Dating and sex

[ThaWholigan]

Some of the posts that are made and then people like them are really confusing in this thread.

 

Nightsky is yelled at for putting some of the responsibility on the woman, to want a girl who WANTS to please him and is willing to put in the effort even if she's not exactly in the mood.

 

Okay, fine but then there is a post like this from movingon:

 

which gets all sorts of likes.

 

movingon is basically putting the responsibility on the man, solely. And assuming if someone doesn't want sex, it's because the man is not skilled. So it's the MAN'S job to reignite the woman, and that's okay but to say it's a woman's job to play along is not?

 

Speaking from my experience, which I posted in this thread, skill has nothing to do with it when someone just flat out is like "ugh not now". I would consider myself to be pretty on top of things sexually and that didn't change the fact that my bf was NOT willing to put in the effort unless the moment was absolutely perfect and he was ALREADY in the mood.

 

That's unacceptable. I need someone who will rally and try even if initially not in the mood every time.

 

for example!! A current example, where I am the one not necessarily in the mood. As most of you know my bf is across the country from me right now. We have to have sexy time via facetime! He wants it tonight and has been hinting all day. I was planning on relaxing and watching TV all night. I'm not really in the mood. I could tell him no, he's certainly not gonna dump me over it or anything. but I don't want to tell him no. I want him to be happy.

 

(oh god let me throw out that yes I understand there are other things that are important in a relationship besides sex, but this thread is about sex).

 

so anyway, he had a great day today and he wants to cap it off with some sexy time with his girl. He's gonna get that! Because I want him to be pleased and satiated and happy. It WON'T be the expense of myself. I am happy to make him happy. It turns me on to make him happy.

 

Turning him down just because I'm not super horny right now, that's a romance killer over the long run.

 

Sure finding someone who wants sex everytime you do (and no more than that) would be ideal but lets be real. That's not gonna happen. people make concessions in relationships EVERY DAY. you compromise on things. why is it any different when it comes to sex? It doesn't have to be. it's not for me.

 

I am ASSUMING that my current example is basically what Nightsky is getting at when he says he wants someone who wants to please him and will go for it even not totally in the mood at the moment.

 

does every thread have to turn into a war of semantics? I thought the gist of what he was saying was clear, not sure how clinging to single words really does any good, all it does it take s.hit way off track.

I was assuming the same thing to an extent - my only thing is that I am perhaps cautious that this "not in the mood" mood will become more frequent. I do not want to end up in that position, so I would rather a woman with a higher libido. That is all I said.

 

If she is happy making me happy and it comes across when we have sex, then no problem. She doesn't have to be super horny, but it helps if she is enjoying it. I don't want to feel like I'm having sex with a woman who doesn't want to have sex.

[veggirl]

I was assuming the same thing to an extent - my only thing is that I am perhaps cautious that this "not in the mood" mood will become more frequent. I do not want to end up in that position, so I would rather a woman with a higher libido. That is all I said.

 

If she is happy making me happy and it comes across when we have sex, then no problem. She doesn't have to be super horny, but it helps if she is enjoying it. I don't want to feel like I'm having sex with a woman who doesn't want to have sex.

 

I get what you're saying. but if someone truly doesn't want to have sex, they aren't going to. Unless they are just some person void of self-esteem or something and they just jump when you say how high.

 

If a girl is willing to have sex with you even though she's not crazy horny to start with, that willingness is likely gonna transpire into desire and enjoyment before you ever get inside her. If she is open to "give it a go", she's either gonna get turned on during foreplay and wanting to continue, or she's gonna still be "meh" and probably just give up (as in stop the process). I mean like I said I'm willing to give things a go when I'm not horny, if I find that I STILL don't get in the mood, we DON'T have sex.

 

I guess people are maybe missing the part where that is still an option!

 

again, this is not meant to be something that happens all the time. Like if my bf always wanted sex and I never did...that's a whole diff issue. that's not the situation we are talking about though.

[Vercetti]

New Orleans huh? For gumbo and sex? Are there a lot of goth guys out there??

 

There should be a circle or two of goths in whatever your city ( bigger the city more of whatever sub-cultures ). Vampirefreaks online ( not the clothing store of the same name ) is a good place to network, could probably discover whats going on locally just by lurking. Long as you avoid the I'm so goth gother then thou types or shock value attention whores should be fine.

 

For fun check this link...

 

About Goth [stereo] Types - All Types

[ThaWholigan]

I get what you're saying. but if someone truly doesn't want to have sex, they aren't going to. Unless they are just some person void of self-esteem or something and they just jump when you say how high.

 

If a girl is willing to have sex with you even though she's not crazy horny to start with, that willingness is likely gonna transpire into desire and enjoyment before you ever get inside her. If she is open to "give it a go", she's either gonna get turned on during foreplay and wanting to continue, or she's gonna still be "meh" and probably just give up (as in stop the process). I mean like I said I'm willing to give things a go when I'm not horny, if I find that I STILL don't get in the mood, we DON'T have sex.

 

I guess people are maybe missing the part where that is still an option!

 

again, this is not meant to be something that happens all the time. Like if my bf always wanted sex and I never did...that's a whole diff issue. that's not the situation we are talking about though.

 

Well you explained it a lot better than Nightsky did.

[veggirl]

Well you explained it a lot better than Nightsky did.

 

Quoting in case he misses that

 

ha ha ha

 

No really though people are just ridiculously over thinking this (imo)....as usual. Oh LS

[ThaWholigan]

Quoting in case he misses that

 

ha ha ha

 

No really though people are just ridiculously over thinking this (imo)....as usual. Oh LS

No really, you did explain it better .

 

 

I'm still laughing at "wifely duties"

[sweetkiwi]

Im a mixture of hippie perky and rockabilly goth. But not so heavy on the goth.

 

Id probably like dating the traditional goth or metalhead. Don't know many goths. Guys who wear eyeliner are hot. Especially If they play electric guitar.

[xxoo]

I get what you're saying. but if someone truly doesn't want to have sex, they aren't going to. Unless they are just some person void of self-esteem or something and they just jump when you say how high.

 

If a girl is willing to have sex with you even though she's not crazy horny to start with, that willingness is likely gonna transpire into desire and enjoyment before you ever get inside her. If she is open to "give it a go", she's either gonna get turned on during foreplay and wanting to continue, or she's gonna still be "meh" and probably just give up (as in stop the process). I mean like I said I'm willing to give things a go when I'm not horny, if I find that I STILL don't get in the mood, we DON'T have sex.

 

I guess people are maybe missing the part where that is still an option!

 

again, this is not meant to be something that happens all the time. Like if my bf always wanted sex and I never did...that's a whole diff issue. that's not the situation we are talking about though.

 

I can relate to this.

 

But I don't "give it a go" because I believe it is some sort of duty I have. It isn't a matter of finding a "type" of woman who believes that sex is a duty, imo.

 

It is a matter of nurturing a relationship where each partner is motivated to "give it a go" for each other. All I'm saying is that it goes both ways, and if a man is having the repeated experience that women stop wanting sex after a while--it might be worth looking at his part in the dynamic.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Nightsky is yelled at for putting some of the responsibility on the woman, to want a girl who WANTS to please him and is willing to put in the effort even if she's not exactly in the mood.

 

 

Well, the reason I took exception to it was because it did NOT put some of the responsibility on the woman - there was no mention of any pleasing by the boyfriend / husband at all. The idea of sex being a "wifely duty" for the benefit of men is offensive to me.

 

There are often threads about reciprocity, and I believe in that. I do NOT think that it's okay for one person to check out of a relationship sexually, emotionally or in any way, whether they're the husband or the wife. But often, when this happens, there have been precursors to the checking out. Not always, I know, but if a relationship is unhealthy and a man is not meeting his wife's needs, I don't believe it's her "wifely duty" to have frequent sex with him anyway, when she does not, just because that's what he wants.

[Vercetti]

Im a mixture of hippie perky and rockabilly goth. But not so heavy on the goth.

 

Id probably like dating the traditional goth or metalhead. Don't know many goths. Guys who wear eyeliner are hot. Especially If they play electric guitar.

 

Traditional romantic corporate goth sitting in studio slowly backs away.

 

If you can have a good time at 80s night.

 

Think you should go for it.

[sweetkiwi]

I love the 80s. I was born in the wrong decade.

[edgygirl]

Traditional romantic corporate goth sitting in studio slowly backs away.

 

If you can have a good time at 80s night.

 

Think you should go for it.

 

I always go to goth and 80s nights. The goth guys seem kinda slow. And assexual.

[veggirl]

I can relate to this.

 

But I don't "give it a go" because I believe it is some sort of duty I have. It isn't a matter of finding a "type" of woman who believes that sex is a duty, imo.

 

It is a matter of nurturing a relationship where each partner is motivated to "give it a go" for each other. All I'm saying is that it goes both ways, and if a man is having the repeated experience that women stop wanting sex after a while--it might be worth looking at his part in the dynamic.

 

Well I don't think sex is a duty perse, but I do think I have a duty to my man, and he has one to me!, to try to satisfy one another in that way. And sometimes that may be trying to get in the mood when I originally am not in it.

 

I would consider that part of nurturing a relationship.

 

I feel like if I make my man happy, in turn he will make me happy. Ideally he feels the same and goes out of his way to make me happy, knowing that I will reciprocate.

[todreaminblue]

The honey moon phase can be full of lots of sex.Than the after honey moon phase can be very sexless. I say date a girl who likes to please her man. That means having regular sex even if she isn't in the mood because she lives in the reality that it is one of her girlfriendly/wifely duties. That is all!

 

 

hmmm....duty si a chore isnt it....my first long term relationship ex thought i was frigid.....i wasnt but sex was a chore because i didnt enjoy it.......that relationship ended on constant cheating from him i threw it open so he could cheat ......without playing me...that lasted just three years

 

 

my second long term.......i was attracted in the beginning of th erelationship sex was nto a chore and happeend frequently every day for nearly a year and not once a day....adn all through the relationship all fifteen years up until the day we split it was frequent.....i have sex when i am attracted to someone...if i am not....reality is i will be unlikely to have sex especially if it isnt a long termer... i have to love the guy and then ...it is never a duty but an exploring of intimacy i feel and have..that doesnt wane with time....trust will however and tends to take passion with it if they cheat....i actually havent reached a peak in my sex life love life or intimate life because i havent had a faithful man to judge that on...i have further to go...;0)..it would be a new planet for me and for the future unknown faithful guy........deb

[Vercetti]

I always go to goth and 80s nights. The goth guys seem kinda slow. And assexual.

 

I am not my brother's keeper

[Nightsky]

Well you explained it a lot better than Nightsky did.

 

Quoting in case he misses that

 

ha ha ha

 

No really though people are just ridiculously over thinking this (imo)....as usual. Oh LS

 

I could make veggirl famous. All I have to do is write my material and have her be the face/presenter of my dating advice.

 

By the way she didn't explain it better than me, she explained it like a girl which you obviously have less trouble relating to.

 

.....i have sex when i am attracted to someone...if i am not....reality is i will be unlikely to have sex especially if it isnt a long termer... i have to love the guy and then ...it is never a duty but an exploring of intimacy i feel and have..that doesnt wane with time....trust will however and tends to take passion with it if they cheat....i actually havent reached a peak in my sex life love life or intimate life because i havent had a faithful man to judge that on...i have further to go...;0)..it would be a new planet for me and for the future unknown faithful guy........deb

 

This advice isn't about you specifically. Also it is about long term relationships where the sex has hit a forever or regularly occurring rut. Also on what kind of attitude to look for in a woman.

 

You'd probably not be attracted to a faithful man given your dating history.

[ThaWholigan]

By the way she didn't explain it better than me, she explained it like a girl which you obviously have less trouble relating to.

 

You little bitch

[Nightsky]

You little bitch

 

oh haha I hit a nerve eh. Good!

[ThaWholigan]

oh haha I hit a nerve eh. Good!

It was a good one, I'll give you that .

 

You're still a bitch

 

The problem is not so much that I relate to women more than men (I don't), it's more that you described it in a manner that didn't sound like something I would want in a relationship, even though I understood what you were trying to say in a roundabout way. Veggirl just explained it more coherently.

Edited December 31, 2012 by ThaWholigan

[todreaminblue]

I could make veggirl famous. All I have to do is write my material and have her be the face/presenter of my dating advice.

 

This advice isn't about you specifically. Also it is about long term relationships where the sex has hit a forever or regularly occurring rut. Also on what kind of attitude to look for in a woman.

 

You'd probably not be attracted to a faithful man given your dating history.

 

 

yes nightsky, i know the advice isnt about me specifically is that what you class your post as advice......to whom....just throwing into the atmosphere eh? create some trouble stir the pot........

i gave a specific example of two long term relationships that were polar opposites.......which i specifically know about because they were mine...and they are in relation to your topic......one where i had sex as a duty the other wasnt.......i dont need your advice nightsky......never asked for it i didnt post this you did.....i simply replied with a relative post.....

 

 

now .....what do you know of my dating history? to say i wouldn't be attracted to a faithful man......what are you"specifically" referring to in my history.....deb

[movingon12]

 

Okay, fine but then there is a post like this from movingon:

 

which gets all sorts of likes.

 

movingon is basically putting the responsibility on the man, solely. And assuming if someone doesn't want sex, it's because the man is not skilled. So it's the MAN'S job to reignite the woman, and that's okay but to say it's a woman's job to play along is not?

 

 

My post was a response to the unnecessary macho stud posturing in OP's original post. If he'd said something balanced like 'Sex is important in a relationship so it's important that both partners are willing to compromise to make sure that they both feel that their needs are being met', I don't think anyone would have objected. What I do have serious objections to is

 

a) the implication in the original post that 'sexless relationships' are due to a failure on the part of the woman. In reality, many women find themselves in relationships in which it is the bf/husband who is too tired/stressed/busy to want to have sex. People like the OP need to stop getting into the habit of blaming relationship problems on "women" and start to realise that both partners have equal responsibility to make sure a relationship works.

 

b) the idea that women should "have regular sex even if they're not in the mood". NO ONE should have sex if they're not in the mood. They shouldn't do it out of a sense of 'duty' or just in order to 'please their boyfriend' or for any other reason. Furthermore, most men (and women) would not be able to enjoy themselves if they knew their partner had agreed to sex simply out of a sense of 'duty'. However, the 'less interested person' definitely should be willing to let themselves be seduced/put down the remote/come home early sometimes and make an effort to try to get themselves in the mood. But that's not what the OP said - he wanted a woman who will "have sex" even when she's "not in the mood".

 

c) "wifely duty"? What decade is he living in?

 

Like I said - beneath it all, the point the OP was trying to make was fair enough (if not exactly earth shattering), but he really needs to think more carefully about how he presents his views if he expects people (especially potential dates) to have any respect for him.

[Queenie42]

As far as I can tell, there are two kinds of "not in the mood:"

 

1) I'm not in the mood right now but you're welcome to try and seduce me

2) No I'm not in the mood and no amount of ibuprofen can kill this headache I just invented so that you would leave me alone

 

If it's #1, she might come around and you could have a great night together. If it's #2 and you're trying to invoke some manly right to access her ladybits, brother you are gonna have a bad time and that itself will trigger a vicious cycle and you'll be a victim of #2 for a very long while. Don't do it.

[Els]

My post was a response to the unnecessary macho stud posturing in OP's original post. If he'd said something balanced like 'Sex is important in a relationship so it's important that both partners are willing to compromise to make sure that they both feel that their needs are being met', I don't think anyone would have objected.

 

EXACTLY.

 

Now, imagine me saying something like, "That means having regular date nights out even if he isn't in the mood because he lives in the reality that it is one of his boyfriend/husband duties."

 

Oho, watch the men pour out of the woodwork at that one. Note: I only changed 2 words in the OP's post to come up with that incredibly bitchy and entitled sentence.

 

As opposed to, "I would like to find someone who, like me, values the emotional connection that date nights out can provide, even in a long-term relationship. I would like someone whom I can compromise with in mutually satisfying one another's needs." Now, isn't that a whole lot better?

 

It may be just the 'words' that are different, but choice of words reveals a whole lot about the attitude behind them. There might be exceptions, such as if the person uttering them has English as their second language, but I find it difficult to believe that anyone who grew up speaking English cannot fathom the huge difference between the former and the latter. The former reeks of entitlement, selfishness, and a complete lack of understanding about sex being a partnered activity for mutual satisfaction (or date nights out, in my example). The latter speaks of mutual compromise and understanding and mutual desire to please one another.

 

And Nightsky - yes, I guarantee you that your attitude, or choice of words, WILL kill the passion of virtually any woman you utter them to (there are exceptions, of course, and I do see one and only one in this 5-page-long thread). Try it and see, when you get around to having a gf one day. By approaching sex with such an attitude, you ARE dooming yourself to meaningless and passionless sex, if you get any. If one desires a satisfying sex life, one's best bet would be to: 1) seek someone with a compatible sex drive, and 2) do one's best to keep the passion and desire going in one's spouse through various means.

[xxoo]

I feel like if I make my man happy, in turn he will make me happy. Ideally he feels the same and goes out of his way to make me happy, knowing that I will reciprocate.

 

Absolutely. It's a positive feedback cycle.

 

In the honeymoon phase, most people feel this way.

 

Somewhere along the line, many stop. Why? Often because they take each other for granted.

 

Observation from a long married woman: the frequency of sex is inversely related to small arguments about little stuff, and directly related to the attitude of "Yes, dear" from both of us. Correlation or causation still to be determined.

[Nightsky]

yes nightsky, i know the advice isnt about me specifically is that what you class your post as advice......to whom....just throwing into the atmosphere eh? create some trouble stir the pot........

i gave a specific example of two long term relationships that were polar opposites.......which i specifically know about because they were mine...and they are in relation to your topic......one where i had sex as a duty the other wasnt.......i dont need your advice nightsky......never asked for it i didnt post this you did.....i simply replied with a relative post.....

 

 

now .....what do you know of my dating history? to say i wouldn't be attracted to a faithful man......what are you"specifically" referring to in my history.....deb

 

Your specific example is very unhelpful. In fact according to you you'll date a guy who cheats on you and continue to date him and just stop having much sex.

 

Yes I was referring to your history as you've said you've never had a faithful partner. That's quite the statement. I'm not blaming you, it's obvious your attraction is for a certain type of demeanor.

 

no libido is definitely a deal breaker... but on the other hand I get little silly thoughts in the back of my mind which are really unhealthy foods for thoughts...

 

such as... "she's really keen on this position, and good at it too... wow amazing actually... hold on a second, she's done this before, many times before, this requires practice... SLUT!!! :sick:"

 

haha fml

 

Being enthusiastic about sex doesn't require practice. I had that down my first time. It's something you either have or you don't. Obviously enthusiasm can fade if a woman has a "he must seduce me attitude."

 

My post was a response to the unnecessary macho stud posturing in OP's original post. If he'd said something balanced like 'Sex is important in a relationship so it's important that both partners are willing to compromise to make sure that they both feel that their needs are being met', I don't think anyone would have objected. What I do have serious objections to is

 

Oh excuse but did I offend your fragile sensibilities. News Flash I am a man it's not posturing. I said what I thought that kind of honesty should be commended not bashed by a thought ending sensitive PC individual like yourself.

 

a) the implication in the original post that 'sexless relationships' are due to a failure on the part of the woman. In reality' date=' many women find themselves in relationships in which it is the [b']bf/husband[/b] who is too tired/stressed/busy to want to have sex. People like the OP need to stop getting into the habit of blaming relationship problems on "women" and start to realise that both partners have equal responsibility to make sure a relationship works.

 

I never said women don't get into sexless relationship. I was speaking about a specific scenario. People like you need to stop getting in the habit of being offended by every post that doesn't first hold your little hand through the though process. I agree both partners have equal responsibility. A woman has an equal responsibility to be regularly sexually available.

 

b) the idea that women should "have regular sex even if they're not in the mood". NO ONE should have sex if they're not in the mood. They shouldn't do it out of a sense of 'duty' or just in order to 'please their boyfriend' or for any other reason. Furthermore' date=' most men (and women) would not be able to enjoy themselves if they knew their partner had agreed to sex simply out of a sense of 'duty'. However, the 'less interested person' definitely [i']should[/i] be willing to let themselves be seduced/put down the remote/come home early sometimes and make an effort to try to get themselves in the mood. But that's not what the OP said - he wanted a woman who will "have sex" even when she's "not in the mood".

 

Thats right I want a woman who doesn't have the though process "do I feel like having sex today" but rather "We have sex _________ number of times a week I have to keep it regular." Seriously is this that hard of a fricken concept for you to grasp. Is it that offensive for you the thought of a man who likes regular sex and recognizes the games women can play if you let them.

 

c) "wifely duty"? What decade is he living in?

 

I'm living in the here and now where this kind of thing actually has to be addressed.

 

Like I said - beneath it all' date=' the point the OP was trying to make was fair enough (if not exactly earth shattering), but he really needs to think more carefully about how he presents his views if he expects people (especially potential dates) to have any respect for him.[/quote']

 

Actually I had a specific target audience in mind and for them it was earth shattering. I don't have problems getting dates you silly fool. I was here giving advice not taking it.

 

As far as I can tell, there are two kinds of "not in the mood:"

 

1) I'm not in the mood right now but you're welcome to try and seduce me

2) No I'm not in the mood and no amount of ibuprofen can kill this headache I just invented so that you would leave me alone

 

If it's #1, she might come around and you could have a great night together. If it's #2 and you're trying to invoke some manly right to access her ladybits, brother you are gonna have a bad time and that itself will trigger a vicious cycle and you'll be a victim of #2 for a very long while. Don't do it.

 

If I'm a victim of #2 for a long while I'll dump her. I have no patience for this kind of BS. She can get a new bf who she'll like less cause he has no sex drive or is gay, or cheats etc.

 

EXACTLY.

 

Now, imagine me saying something like, "That means having regular date nights out even if he isn't in the mood because he lives in the reality that it is one of his boyfriend/husband duties."

 

Oho, watch the men pour out of the woodwork at that one. Note: I only changed 2 words in the OP's post to come up with that incredibly bitchy and entitled sentence.

 

I'm a man and I sounded like a man in my OP so to say I sounded bitchy is pure fantasy.

 

As opposed to' date=' "I would like to find someone who, like me, values the emotional connection that date nights out can provide, even in a long-term relationship. I would like someone whom I can compromise with in mutually satisfying one another's needs." Now, isn't that a whole lot better?[/quote']

 

That sounds really gay but thank you for trying to teach me how to be a castrated loser version of myself. If I were to follow your advice I'd be very loserly.

 

It may be just the 'words' that are different' date=' but choice of words reveals a whole lot about the attitude behind them. There might be exceptions, such as if the person uttering them has English as their second language, but I find it difficult to believe that anyone who grew up speaking English cannot fathom the huge difference between the former and the latter. The former reeks of entitlement, selfishness, and a complete lack of understanding about sex being a partnered activity for [b']mutual[/b] satisfaction (or date nights out, in my example). The latter speaks of mutual compromise and understanding and mutual desire to please one another.

 

So, are you saying you didn't grow up speaking English so you have troulbe understanding mutual desire? That's no excuse.

 

And Nightsky - yes' date=' I guarantee you that your attitude, or choice of words, WILL kill the passion of virtually any woman you utter them to (there are exceptions, of course, and I do see one and only one in this 5-page-long thread). Try it and see, when you get around to having a gf one day. By approaching sex with such an attitude, you ARE dooming yourself to meaningless and passionless sex, if you get any. If one desires a satisfying sex life, one's best bet would be to: 1) seek someone with a compatible sex drive, and 2) do one's best to keep the passion and desire going in one's spouse through various means.[/quote']

 

Oh you guarantee my attitude, "or choice of words, WILL kill the passion." I beg to differ to quote you something like this would kill all passion "I would like someone whom I can compromise with in mutually satisfying one another's needs." hahaha

 

Please, I have a presence and a way with words that drive the ladies mad. I can make a woman orgasm just from the things I'd whisper in her ear if I felt like.

 

Save your advice for some one foolish enough to use it. I've known passion you'll only read about in books or see in movies.

 

And exactly what is it YOU bring to the table that makes you think you deserve a sexual "Super Woman?" Even monkeys can bang all night so you'd better have something to offer that's a hell of a lot more appealing than that.

 

 

Show me an ape that can talk and I'll show you one that can get women. I bring more table than you'd be able to comprehend. You've made it apparent you lack the intellect to hold a rational conversation.