice to expect people who hold views
very different from one's own to be ignorant.
I, personally, was extraordinarily surprised to hear that *you* know
these words...
--
Sarah
Laurent Bugnion
Delila wrote:
> "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:2ltf5fF...@uni-berlin.de...
> > Look, we've already established that sex in general and oral in
> > particular is not something very interesting to you (despite the fact
> > that you've been hanging around here for the last couple of weeks). You
> > would prefer never to fellate anone ever again. Okay, Sarah is cool with
> > that, I'm cool with that, and everybody else is cool with that. Why is
> > it such a stretch for you to understand that there are *some* things
> > that are just as important to *other* people?
>
>
> Like I said in an earlier post, if that's your biggest problem, you're
> very lucky.
You know, that's such an idiotic statement that I am starting to wonder
a) if you're for real and b) if you're not the worst ever kind of troll:
the one who doesn't even know that they're trolling.
Your problem (according to an earlier post) is that you're afraid that
your daughter will give blowjobs in her school, right? That's also such
a tiny problem compared to women seing their daughters being raped in
Dar Fur, to people seeing their kids starving to dead in other places,
etc... You see the pattern. Your problems can always be minimized when
comparing them to something else.
I wonder if you can quit being such a closed-mind person for just a
minute, and try to feel empathy for someone else than yourself.
Laurent
--
Laurent Bugnion, GalaSoft
Software engineering: http://www.galasoft-LB.ch
Private/Malaysia: http://mypage.bluewin.ch/lbugnion
Support children in Calcutta: http://www.calcutta-espoir.ch
Tom Allen
Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| news:2ltf5fF...@uni-berlin.de...
| >
| >
| > Sarah expressed that there is something that she'd like very much
| for > her partner to do. She expressed how she feels when he
| doesn't do it. > And you expressed... disdain for her feelings on
| the subject?
|
|
| I'm sorry, I just do not get this, at all, thry as I might.
Yes, we get it: you don't care for os and don't know why anyone else
would either. We've heard you a number of times. Nobody is arguing that
point.
But notice that nobody is suggesting that you're deviant or perverted or
that you have issues with hating men because of your beliefs.
| Sarah is cool with > that, I'm cool with that, and everybody else
| is cool with that. Why is > it such a stretch for you to understand
| that there are *some* things > that are just as important to
| *other* people?
|
|
| Like I said in an earlier post, if that's your biggest problem,
| you're very lucky.
Can't you see how insensitive that statement is? She appears lucky to
you because you don't care about os in the first place. If you take that
kind of logic to the absurd extreme, one might say "Oh, people are dying
all over the place, so if your biggest problem is just losing a limb,
then you're very lucky."
| > What if each time he did the dishes, you came up behind him as he
| was > almost done, nibbled his neck and told him how nice it was
| for him to do > that for you, and that even though you were tired
| now, that he could > look forward to a little "appreciation" later?
| Oh, and by the way, could > you make sure to mop up the floor so
| nobody slips? <nibble nibble> > Thanks so much, stud <kiss kiss>.
|
|
| That's not my style.
Bingo!
It's not most people's style, either - and even I have to remind myself
to do this. But look - if you would like someone to wash the dishes (or
laundry or clean the garage, or whatever) then it helps to give someone
an idea of why they should make things easier for you. Quid pro quo, one
hand washes the other, scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, and all
that.
Note that this is *not* the same as doing something in expectation of a
reward - although it could certainly go in that direction. I'm talking
about showing appreciation in a way that your partner understands. When
my wife wants to show her appreciation for me cleaning her car, she
doesn't buy me a little tschoske with a balloon, she makes her award
winning apple pie. She doesn't have to do either, I *know* she
appreciates it, but a pie speaks to me, the knick-knack will just
collect dust.
| > Honey.
| > Vinegar.
| > Flies.
|
|
| I know about the honey/vinegar/flies thing and use it in other
| situations sometimes.
That's great! But why limit yourself to certain situations? Why not
practice using it more often? People are funny, they respond to that
honey in almost all situations, even moreso if you take the time to
figure out what "flavor" of honey they prefer.
| > No, that's Sarah. And like you, Sarah has some sexual preferences
| that > she has, over the course of xx years decided that she wanted
| in a > relationship; periodic oral worship of her yoni being one of
| them, and > she probably made that clear at the start of her
| relationship. /Just > like you/ would probably make it clear that
| you will *not* be orally > worshiping any lingam. Preference *for*
| something vs preference for > *not* something. She hasn't insulted
| you, why would you make fun of her?
|
|
| I'm not making fun of her, *I* just don't understand how someone
| can see oral sex as *that* important. But I guess many people do.
Now you're coming around. Yes, some sexual acts are *very* important to
people because for some reason - brain chemistry, childhood experiences,
genetic wiring, karmic balance, whatever - they associate these acts
with being able to more fully express themselves. *Why* this happens is
probably not important; the important thing is just accepting that it
*does* happen and not assigning some random moral score to these people.
| Oh,
| and I'm impressed that you know the words 'yoni' and 'lingam'.
<rolls eyes and bangs head on desk>
Tom
Tom Allen
Sarah <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> informed us:
| "Delila" <aqu...@widomaker.com> said:
|
|| Oh, and I'm
|| impressed that you know the words 'yoni' and 'lingam'.
|
| I guess it's a common human prejudice to expect people who hold views
| very different from one's own to be ignorant.
It's a lot like my "foreign country" analogy in the other thread. We
tend to believe that people have different customs because they "don't
know any better". At least, until we apply ourselves to learning about
their culture and the reasons why certain customs developed.
| I, personally, was extraordinarily surprised to hear that *you* know
| these words...
<splutters coffee on keyboard>
Add one more member to your fan club.
Tom
peter
> Your problem (according to an earlier post) is that you're afraid that
> your daughter will give blowjobs in her school, right?
All parents have not only to accept, but even to help their children in
learning that sexual culture in which they want them to live/be happy.
Giving blowjob somehow seems to be a basal point in the present western
culture, so somebody likes or not the idea, has to encourage the kid.
(Of course in the right age, right time, and with a right attitude)
Anyway, my wife always said that, that was the best if our daughter was
dare to take her bf home even for love, because this was the most secure
way, and resulted in an openly honest atmosphere. And she was right.
The best, peter
illecebra
Hash: SHA1
Tom Allen wrote:
| In news:40fdc...@corp.newsgroups.com,
| Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
<snip>
| Yes, some sexual acts are *very* important to
| people because for some reason - brain chemistry, childhood experiences,
| genetic wiring, karmic balance, whatever - they associate these acts
| with being able to more fully express themselves. *Why* this happens is
| probably not important; the important thing is just accepting that it
| *does* happen and not assigning some random moral score to these people.
<snip>
Forgive me if I'm not quite on-topic for this thread--I ploked Delila a
while ago.
I think you're on to something, here, Tom. When I was in college, I
volunteered to be a guinea-pig for a study someone I knew was doing for
a psych class on communication styles vs. learning styles.
It came out that something like 70% of people are primarily visual
communicators.
Something like 25% were verbal communicators.
Almost 5% were aural communicators (i.e. there was more, for them, in
tone of voice, volume, rythm of speech, etc. than in the words that were
said)
Less than 1% were primarily touch communicators (and I was one of them).
I think this is why a lot of my boyfriends didn't get why I was such a
physical person, even with my friends. That's simply how I communicate
best. My husband can usually tell if I'm really mad at him by observing
whether I seek out his touch, pointedly avoid it, or somewhere in
between. When I want to comfort my son, I think of smoothing his hair
or rubbing his back before anything else.
My husband is really good at "romantic" stuff. He brings me a single
flower every once in awhile just because he's thinking of me. The first
time we ever had a fight he made a card for me to say he was sorry and
wrote some beautiful things in it. I'm not very good at it. I've
really only ever pulled of "romance" once.
OTOH, I express myself very easily when I choose to touch him a certain
way, by the care I show, by how I know how to push his buttons, whether
I'm trying to turn him on, relax him, confort him, whatever.
I think I'm mostly rambling now... the point I was trying to make is
that I think Tom was right about sex sometimes being important as a form
of self-expression. Yes, I can make my husband's favorite dinner, or
tell him I love him, I can even be somewhat eloquent at times--but it's
when we touch that I think I best communicate how I feel.
Susan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA/rf6pPapZfe+hZ0RAlCGAJ0cKyQdKkxP54LIGW+mqC86ImZlugCfTakx
btPfB62qth9mtXgEL7yzL4E=
=ah0E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Delila
>
>
> But notice that nobody is suggesting that you're deviant or perverted or
> that you have issues with hating men because of your beliefs.
That I might hate men has been mentioned before.
>
> Can't you see how insensitive that statement is?
NO! What in the world is insensitive about it?? I don't get it!
She appears lucky to
> you because you don't care about os in the first place. If you take that
> kind of logic to the absurd extreme, one might say "Oh, people are dying
> all over the place, so if your biggest problem is just losing a limb,
> then you're very lucky."
I guess you'd have to ask a person who's actually lost a limb. Most of
them, I'd wager, would indeed consider themselves lucky to have survived at
all.
>
> It's not most people's style, either - and even I have to remind myself
> to do this. But look - if you would like someone to wash the dishes (or
> laundry or clean the garage, or whatever) then it helps to give someone
> an idea of why they should make things easier for you. Quid pro quo, one
> hand washes the other, scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, and all
> that.
I know a relationship should be give and take, but you should never do
something, esp. something necessary, like laundry, and expect to have the
other person do something in return. I mean, do some people keep score?
>
> Note that this is *not* the same as doing something in expectation of a
> reward - although it could certainly go in that direction. I'm talking
> about showing appreciation in a way that your partner understands. When
> my wife wants to show her appreciation for me cleaning her car, she
> doesn't buy me a little tschoske with a balloon, she makes her award
> winning apple pie. She doesn't have to do either, I *know* she
> appreciates it, but a pie speaks to me, the knick-knack will just
> collect dust.
Well, as long as likes making the pie, it's okay. But do you expect her to
make the pie each time you clean her car?
>
> <rolls eyes and bangs head on desk>
???
Tom Allen
illecebra <vyyrpro...@yahoo.com> informed us:
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
| Hash: SHA1
|
| Tom Allen wrote:
|| In news:40fdc...@corp.newsgroups.com,
|| Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
|
| <snip>
|| Yes, some sexual acts are *very* important to
|| people because for some reason - brain chemistry, childhood
|| experiences, genetic wiring, karmic balance, whatever - they
|| associate these acts with being able to more fully express
|| themselves. *Why* this happens is probably not important; the
|| important thing is just accepting that it *does* happen and not
|| assigning some random moral score to these people. <snip>
|
| Forgive me if I'm not quite on-topic for this thread--I ploked Delila
| a while ago.
It sounds like Delila hasn't been ploked in a while. Oh, did you mean
"plonked"?
</wisecrack>
|
| I think you're on to something, here, Tom. When I was in college, I
| volunteered to be a guinea-pig for a study someone I knew was doing
| for a psych class on communication styles vs. learning styles.
Ah, I used to love those, being a Psych major myself at the time.
|
| It came out that something like 70% of people are primarily visual
| communicators.
| Something like 25% were verbal communicators.
| Almost 5% were aural communicators (i.e. there was more, for them, in
| tone of voice, volume, rythm of speech, etc. than in the words that
| were said)
| Less than 1% were primarily touch communicators (and I was one of
| them).
I'm assuming here that by "primary" you mean that most people have a mix
of styles.
|
| I think this is why a lot of my boyfriends didn't get why I was such a
| physical person, even with my friends. That's simply how I
| communicate best. My husband can usually tell if I'm really mad at
| him by observing whether I seek out his touch, pointedly avoid it, or
| somewhere in between. When I want to comfort my son, I think of
| smoothing his hair or rubbing his back before anything else.
Hmm, here's something interesting. I think that in our culture, "touch
communication" is frowned upon for men. I don't come from a touchie
family, buyt for some reason (and probably *because of this) I respond
well to touch communication. In fact, I've noticed that I've become much
more touchie (as opposed to touchy) after my daughter was born (I became
much more emotionally expressive in other ways as well). I do this with
her a lot, I'll grab her for a surprise hug, or sometimes for a suprise
nouggie (sp?), or a smattering of kisses on her head.
A particularly well-remembered lover had a particular way of touching my
arm in such a way that I could sense that it was as much for her
pleasure as my own. I could probably pick that touch out of a dozen
women while blindfolded. A therapist recently told me that given my
family background and my general temperment and desire for certain kinds
of physical intimacy (in that I'm more sensually than sexually
oriented), that he could well understand how that lover would have a
very powerful draw on me.
| My husband is really good at "romantic" stuff. He brings me a single
| flower every once in awhile just because he's thinking of me. The
| first time we ever had a fight he made a card for me to say he was
| sorry and wrote some beautiful things in it. I'm not very good at
| it. I've really only ever pulled of "romance" once.
That's okay, we like you anyway.
| OTOH, I express myself very easily when I choose to touch him a
| certain way, by the care I show, by how I know how to push his
| buttons, whether I'm trying to turn him on, relax him, confort him,
| whatever.
Yes! I know exactly what you mean.
I can see that some of my past relationships that seemed nice on the
surface failed because of a lack of communication. Not a lack fo trying,
mind you, but a failure to get a message across because we're operating
on the wrong channels. I had a gf who did not like to be touched or
hugged, and our intimate life always felt as if something was lacking,
something we could never put our finger on. Even my wife now has a hard
time with the sensuality of lovemaking, and I'm only just recognizing
how this has impacted our relationship over the years.
| I think I'm mostly rambling now... the point I was trying to make is
| that I think Tom was right about sex sometimes being important as a
| form of self-expression. Yes, I can make my husband's favorite
| dinner, or tell him I love him, I can even be somewhat eloquent at
| times--but it's when we touch that I think I best communicate how I
| feel.
Let me add to that: When I think of sensual touching, spending a long
time in caressing and enjoying physical contact, what I call "sensual"
rather than "sexual" lovemaking, I imagine that I'm... doing something
that I can only describe as akin to painting a picture or molding a
sculpture; I'm creating a dynamic expression of love, friendship, trust,
and respect. Sex can be found anywhere, but what I seek is the means to
give something more. For me it's through the sensual; I s'pose if I were
a musician I'd be writing songs. And when I don't get this opportunity,
I feel sad and somewhat neglected or maybe unappreciated.
I've wondered if this is an offshoot from having studied Tantra years
ago; but perhaps my study was the result of an inner voice recognizing
that Tantra was a way to this expression.
Tom <expecting Delila to be surprised that I know what Tantra is, too>
Tom Allen
Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| news:2m7k2iF...@uni-berlin.de...
| >
| >
| > But notice that nobody is suggesting that you're deviant or
| perverted or > that you have issues with hating men because of your
| beliefs.
|
|
| That I might hate men has been mentioned before.
You said yourself that you thought men who would ask a woman for os were
not "decent". I'm too laze to find the posts, but you really have
written a few things in which it seems that you've suggested men who
want os have certain issues with hostility.
My point, though, was that nobody here is calling you perverted for
*not* liking os. Can we agree on that?
| >
| > Can't you see how insensitive that statement is?
|
|
| NO! What in the world is insensitive about it?? I don't get it!
Let's go back to my analogy of visiting a foreign country in which the
customs were very different from your own. When in Rome, you don't have
to do as the Romans do, but would you accuse the Romans of being sick,
hostile, perverted or deviant?
|
| She appears lucky to
| > you because you don't care about os in the first place. If you
| take that > kind of logic to the absurd extreme, one might say "Oh,
| people are dying > all over the place, so if your biggest problem
| is just losing a limb, > then you're very lucky."
|
|
| I guess you'd have to ask a person who's actually lost a limb. Most
| of them, I'd wager, would indeed consider themselves lucky to have
| survived at all.
Okay, let's try another route. Many couples divorce because the husband
has an affair or is emotionally unavailable for his wife. So, what's
their problem? At least he's not beating her? If her only problem is
that he's not nice all the time then she should consider herself to be
lucky, right?
| I know a relationship should be give and take, but you should never
| do something, esp. something necessary, like laundry, and expect to
| have the other person do something in return. I mean, do some people
| keep score?
That wasn't what I was saying, but then, why not "expect" something in
return? Why else do people have a relationship? If you enjoy each
other's company, then why wouldn't you expect to do things for each
other to keep the relationship running smoothly?
I have a friend who is what most of us would call a terrible
housekeeper. Cluttered, disorganized, and only cleans when the Health
Department shows up. The Anti-June Cleaver. She will say right up front
that any man who wants a neater house will have to do it himself. OTOH,
she's agreeable to sex just about any time of day or night. She claims
that she'd rather save her energy for fun and orgasms; after all, you
can hire someone to clean your house for you, but you don't want to hire
someone to screw your husband for you. (yes, some women would do that,
but we're not talking about them)
| > Note that this is *not* the same as doing something in
| expectation of a > reward - although it could certainly go in that
| direction. I'm talking > about showing appreciation in a way that
| your partner understands. When > my wife wants to show her
| appreciation for me cleaning her car, she > doesn't buy me a little
| tschoske with a balloon, she makes her award > winning apple pie.
| She doesn't have to do either, I *know* she > appreciates it, but a
| pie speaks to me, the knick-knack will just > collect dust.
|
|
| Well, as long as likes making the pie, it's okay. But do you expect
| her to make the pie each time you clean her car?
<holds head in hands and moans softly> No, of course not!
And does it matter if she likes making the pie? She knows that *I* like
it, that's why she does it - it's her way of communicating to me "Thanks
for what you've done for me this week". The point, which you seemed to
have missed, is that she knows I'd like the pie more than the
embroidered pillows which she gives to her girlfriends, or the bottle of
wine she gives to her sister. Would I feel as appreciated if she gave
*me* a pillow? Well, I'd understand that "it's the thought that counts",
naturally; it's just that certain other things have more significance to
me.
Likewise, when your partner is washing the dishes or folding clothes or
cooking dinner, how would you show your appreciation in a way that has
significance to him? Do you say nothing because it's his house too and
he should take some repsonsibility? Do you stop at the video store a few
days later and rent him that new action flick? Make his lunch and leave
a suggestive note for him? Something will "push his buttons" and make
him more likely to wash, fold, cook next week.
My original suggestion was a nibble on the neck because it's cheap
(free, actually), and your promise of "appreciation" when you're feeling
better usually will make him more attentive to what you need. An old gf
once told me that this kind of attitude was "not her style" because it
made her think that she "had" to reciprocate every single action; she
believed that I should do things for her because she asked me, period.
When she finally did get around to showing her appreciation in small
ways, it was usually something that was convenient for her, but had no
significance for me.
"To thank you for cleaning the garage, I made you a banana cream pie."
"oh, er, thanks..."
"Well, you don't seem very appreciative."
"that's because I thought you knew I hate banana cream pie."
"Well, I knew that you didn't care for it, but my mother likes it, and
she's coming for dinner tonight."
"oh. Um, maybe you can make me a coconut cream pie later this week, you
know that I love that kind."
"You daft bastard, do you think I'm gonna make *two* pies this week? Why
can't you be satisfied with banana cream?"
"because I don't like banana cream!"
"Don't you know that it's the thought that counts?"
"um... I suppose a blowjob is outta the question, too, huh?"
Okay, so we've defined that a show of appreciation has to be
communicated in a way that has significance to the partner. Are we more
clear on the concept?
| > <rolls eyes and bangs head on desk>
|
| ???
Exactly my point!
Tom
Delila
>
>
>
> No, I am acting like an honest adult with sexual desires.
Okay, I apologize. I jumped into this thread without having read
everything that was said before.
>
> It took my partner and me the best part of four years to get our
> sexual needs balanced in a way that suits us both.
Four years? That's a mighty long time to get each other's desires in
synch. Are you sure you two are really compatible?
>
> It is absolutely true that not getting the sexual attention one
> desires from ones beloved partner makes one feel desolate. Read ssg
> for a year and you will hear from around 15 husbands whose wives no
> longer give them the sexual attention they wish for.
There can be so many different reasons why women (or men) lose interest in
sex after so many years of marriage. Sometimes they just don't find their
partners attractive anymore.
>
> These men, with almost no exception, express feelings of aloneness, a
> lack of feeling loved, rejection, ugliness, sadness, humiliation.
Do they ever discuss this with their spouses?
>
> It would also go against one of the most important things I believe
> about relationships which are romantic and sexual. Partners must be
> equals. A deliberate withholding of things one partner enjoys simply
> to "make them suffer" is not the act of an equal. It's an act which
> asserts power over the other individual, and so it is not something
> which is *permissible* in an adult, honest relationship.
I agree.
>
> Guilt is an useless emotion. It doesn't benefit anyone (except those
> looking for some sort of petty revenge), and as such, I have no use
> for it.
Me neither.
>
> You know how I just love it when you bite the back of my neck? Well,
> it seems to me that you haven't done that in a long while. It makes me
> feel you aren't thinking about how I feel and what I like, and that
> makes me sad"
I'm not going to write what my thoughts are about this, because it would
probably upset you.
>
> There is nothing morally wrong with not biting one's partner on the
> back of the neck. There is nothing morally wrong with not giving one's
> partner any freely agreed upon sexual service.
This sounds like a chore. To me, a partnership shouldn't be a chore like
that.
>
> And the cycle would begin again.
>
> Is this making sense to you at all?
Yes, and I don't care for it. That's why I doubt I'll ever want to be in
another realationship again.
>
> His manipulation of you was very effective.
I guess you're right, but we were also very young then, 21 and 19.
>
> And here you;ve manipulated him right back.
In a way I did, yes. Today I would tell him to either iron them himself or
take them on post, but back then I wasn't as assertive.
>
> What if your husband had said to you, when you asked him to wash the
> dishes "I really hate washing dishes. Is there something else I could
> do for you instead?"
>
> Would you have accepted and offered him a job more suitable to his
> temperament?
Yes.
>
> And wouldn;t that have saved a lot of wet floors, and dishes you hard
> to rewash yourself?
>
> And what if you had said to your husband "I hate ironing. If you get
> your shirts ironed elsewhere, I'd be happy to do something else for
> you"?
I could have, but that didn't occur to me at the time.
>
> Heh. Funny, I think it's sad for someone not to be able to be happy in
> a relationship which includes oral sex.
>
> Funny old world, isn't it?
Yep.
>
> I am indeed serious.
>
> PIV sex, while a lovely, lovely thing, is less important to me than
> oral sex.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks, I guess.
>
> I think you have a lot of guts, staying around in a place where it
> seems no-one shares your veiw point, where everyone seems to be
> attacking you.
This group is tame compared to some of the others I've been on and still
am on.
>
> That's part of why I keep answering your posts - and I appologise for
> how long this one is - I think if you're willing to put in the effort
> to understand, I should certainly be willing to put in the effort to
> try to help you.
Thank you.
Delila
Delila
>
> I, personally, was extraordinarily surprised to hear that *you* know
> these words...
Believe it or not, I'm actually quite open-minded.
suzeeq
> > These men, with almost no exception, express feelings of aloneness, a
> > lack of feeling loved, rejection, ugliness, sadness, humiliation.
>
> Do they ever discuss this with their spouses?
They try. The women just seem to look at them and say `what's the
problem?' No comprehension of what they're feeling.
sue
Sarah
> > No, I am acting like an honest adult with sexual desires.
> Okay, I apologize. I jumped into this thread without having read
>everything that was said before.
Apology accepted and appreciated. It's easy to jump to conclusions
when one does not have full information.
> > It took my partner and me the best part of four years to get our
> > sexual needs balanced in a way that suits us both.
> Four years? That's a mighty long time to get each other's desires in
>synch. Are you sure you two are really compatible?
...I thought you said sex wasn;t terribly important to you.
Here are some of the ways my partner and I are 100% compatible.
Books - we read and enjoy the same genres and authors. If one of
enjoys a book it is almost completely certain that the other will
enjoy it just as much. There is just enough difference for the
occasional entertaining discussion.
Politics - we vote the same way and our senses of social justice align
closely. There is just enough difference for the occasional
entertaining discussion.
Nightclubs - neither of us enjoys being at them, but either or both of
us can manage a couple of hours without getting too distressed if it's
someone's birthday or whatever.
Food. We both love good food and our favourite restaurants are the
same.
Love - Each of us has a deep sense of love, not only for one another,
but for our families. Love is very important to both of us.
Fairness - is extraordinarily important to each of us.
Money - as long as there is enough money between us (remember, we have
separate households and separate bank accounts) for each of us to
fulfill our duties and our pleasures, we don;t really care who earned
it.
Sexual fidelity - we are both monogamous by nature, although we can
(and have) discussed different versions of polifidelity as an
intellectual exercises. Each of us believes that polifidelity of quite
moral when all partners are fully aware of all of the facts, but that
it does not suit out lifestyles or our needs
Childraising - each of us believes that most of children's teaching
and discipline comes from their mothers, although neither of us
believes this is necessarily a good thing. Each of us believes that
smacking can be justified in particular circumstances, but should
never be done in anger.
Violence Vs Sex on television - each of us believes that viewing
violence is more damaging that viewing loving romantic sex, for
children and others. Each of us would be happy with a tightening of
what violence may be shown on television. Each of us would be happy
with a relaxation of what sexual matters may be shown on television.
There are more, but I am probably wearing out your pixels.
There are two matters we are not almost entirely in accord on.
I am an atheist while my partner is an agnostic, and my drive for sex
is slightly stronger than my parter's.
Would you suggest that because of these two (or really, this one,
because you didn't know about our religions before now) I should
consider us incompatible?
I guess sex is more important to you that I realised...
> > It is absolutely true that not getting the sexual attention one
> > desires from ones beloved partner makes one feel desolate. Read ssg
> > for a year and you will hear from around 15 husbands whose wives no
> > longer give them the sexual attention they wish for.
> There can be so many different reasons why women (or men) lose interest in
>sex after so many years of marriage. Sometimes they just don't find their
>partners attractive anymore.
I don;t see your point here.
Are you saying that the partner who is undesired should just shut up
and cope?
> > These men, with almost no exception, express feelings of aloneness, a
> > lack of feeling loved, rejection, ugliness, sadness, humiliation.
> Do they ever discuss this with their spouses?
There are, without exception, advised by many regulars of SSG to do
so.
As I can see you are aware, discussion, awareness, and compromise are
the only ways to strengthen a marriage.
> > You know how I just love it when you bite the back of my neck? Well,
> > it seems to me that you haven't done that in a long while. It makes me
> > feel you aren't thinking about how I feel and what I like, and that
> > makes me sad"
>
>
> I'm not going to write what my thoughts are about this, because it would
>probably upset you.
Please, please *do* write what your thoughts about this are. I should
have imagined that you would have realised by now that it is quite
difficult to "upset" me by saying things I don't agree with.
It's obvious that something I wrote in the quoted paragraph has pushed
a button for you - sadly I can't tell if it's the fact my partner
might like to have his neck nibbled, or the fact that we might cook
dinner together, or the fact that he would talk to me about something
like this, or something quite different.
Please tell me.
> > There is nothing morally wrong with not biting one's partner on the
> > back of the neck. There is nothing morally wrong with not giving one's
> > partner any freely agreed upon sexual service.
> This sounds like a chore. To me, a partnership shouldn't be a chore like
>that.
I'm sorry you feel it sounds like a chore. It certainly is no chore to
either of us.
> > And the cycle would begin again.
> >
> > Is this making sense to you at all?
> Yes, and I don't care for it. That's why I doubt I'll ever want to be in
>another realationship again.
I'm not understand you here, and I really want to.
What don;t you like about the pattern of reminders and compromise I
have set out above?
> > His manipulation of you was very effective.
> I guess you're right, but we were also very young then, 21 and 19.
> > And here you;ve manipulated him right back.
> In a way I did, yes. Today I would tell him to either iron them himself or
>take them on post, but back then I wasn't as assertive.
Excellent - so you;ve proved it is possible for you to learn, grow and
mature.
> > That's part of why I keep answering your posts - and I appologise for
> > how long this one is - I think if you're willing to put in the effort
> > to understand, I should certainly be willing to put in the effort to
> > try to help you.
> Thank you.
You're quite welcome.
--
Sarah
Jacques Michel
That is in the milder cases. This group has had reports of women
becoming a lot more aggressive than that. Not asking "what's the
problem?", but rather stating "your perverted horniness is the
problem".
Sarah
Tom and I were talking, no-one else's quoted
>Sarah, i just wanted to revisit something, if you don't mind.
Not at all.
Here's your question.
>For example, let's go back to the cl several times a year. Let's say
>that early in your relationship you didn't realize that you would really
>miss having cl at least once every month or two. At some point you start
>to recognize this need in yourself, but also during that time you've had
>indications from him that cl wan't his cup of tea, or perhaps he
>regarded it as a bit of a squick (perhaps you've overheard him mention
>this to his mates or he's made offhand comments about it). You now
>realize that you've got the potential for a disagreement, so you want to
>perhaps bring it up in such a way that's not going to make him react out
>of feeling pressured or defensive. How do you go about this? Any
>thoughts on what the conversation (or next several) would look like?
I've tossed this one around in my head for the last two days, and not
really known where to begin answering.
Since, when I get stuck, I like to discuss stuff with my fellow, I
posed him the following question:
"What if you suddenly realised that "the thing that was missing"*, the
thing that was stopping you feeling happy and satisfied, was that you
really, really wanted to stick your dick in my ear. What would you
do?"
He said "I'd ask you about it, of course"
So I said "And what if, when you asked me about it, I told you I hated
the idea; that it made me feel sick or afraid?"
He went quiet for a while and then said "I guess I'd go out and buy a
fake ear. Would you hold it for me?"
And that is how it would work for us. Because of the traditions of our
relationship.
It's exceedingly difficult for me to answer your question properly,
Tom, because I would just not be in the situation you describe. If the
desires were reversed, as soon as I knew I fancied having my ear
penetrated I would tell him it was something I was feeling might be
interesting. I would listen to his ideas. If he felt sickened at the
idea I might well go out and buy a Handy Dandy Ear Reamer (only $9.95,
batteries not included) and ask him to help me use it. If he just felt
bland about the idea, I would probably ask him to try it and see how
it went.
See, if you;re talking the whole time during your relationship, you
learn how to negotiate and compromise. Once the talking honestly has
gone by the wayside, it's much, MUCH more difficult to get this sort
of dialogue going. Both people have to WANT to have the dialogue. Both
people have to WANT to understand how their partner feels, what their
partner wants.
And honesty is a Very Hard Thing to begin when you;re out of practice.
When you haven;t been saying to your partner "I love it when we do
this." " I'm ambivalent when you do that." " Please, I dislike the
other thing, so please keep it for special occasions.". and "I cannot
accept this fourth thing, ever - how can I meet your need without
breaking my personal code?" every day (or every week) it can be
horribly scary to say "I would like to tie you up and tickle your
navel with my tongue"
Neither you (not necessarily You, Tom, just You in general) nor your
partner is in practice with discussing things that make one vulnerable
to one another.
Your partner might feel revolted by the idea of having her navel
tonguetickled. Or she might feel she *should* feel revolted by it. Or
she might just have never thought about it very hard. If she's not
used to speaking about how she feels, her answer cold be
extraordinarily unhelpful.
"Would you?"
"I see."
"That's not normal"
"Why would you want to do that?"
When what she probably would be saying, if the two of you were in
practice, would be "Thank you for telling me. I need to process that
for a day or two. Could we talk about it on Tuesday after dinner?"
So I think my answer to the question you didn;t ask, but I seem to be
answering, is something like this:
In order to ask one's partner to participate in a different-than-usual
sexual experience, make sure first that the two of you are used to
talking freely about your sexual thoughts, desires, ideas, feelings
and dislikes.
In order to keep this working, also remember to always talk about your
preferences in recreation, food, work, child rearing, politics,
religion, cars, dinosaurs, penguins, social responsibilities,
taxation, and the breeding of salmon, too.
Talk, without pulling punches.
Never stop talking.
Except when your mouth is busy ;)
*Note - there isn't actually a Thing That Is Missing. He's very happy.
--
Sarah
Tom Allen
Delila <aqu...@widomaker.com> informed us:
| "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
| news:6lqkf05sscs6j2bmq...@4ax.com...
| >
| >
| >
| > No, I am acting like an honest adult with sexual desires.
|
|
| Okay, I apologize. I jumped into this thread without having read
| everything that was said before.
Hmmm.
| > It took my partner and me the best part of four years to get our
| > sexual needs balanced in a way that suits us both.
|
|
| Four years? That's a mighty long time to get each other's desires in
| synch. Are you sure you two are really compatible?
I read this post last night, and thought about it all the way into work
this morning. Last night I was tired and cranky because I'd had a long
week of work yesterday. This morning I'm refreshed and eager. Delila, I
was planning some smart-alecky sarcastic response, but I've realized
that this is a potential growth opportunity for you.
Look at how your first thought was "4 years? They must not be very
compatible!" But consider: most people are together for many years and
the sex is never enough & always too much. What Sarah is saying is that
she and her partner spent 4 years getting to know each other and
finding a pattern that suits *both* of them. That doesn't mean that they
spent four years arguing or manipulating or bickering or giving in; it
means that they approached each other honestly and fine-tuned what they
wanted over a period of time. Consider your paragraph below, that many
couples lose interest in each other over time. That means that they've
both compromised in a way that's satisfactory for *neither* of them;
Sarah and her partner have worked out something that *is* satisfactory
for both of them.
D, can you write a bit about how compatible your relationship has been?
Can you write a few sentences about how you and your hub agreed on
things, how you'd manage to work out who would do things that they
didn't like?
| > It is absolutely true that not getting the sexual attention one
| > desires from ones beloved partner makes one feel desolate. Read
| ssg > for a year and you will hear from around 15 husbands whose
| wives no > longer give them the sexual attention they wish for.
|
|
| There can be so many different reasons why women (or men) lose
| interest in sex after so many years of marriage. Sometimes they just
| don't find their partners attractive anymore.
You've missed her point: Sarah was speaking to how men and women can
feel isolated and alienated from their spouses because of the lack of
physical intimacy. Of course there are many reasons; now, can you write
a little about feeling emotionally disconnected because of a lack of
intimacy? Or can you write a bit on why you think it would or woudn't
happen?
| > You know how I just love it when you bite the back of my neck?
| Well, > it seems to me that you haven't done that in a long while.
| It makes me > feel you aren't thinking about how I feel and what I
| like, and that > makes me sad"
|
|
| I'm not going to write what my thoughts are about this, because it
| would probably upset you.
You're proably thinking that "If that's her biggest problem, then she
should stop whining and get on with her life".
D, can you write about how you were disappointed when your husband
stopped doing something that you used to enjoy? Not specifcally sexual,
but something that pleased you on a few levels that he stopped or
neglected. How did it make you feel? Did you try to get him to start
doing it again? If so, how? If not, why?
| > There is nothing morally wrong with not biting one's partner on
| the > back of the neck. There is nothing morally wrong with not
| giving one's > partner any freely agreed upon sexual service.
|
|
| This sounds like a chore. To me, a partnership shouldn't be a chore
| like that.
Why does it sound like a chore? Because it was agreed upon? Becuase it's
not given freely and spontaneously?
| > His manipulation of you was very effective.
|
| I guess you're right, but we were also very young then, 21 and 19.
|
|
| >
| > And here you;ve manipulated him right back.
|
| In a way I did, yes. Today I would tell him to either iron them
| himself or take them on post, but back then I wasn't as assertive.
And I think what Sarah is trying to convey isn't so much about being
mature or assertive, it's that manipulating one's partner is so much
more *work* than just asking for what you want and negotiating openly.
WHo want's to spend all that mental enegery planning and being devious
or wondering how someone will react, when you can just say "Would you do
this for me?" and then get on to the good stuff later.
How'm I doing Sarah? Do I have that about right?
| This group is tame compared to some of the others I've been on and
| still am on.
<bites tongure>
| > That's part of why I keep answering your posts - and I appologise
| for > how long this one is - I think if you're willing to put in
| the effort > to understand, I should certainly be willing to put in
| the effort to > try to help you.
Yeah, me too. Mostly.
Tom
Tom Allen
Sarah <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> informed us:
Okay, let's stop there. What if over the last few years he'd heard you
make rather disparaging remarks about dick-in-ear (aural?) sex? IOW,
what if he didn't realize that aural sex was even missing in his life
until he'd heard you go on about the damn "auralies", or listen to you
point out articles on how teenage girls were doing it because of peer
pressure?
See, what you were describing was a situation in which he wanted to try
somethig and had no idea how you felt about it. What if he did know, and
it appeared to be somethign that you were rather against for moral or
religious or philosophical reasons? Would he change his modus operandi?
| So I said "And what if, when you asked me about it, I told you I hated
| the idea; that it made me feel sick or afraid?"
|
| He went quiet for a while and then said "I guess I'd go out and buy a
| fake ear. Would you hold it for me?"
|
| And that is how it would work for us. Because of the traditions of our
| relationship.
I'm cool so far. I still need to process this for a bit, okay?
| And honesty is a Very Hard Thing to begin when you;re out of practice.
| When you haven;t been saying to your partner "I love it when we do
| this." " I'm ambivalent when you do that." " Please, I dislike the
| other thing, so please keep it for special occasions.". and "I cannot
| accept this fourth thing, ever - how can I meet your need without
| breaking my personal code?" every day (or every week) it can be
| horribly scary to say "I would like to tie you up and tickle your
| navel with my tongue"
I'm finding that in relationships I have been very hesitant to express
what I want. I've often said that I don't always *know* what I want, but
thinking about this letely I realize that I usually *do* know, I'm just
choosing to not express it until I'm relatively assured that my partner
won't flip out. I'm saying that I'm ignoring my own desires "for the
sake of the relationship", but what I'm actually ignoring is that
without the positive interaction of *both* partners then there *is* no
relationship.
|
| Neither you (not necessarily You, Tom, just You in general) nor your
| partner is in practice with discussing things that make one vulnerable
| to one another.
And this is a big one for me. I'm constantly balancing my desires or my
expression of those desires against the fear that I would be hurt in
some way.
"I can't beleive that you'd even ask me for something like that! No
decent guy would want to stick his tongue in my navel! Wait until I call
all my girlfriends, your parents, and go cry about it to our other
friends, and they'll never beleive it either."
Either that, or I'm worried that I'll hurt my partner in some way.
"I can't believe that you think I haven't been good enough for you.
Wasn't the ear tonguing enough? How much more humilation will I have to
take for you? Haven't you asked enough from me?"
| If she's not
| used to speaking about how she feels, her answer cold be
| extraordinarily unhelpful.
|
| "Would you?"
|
| "I see."
|
| "That's not normal"
|
| "Why would you want to do that?"
You can't believe how much of this I actually get. Or maybe you can.
But to be fair, when she asks me, I think that I sometimes will tailor
my comments so that I don't freak her out. It's as if I'm trying to
forsee the answer that she'd like, or to at least couch it in terms that
she can more accept.
Her: "Do you think that my butt is getting too large?"
Me: "Of course not! Why make yourself a salve to what those elitist
fashion designers say?"
Her: "Are you saying that fashion designers would think my butt is too
large for their clothes?"
Me: "Er... I think I hear the baby crying..."
| So I think my answer to the question you didn;t ask, but I seem to be
| answering, is something like this:
|
| In order to ask one's partner to participate in a different-than-usual
| sexual experience, make sure first that the two of you are used to
| talking freely about your sexual thoughts, desires, ideas, feelings
| and dislikes.
|
| In order to keep this working, also remember to always talk about your
| preferences in recreation, food, work, child rearing, politics,
| religion, cars, dinosaurs, penguins, social responsibilities,
| taxation, and the breeding of salmon, too.
|
| Talk, without pulling punches.
|
| Never stop talking.
|
| Except when your mouth is busy ;)
Sarah, thank you so much for this. It's gonna need some processing time.
Tom
Delila
>
>
> ...I thought you said sex wasn;t terribly important to you.
It isn't. But that doesn't mean I'm not interested in what other people
do. That's why I joined this group for a while.
>
> Here are some of the ways my partner and I are 100% compatible.
>
> Books - we read and enjoy the same genres and authors. If one of
> enjoys a book it is almost completely certain that the other will
> enjoy it just as much. There is just enough difference for the
> occasional entertaining discussion.
That's great.
>
> Politics - we vote the same way and our senses of social justice align
> closely. There is just enough difference for the occasional
> entertaining discussion.
That would be very important to me, too. No Bush-supporters need apply,
LOL!
>
> Nightclubs - neither of us enjoys being at them, but either or both of
> us can manage a couple of hours without getting too distressed if it's
> someone's birthday or whatever.
I used to like them when I was younger, now I don't care about them
anymore.
>
> Food. We both love good food and our favourite restaurants are the
> same.
>
> Love - Each of us has a deep sense of love, not only for one another,
> but for our families. Love is very important to both of us.
>
> Fairness - is extraordinarily important to each of us.
>
> Money - as long as there is enough money between us (remember, we have
> separate households and separate bank accounts) for each of us to
> fulfill our duties and our pleasures, we don;t really care who earned
> it.
So you really do have plenty in common, more than most couples.
>
> Sexual fidelity - we are both monogamous by nature, although we can
> (and have) discussed different versions of polifidelity as an
> intellectual exercises. Each of us believes that polifidelity of quite
> moral when all partners are fully aware of all of the facts, but that
> it does not suit out lifestyles or our needs
Well, at least you're able to discuss it.
>
> Childraising - each of us believes that most of children's teaching
> and discipline comes from their mothers, although neither of us
> believes this is necessarily a good thing. Each of us believes that
> smacking can be justified in particular circumstances, but should
> never be done in anger.
Spankings can sometimes drive a point home to the child that all the
reasoning in the world can't.
>
> Violence Vs Sex on television - each of us believes that viewing
> violence is more damaging that viewing loving romantic sex, for
> children and others. Each of us would be happy with a tightening of
> what violence may be shown on television. Each of us would be happy
> with a relaxation of what sexual matters may be shown on television.
I agree with that. Like why is the female nipple still taboo? This is
ridiculous.
>
> There are more, but I am probably wearing out your pixels.
>
> There are two matters we are not almost entirely in accord on.
>
> I am an atheist while my partner is an agnostic, and my drive for sex
> is slightly stronger than my parter's.
Atheists have stronger sex-drives?
>
> Would you suggest that because of these two (or really, this one,
> because you didn't know about our religions before now) I should
> consider us incompatible?
No, definitely not.
>
> I guess sex is more important to you that I realised...
How do you mean? If I were to find a partner who'd be as compatible with
me as your partner is to you and he were a so-so lover, I'd stay with him.
Because most people really don't spend a whole lot of time having sex.
There's a question sometimes asked "And what do you do the other 23 hours
and 45 minutes?" That's why I say sex isn't that important to me, other
things are more important.
>
> I don;t see your point here.
Sometimes, people stop finding their partners physically appealing. That
could be due to weight gain, aging, any number of things. Of course, that's
not the only reason why sex tends to become less important for one but not
the other partner. Just the stress of every-day living, going to work,
raising kids, etc. can take a lot out of a person, and they're just too
tired in the evening to have sex.
>
> Are you saying that the partner who is undesired should just shut up
> and cope?
No, but maybe they can try to do something about it. They can try to lose
weight, go to the gym (it's something couples can do together). If that's
not possible, then I don't know, I wouldn't want to be required to have
obligatory sex with someone I find downright repulsive. If we're still
having plenty of other things in common, I'd be willing to compromise and
have sex with every so often anyway, because the relationship would be too
important for me to throw away. But I don't know how long I could keep this
up. I think, in my case, the relationship would eventually end.
>
> As I can see you are aware, discussion, awareness, and compromise are
> the only ways to strengthen a marriage.
Compromises are good, up to a point. If one has to compromise too much one
might get resentful.
>
> Please, please *do* write what your thoughts about this are. I should
> have imagined that you would have realised by now that it is quite
> difficult to "upset" me by saying things I don't agree with.
>
> It's obvious that something I wrote in the quoted paragraph has pushed
> a button for you - sadly I can't tell if it's the fact my partner
> might like to have his neck nibbled, or the fact that we might cook
> dinner together, or the fact that he would talk to me about something
> like this, or something quite different.
>
> Please tell me.
I don't know how long you two have been together. I'd guess that in the
beginning of the relationship you started nibbling his neck, just because
you felt like it. He happened to like it. Or maybe he asked you to do it and
you gladly obliged. But as time went on, the neck nibbling lost (some of)
its appeal, and you all but stopped doing it. But he still likes you to do
it. You do it, but don't you get just the tiniest bit resentful? Just a
fleeting moment? I remember my mother doing things for my father, like wash
his hair or cut his toenails; things he could easily have done for himself.
She'd started doing those things for him when they were courting and he just
kept on demanding she continue doing them throughout their marriage. She
resented having to do it. Yet, she never told him no, either. Sometimes we
do things in the beginning, that get abandoned down the road, but the other
partner can't or won't accept this.
>
> I'm not understand you here, and I really want to.
A relationship shouldn't really be work, I believe. You either get along
or you don't. I'm not saying you and your husband don't, but generally
speaking.
>
> What don;t you like about the pattern of reminders and compromise I
> have set out above?
It just doesn't appeal to me, I can't explain it.
>
> Excellent - so you;ve proved it is possible for you to learn, grow and
> mature.
Well, at the time I was also still struggling somewhat with the English
language, so I didn't have the words to really tell him what I thought.
Delila
"Norton" <nor...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:cd9vm8$2ce$9...@reader2.panix.com...
>
> Delila: what you are talking about are two people trying
> to negotiate their way through some differences.
I already took care of this with Sarah. I didn't know the whole story.
> Of course, one solution is if he wants oral sex and you
> don't want to provide it, get a third woman involved who
> would provide it.
>
> One might end up with a *very* happy partner... ;-)
Sounds good to me.
D.
Sarah
> > I am an atheist while my partner is an agnostic, and my drive for sex
> > is slightly stronger than my parter's.
> Atheists have stronger sex-drives?
*lol* No!
*This* atheist has a stronger sex drive than *that* agnostic.
--
Sarah
suzeeq
>
> "Sarah" <sarah_cha...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:lbjuf0li1kcp5qu6e...@4ax.com...
> > I guess sex is more important to you that I realised...
>
> How do you mean? If I were to find a partner who'd be as compatible with
> me as your partner is to you and he were a so-so lover, I'd stay with him.
> Because most people really don't spend a whole lot of time having sex.
> There's a question sometimes asked "And what do you do the other 23 hours
> and 45 minutes?" That's why I say sex isn't that important to me, other
> things are more important.
And if you (anyone, not just you personally) spent more than 15 minutes
having sex, they might find why it's very important in a relationship.
> > As I can see you are aware, discussion, awareness, and compromise are
> > the only ways to strengthen a marriage.
>
> Compromises are good, up to a point. If one has to compromise too much one
> might get resentful.
Yes and that's the problem many people face when their partner isn't
interested in sex or even discussing it. They compromist to get along
and end up being very unhappy as well as resentful.
sue
Delila
I know, I was just messin' with you. :)
D.
~consul
> "To thank you for cleaning the garage, I made you a banana cream pie."
> "oh, er, thanks..."
> "Well, you don't seem very appreciative."
> "that's because I thought you knew I hate banana cream pie."
> "Well, I knew that you didn't care for it, but my mother likes it, and
> she's coming for dinner tonight."
> "oh. Um, maybe you can make me a coconut cream pie later this week, you
> know that I love that kind."
> "You daft bastard, do you think I'm gonna make *two* pies this week? Why
> can't you be satisfied with banana cream?"
> "because I don't like banana cream!"
> "Don't you know that it's the thought that counts?"
> "um... I suppose a blowjob is outta the question, too, huh?"
Oh man, Tom is reading my mind. I had a near exact type (she used the word 'daft') of
conversation with an old female housemate of mine. Damn ... the horrors! :) We'd have
these type of talks every now and then, but we still stayed housemates for 3 years, and
she was one of my closest friends.
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk ..."
-till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
con...@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com ((remove the INVALID to email))
Delila
>
> And if you (anyone, not just you personally) spent more than 15 minutes
> having sex, they might find why it's very important in a relationship.
Of course, a love-making 'session' can take an hour or even two for some
people. But there's still a majority of your time together that you do
something other than have sex.
D.
suzeeq
>
> "suzeeq" <suz...@imbris.com> wrote in message
> news:41005E19...@imbris.com...
> >
> > And if you (anyone, not just you personally) spent more than 15 minutes
> > having sex, they might find why it's very important in a relationship.
>
> Of course, a love-making 'session' can take an hour or even two for some
> people. But there's still a majority of your time together that you do
> something other than have sex.
Uh huh. And whether you're happy or not about sex can have an effect on
the rest of your time together.
sue
Jack C Lipton
> suzeeq wrote:
>> And if you (anyone, not just you personally) spent
>> more than 15 minutes having sex, they might find
>> why it's very important in a relationship.
>
> Of course, a love-making 'session' can take an hour
> or even two for some people. But there's still a
> majority of your time together that you do something
> other than have sex.
It has been argued that a woman's mind has to be "on"
for sex, which requires foreplay. Foreplay can take
many forms, many of them non-sexual (like cleaning,
for instance) which, when properly recognized (and
worth the effort) and acted upon, effectively extends
love-making to *days*.
Of course, given the fragility of the mood, several
days (or weeks, or months) may be needed to get one's
woman in the mood.
--
Jack C Lipton | cupasoup at pele dot cx | http://www.asstr.org/~CupaSoup/
"While life is too short to be taken seriously, it also lasts
for far too long to spend it with a stick up your ass." - me
Delila
>
> Uh huh. And whether you're happy or not about sex can have an effect on
> the rest of your time together.
True for most people, I guess, but not for me. :)
Delila
>
> I read this post last night, and thought about it all the way into work
> this morning. Last night I was tired and cranky because I'd had a long
> week of work yesterday. This morning I'm refreshed and eager. Delila, I
> was planning some smart-alecky sarcastic response, but I've realized
> that this is a potential growth opportunity for you.
Growth opportunity, hm? Well, you never stop learning, so...
>
> Look at how your first thought was "4 years? They must not be very
> compatible!" But consider: most people are together for many years and
> the sex is never enough & always too much. What Sarah is saying is that
> she and her partner spent 4 years getting to know each other and
> finding a pattern that suits *both* of them. That doesn't mean that they
> spent four years arguing or manipulating or bickering or giving in; it
> means that they approached each other honestly and fine-tuned what they
> wanted over a period of time. Consider your paragraph below, that many
> couples lose interest in each other over time. That means that they've
> both compromised in a way that's satisfactory for *neither* of them;
> Sarah and her partner have worked out something that *is* satisfactory
> for both of them.
Yeah, I thought about it a bit more. Four years seemed like a long time to
me at first read, but maybe it's not.
>
> D, can you write a bit about how compatible your relationship has been?
> Can you write a few sentences about how you and your hub agreed on
> things, how you'd manage to work out who would do things that they
> didn't like?
Well, I got married very young (18) to a man (then 20) I barely knew. I'm
German he was an American GI. We met in March 1981 and were married in
September 1981, and had really only seen each other on weekends, and not
every weekend, either. He was my first real boyfriend. I'd had sex once
before I met him. I was very inexperienced and naive. I had a bad
relationship with my parents. He treated me well (better than any of the
other guys I'd met) and I fell in love.
Shortly after we were married, we got separated, due to him being in the
military and having to go to Alabama. I stayed in NY with his family. It
took until November until we were together again, but he had changed a lot
in those two-and-a-half months. Gone was the nice guy I'd married. He became
more demanding, critical, selfish, etc. The sex was still okay then, but it,
too deteriorated after a while, esp. after I'd become pregnant. By this time
I'd figured out I didn't like oral sex, but did it for him anyway. He always
had to ask for it, though. Things just got worse for a while, but shortly
after our son was born, we got separated again, due to change of duty place.
I'm not going to type the whole history of our marriage here, but let's just
say it was rocky. We stayed together, though, because I had nowhere to go.
Going back to my father's house (my mother had died in the meantime) was out
of the question. After about 18 years of marriage I told him I was not going
to fellate him anymore, that I hated it and he was just going to have to
live without it, period. That was during one of the times he came home for a
visit while working in Saudi Arabia. I became quite independent during the
two years he was in SA, so when his time there was over, I told him to move
out. We were incompatible, not just sexually, but in many other ways as
well.
>
> You've missed her point: Sarah was speaking to how men and women can
> feel isolated and alienated from their spouses because of the lack of
> physical intimacy. Of course there are many reasons; now, can you write
> a little about feeling emotionally disconnected because of a lack of
> intimacy? Or can you write a bit on why you think it would or woudn't
> happen?
Not any more than I've already written. I stopped loving my husband early
on in our marriage and didn't miss physical closeness with him at all.
>
> D, can you write about how you were disappointed when your husband
> stopped doing something that you used to enjoy? Not specifcally sexual,
> but something that pleased you on a few levels that he stopped or
> neglected. How did it make you feel? Did you try to get him to start
> doing it again? If so, how? If not, why?
Well, he just stopped being the nice guy I'd married, it was not any one
thing he did then that he didn't do anymore later. He'd just changed so
much. He always wanted to watch TV, instead of going for a walk with me,
like so many other GI husbands did with their wives in the evenings (his
excuse was he walked enough at work) or go to a club, even if all there was
in Junction City, Kansas was a honky tonk. So? To me it was something
exotic. Or take me to a movie once in a while. He always claimed we didn't
have the money (I didn't work, I had no green card yet). But walks are free,
right?
>
> Why does it sound like a chore? Because it was agreed upon? Becuase it's
> not given freely and spontaneously?
Yes, because they have to remind each other to do this and that.
>
> And I think what Sarah is trying to convey isn't so much about being
> mature or assertive, it's that manipulating one's partner is so much
> more *work* than just asking for what you want and negotiating openly.
That's something I still had to learn. My parent's marriage was extremely
dysfunctional, so what did I have to go on. NOW I know that manipulation is
stupid and childish, but it's what I saw at home.
>
> | This group is tame compared to some of the others I've been on and
> | still am on.
>
> <bites tongure>
Why?
D.
Tom Allen
news:4102b...@corp.newsgroups.com
| "Tom Allen" <tao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| news:2ma23dF...@uni-berlin.de...
| >
| > I read this post last night, and thought about it all the way
| into work > this morning. Last night I was tired and cranky because
| I'd had a long > week of work yesterday. This morning I'm refreshed
| and eager. Delila, I > was planning some smart-alecky sarcastic
| response, but I've realized > that this is a potential growth
| opportunity for you.
|
|
| Growth opportunity, hm? Well, you never stop learning, so...
<huge snip of life story>
D, thank you for trusting me enough to be so open and honest about your
life. I appreciate your taking the time to write, and I hope that you've
gotten something from doing so.
| > | This group is tame compared to some of the others I've been
| on and > | still am on.
| >
| > <bites tongure>
|
|
|
| Why?
Because most other groups don't have the respect, sensitivity, and
consideration for each other that we try to promote here.
Of course, they're not as intelligent, talented, nor good-looking as we
are here, either.
Tom
Delila
> |
> | That I might hate men has been mentioned before.
>
> You said yourself that you thought men who would ask a woman for os were
> not "decent".
I did not say that. I said a man who'd ask to ejaculate into a woman's
mouth, would, IMO, not be decent.
>
> My point, though, was that nobody here is calling you perverted for
> *not* liking os. Can we agree on that?
Yes.
>
> Let's go back to my analogy of visiting a foreign country in which the
> customs were very different from your own. When in Rome, you don't have
> to do as the Romans do, but would you accuse the Romans of being sick,
> hostile, perverted or deviant?
No.
>
> Okay, let's try another route. Many couples divorce because the husband
> has an affair or is emotionally unavailable for his wife. So, what's
> their problem? At least he's not beating her? If her only problem is
> that he's not nice all the time then she should consider herself to be
> lucky, right?
No, if she's constantly unhappy in the marriage, the marriage should end.
>
> That wasn't what I was saying, but then, why not "expect" something in
> return? Why else do people have a relationship? If you enjoy each
> other's company, then why wouldn't you expect to do things for each
> other to keep the relationship running smoothly?
Sorry, that would be too much pressure for me. Every time he does
something 'nice' for me, I'd think that now I *hvae* to do something else
back for him in return. That would ruin the nice thing he does for me.
>
> I have a friend who is what most of us would call a terrible
> housekeeper. Cluttered, disorganized, and only cleans when the Health
> Department shows up. The Anti-June Cleaver. She will say right up front
> that any man who wants a neater house will have to do it himself. OTOH,
> she's agreeable to sex just about any time of day or night. She claims
> that she'd rather save her energy for fun and orgasms; after all, you
> can hire someone to clean your house for you, but you don't want to hire
> someone to screw your husband for you. (yes, some women would do that,
> but we're not talking about them)
I'm not the best housekeeper in the world, either, but I'm not a
sex-kitten, either. :( I wish I were, but you can't change your nature.
Most men would choose the sex kitten over a June Cleaver, anyway.
>
> And does it matter if she likes making the pie? She knows that *I* like
> it, that's why she does it - it's her way of communicating to me "Thanks
> for what you've done for me this week". The point, which you seemed to
> have missed, is that she knows I'd like the pie more than the
> embroidered pillows which she gives to her girlfriends, or the bottle of
> wine she gives to her sister. Would I feel as appreciated if she gave
> *me* a pillow? Well, I'd understand that "it's the thought that counts",
> naturally; it's just that certain other things have more significance to
> me.
Yeah, you can't eat the pillow. :)
>
> My original suggestion was a nibble on the neck because it's cheap
> (free, actually), and your promise of "appreciation" when you're feeling
> better usually will make him more attentive to what you need. An old gf
> once told me that this kind of attitude was "not her style" because it
> made her think that she "had" to reciprocate every single action; she
> believed that I should do things for her because she asked me, period.
> When she finally did get around to showing her appreciation in small
> ways, it was usually something that was convenient for her, but had no
> significance for me.
> "To thank you for cleaning the garage, I made you a banana cream pie."
> "oh, er, thanks..."
> "Well, you don't seem very appreciative."
> "that's because I thought you knew I hate banana cream pie."
> "Well, I knew that you didn't care for it, but my mother likes it, and
> she's coming for dinner tonight."
Well, that sounds like hidden hostility on her part. She must have been
angry with you over something, but couldn't come right out and say what it
was.
> "oh. Um, maybe you can make me a coconut cream pie later this week, you
> know that I love that kind."
> "You daft bastard, do you think I'm gonna make *two* pies this week? Why
> can't you be satisfied with banana cream?"
> "because I don't like banana cream!"
> "Don't you know that it's the thought that counts?"
> "um... I suppose a blowjob is outta the question, too, huh?"
LOL! Maybe she did it to get out of doing the BJ. <ducks>
>
> Okay, so we've defined that a show of appreciation has to be
> communicated in a way that has significance to the partner. Are we more
> clear on the concept?
I get what you're saying. I also know that I couldn't be with a man like
you. I'd become very resentful very fast.
Tom Allen
| >
| > Okay, so we've defined that a show of appreciation has to be
| > communicated in a way that has significance to the partner. Are
| we more > clear on the concept?
|
| I get what you're saying. I also know that I couldn't be with a man
| like you. I'd become very resentful very fast.
Yes, that's true. Ask Alius, she'll tell you that I'm a high maintenance
guy.
Tom <very high maintenance>
Delila
"Jack C Lipton" <cupa...@peElMe.cx> wrote in message
news:slrncg2300....@soup2nets.net.dhis.org...
>
> It has been argued that a woman's mind has to be "on"
> for sex, which requires foreplay. Foreplay can take
> many forms, many of them non-sexual (like cleaning,
Huh? You're joking, right?
To me, the best foreplay is a man who treats me with kindness and respect
all the time. I can't get all hot for a guy who acts like a jerk all day,
and then when the lights go out he wants to make love. No, doesn't work like
that.
Jack C Lipton
> Jack C Lipton wrote:
>> It has been argued that a woman's mind has to be "on"
>> for sex, which requires foreplay. Foreplay can take
>> many forms, many of them non-sexual (like cleaning,
>
> Huh? You're joking, right?
No, I'm not. And, as you point out below:
> To me, the best foreplay is a man who treats me with
> kindness and respect all the time. I can't get all
> hot for a guy who acts like a jerk all day, and then
> when the lights go out he wants to make love. No,
> doesn't work like that.
... you are just re-phrasing and re-iterating what I
said.
The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
brain; as such, any efforts to place a woman into the
mood (assuming for the sake of argument that she is
not a self-starter) requires catering to the emotional
aspects of the relationship... and being reasonably
compliant to her wishes.
So, yes, what is done outside the bedroom counts in
what happens inside the bedroom (at least in the case
of MattressSexuals).
The problem, of course, is that men are usually the
other way around: their behavior outside the bedroom
is usually influenced by occurences INSIDE the bedroom.
Hence the communications difficulties.
Of course, once far enough out of whack, the effort
both parties have to put into getting back on track
seems to grow exponentially... and that might be the
easy part.
The worst aspect of the cumulative frictions is that
NOTHING can be accomplished if it has to be a unilateral
action by only *one* of the parties.
(shrugs)
If I know all this, why do I still have problems?
It takes two. And my partner doesn't think we have any
real problems... even with me saying we do. And it's
not like I'm trying to pin blame for anything, either;
I takes my lumps.
I sometimes think that the more intelligent a person
believes themselves to be the stupider they act. If
you look at old posts of mine you'll see this is true.
Sarah
>The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
>brain;
I take issue with this statement.
--
Sarah
suzeeq
Would you like it better if it stated the important sex organ for men
and women is the brain?
sue
Sarah
That would still make me twitch a little.
but if you replaced "the important" with "an important" or "a very
important" I would be very happy.
--
Sarah
rg
I agree, Sarah. I think about sex a lot and that doesn't seem to do me any
good. And from his posts, I suspect that Jack thinks about it a lot too and
it obviously hasn't done him much good either.
I take issue with the tissue.
rg
suzeeq
I understand what you two are saying, but in a sense he's right. If
you're not disposed to think about sex (especially eagerly or
positively) then it doesn't matter what you do to the genitals. If your
brain's not turned on, your body won't be either.
sue
Jack C Lipton
> Jack C Lipton said:
>> The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
>> brain;
>
> I take issue with this statement.
Look, it takes maybe 9 units of effort to get many women
"in the mood" and 1 unit of effort to blow it off (kind
of like the "attaboy/ohshit" system) while it takes many
men one unit of effort to turn one on and then up to 9 to
turn 'em back off. For men an orgasm is almost reflexive
and our brains are pretty much along for the ride.
The most important part of sex is in the brain; the body
is only there to provide input to the brain. All feedback
loops REQUIRE the presence of the brain, in command of the
various muscles, etc.
AFAIK it is functionally impossible to trigger an orgasm
in a female unless the brain has been somehow seduced into
going along with it; "forced orgasms" in women require a
level of mental cooperation (or, at least, distractions
from a resistive mindset). The pelvic response in a
female orgasm is, to the best of my knowledge, not a
"reflexive" response. (I'm not sure if there's any real
evolutionary advantage to female orgasm, so this will
likely cut both ways. Some women will have 'em, some
won't, all because there's no selection pressure either
way-- at least for long enough to make a difference.)
Males, AFAIK, can probably ejaculate with the appropriate
stimulation given to the prostate (and lower spinal cord,
which is, IIRC, where Viagra does it's job) even if the
brain is in flat-line.
All right, so a lot of the above is supposition, guessing
and opinion; however, I've noticed that the only posts
that get follow-ups are those people find something to
disagree with.
Delila
"Jack C Lipton" <cupa...@peElMe.cx> wrote in message
>
> No, I'm not. And, as you point out below:
Did you mean that he does the cleaning or that they do it together?
>
> So, yes, what is done outside the bedroom counts in
> what happens inside the bedroom (at least in the case
> of MattressSexuals).
That makes sense to me.
>
> The problem, of course, is that men are usually the
> other way around: their behavior outside the bedroom
> is usually influenced by occurences INSIDE the bedroom.
My STBX was like that. If he didn't get any the night before he'd act like
an even bigger jerk the next day, even sometimes punishing our son by not
doing things with him that he'd promised, because he was mad at me.
rg
I require that my engine gets tweaked every day. Unfortunately, I don't get
the maintenance that I require.
rg
suzeeq
FWIW, I do see your point, though I'm not sure the brain is as majorly
important as you believe. But it is quite important in the whole
process, even going so far as to make a decision whether to like sex or
not.
sue
rg
"Jack C Lipton" <cupa...@peElMe.cx> wrote in message
Not exactly correct but I defer to disagree so as not to be disagreeable.
Sorry for the post.
:)
rg
Tom Allen
news:3isOc.14160$Gk4....@fe1.texas.rr.com
| "Jack C Lipton" <cupa...@peElMe.cx> wrote in message
| news:slrncgjj8a....@soup2nets.net.dhis.org...
| | Sarah wrote:
| | | Jack C Lipton said:
| | | | The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
| | | | brain;
| | |
| | | I take issue with this statement.
| |
| | Look, it takes maybe 9 units of effort to get many women
| | "in the mood" and 1 unit of effort to blow it off (kind
| | of like the "attaboy/ohshit" system) while it takes many
| | men one unit of effort to turn one on and then up to 9 to
| | turn 'em back off. For men an orgasm is almost reflexive
| | and our brains are pretty much along for the ride.
I just wanted to comment on Jack's observation. I kind of like this,
even though I disagree to a certain extent. I know that some women
really do get upset and will turn off to sex rather easily and not get
turned back on, oftenn to the complete surprise of their partner "Huh?
WHatdidIdo *now*?" But this is a stereotype that, while having some
basis in reality, isn't always accurate. I do appreciate, though, that
for Jack it's probably pretty accurate - or possibly even lenient.
| | All right, so a lot of the above is supposition, guessing
| | and opinion; however, I've noticed that the only posts
| | that get follow-ups are those people find something to
| | disagree with.
No it's not!
Oh, er, why do you suppose that is?
|
| Not exactly correct but I defer to disagree so as not to be
| disagreeable. Sorry for the post.
|
| :)
I disagree as to the degree of your disagreeableness.
Tom
Jack C Lipton
> Jack C Lipton wrote:
>
>
> Did you mean that he does the cleaning or
> that they do it together?
Either. This is the "Domestic Support" input.
My point being that people often want to feel
valuable outside of the bedroom. Unfortunately,
there are those who want to feel valuable
*IN*side the bedroom, too.
>> So, yes, what is done outside the bedroom
>> counts in what happens inside the bedroom
>> (at least in the case of MattressSexuals).
>
> That makes sense to me.
Good, I've not completely pissed you off,
then.
>> The problem, of course, is that men are
>> usually the other way around: their
>> behavior outside the bedroom is usually
>> influenced by occurences INSIDE the bedroom.
>
> My STBX was like that. If he didn't get any
> the night before he'd act like an even bigger
> jerk the next day, even sometimes punishing
> our son by not doing things with him that he'd
> promised, because he was mad at me.
And I thought _I_ acted like a jerk when I wasn't
getting attention for a few weeks...
Y'see, the problem is that a "communication
failure", albeit non-verbal, can cause the
accumulation of resentments. Retaliation is
not always done overtly, either; a lot does
depend upon the levels of (in)security.
The problem is that this is one of those "medium
affecting the message" moments; look at the ten
emotional needs as described at
http://www.marriagebuilders.com/
While I don't think they've got a solid lock on
truth, they've got some good ideas that may be
workable in the real world. Idealism is good as
a motivator but pragmatism is required to make
any system sustainable.
In my way of re-paraphrasing the message, each of
those ten needs is, in effect, a communications
channel by which you can express (or feel expressed)
value with your partner.
Now, for some people, sex is an important channel.
So is Domestic support, or Financial support. Each
of the ten needs is a way to express to your partner
that you value them. It works the other way too.
The problem is that people choose how much they
invest in expressing value through these channel
usually choosing the channels they value hearing
love across rather than considering what their
partner would like to see/here/feel.
So a man who values sexual attentions is far more
likely, if he doesn't think about it, to believe
that providing sexual attentions to his wife will
be received by her as being valued by him.
A woman who is looking for domestic support (or
even just conversation) will likely *give* along
that channel, expecting her husband to sense how
much she values him.
Unless both parties realize that there's a channel
mis-match, each will be thinking "why doesn't my
spouse understand me?" and, I think, is why there
is the thought that "why am I expected to be a
mind reader?"
So, for me, I was ignoring the channels my wife
was expressing how much she valued me and she
couldn't understand how my own attentions (sexual
and otherwise) were meant to express value. I
have since learned something from this but some
of the bad habits are not easy to break.
What you would most value in terms of attention
from your spouse (and now STBX) is not something
he could have seen as valuable to _him_. When
you gave attention along the channel you'd most
expected to have reflected he didn't see it as a
measure of value...
In terms of practice we all may hope for ideals
but reality rewards compromise far more quickly.
Now for a remark about Marriage Builders.
Their little inventory is bald. They really do
need a real psychologist/sociologist work out a
much more indirect means that can't be easily
diddled in order to work out one's "spectral"
response to the ten channel.
Another interesting site I've found, quite by
chance, is at:
On Myers-Briggs I'm split between INFP and ISFP.
Norton
Ok. Would you like to nominate another organ or organs?
Norton.
Norton
>Sarah wrote:
>> Jack C Lipton said:
>>> The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
>>> brain;
>>
>> I take issue with this statement.
>Look, it takes maybe 9 units of effort to get many women
>"in the mood" and 1 unit of effort to blow it off (kind
>of like the "attaboy/ohshit" system) while it takes many
>men one unit of effort to turn one on and then up to 9 to
>turn 'em back off. For men an orgasm is almost reflexive
>and our brains are pretty much along for the ride.
Nah. Ever had the woman, in the midst of a very
active sex act, say to you "by the way, I forgot to
tell you that I'm going shopping tomorrow."
Kills any lust *I* have.
:-) <-- not really
Norton.
Sarah
Not at all.
The problem I have is that Jack was saying that the brain is the
*only* organ of importance, not that the *brain* is the only organ of
importance.
See?
Women (and men) are more than any one organ. Sexual response is not
fulfilled in (or by) any one organ.
For me to enjoy sex to orgasm I need:
a brain
skin
a clitoris
nerves to carry the sensations from my skin and clitoris to my brain
None of these things by itself is enough. If any one of these things
is missing, it is impossible for me to experience sexual pleasure to
orgasm.
--
Sarah
Norton
>"rg" <jobb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3isOc.14160$Gk4....@fe1.texas.rr.com
>| "Jack C Lipton" <cupa...@peElMe.cx> wrote in message
>| news:slrncgjj8a....@soup2nets.net.dhis.org...
>| | Sarah wrote:
>| | | Jack C Lipton said:
>| | | | The only sex organ of importance for a woman is the
>| | | | brain;
>| | |
>| | | I take issue with this statement.
>| |
>| | Look, it takes maybe 9 units of effort to get many women
>| | "in the mood" and 1 unit of effort to blow it off (kind
>| | of like the "attaboy/ohshit" system) while it takes many
>| | men one unit of effort to turn one on and then up to 9 to
>| | turn 'em back off. For men an orgasm is almost reflexive
>| | and our brains are pretty much along for the ride.
>I just wanted to comment on Jack's observation. I kind of like this,
>even though I disagree to a certain extent. I know that some women
>really do get upset and will turn off to sex rather easily and not get
>turned back on, oftenn to the complete surprise of their partner "Huh?
>WHatdidIdo *now*?" But this is a stereotype that, while having some
>basis in reality, isn't always accurate. I do appreciate, though, that
>for Jack it's probably pretty accurate - or possibly even lenient.
Well, we could take a poll. It has happened to me, though
not often.
What about you?
Norton.