SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 I posted this here and not the sex section becuase it's not about the "act" or "how to?"... I recently purchased a book by a professional therapist/counselor and it has confused me MORE to my disappointment. The most confusing is that he makes it sound like trying to please your partner sexually is a bad thing?? here's a quote: "Sex that focuses on trying to please the other guarentees a routine, do what worked last time kind of experience. Trying to be a great lover pretty much ensures that a nice guy will not have passionate, reciprocal, spontaneous, serrendipitous, or intimate sexual experiences-hardly a recipie for good sex" Am I mis-interpreting this? What's wrong with trying to please your partner? It makes it seem like a bad thing. Mabye he's trying to say make sure you get yours too so don't put too much pressure on yourself to please her? Opinons on this please:rolleyes: 3
ThaWholigan Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 It means try not to take a mechanical approach to sex. Experiment, be in the moment, because doing the same things over and over again will become boring to quite a few women - not all women, but I reckon a decent portion of them will have their sex drives completely shut down by boredom. I think it also means being fully accommodating and stimulating of a woman's sex drive does involve getting in touch fully with your own. And thus, the synthesis will be created when both person's needs are being met - especially when both are fully engaged with both the sexuality of themselves and the significant other. So instead of doing the same "kissing, foreplay, sex, pillow talk" routine, occasionally do something wild like come home in the afternoon, take her, kiss her passionately and f*ck her hard in the kitchen and pull her hair a little bit. Or take her to the beach, and f*ck her there. Or in the car. Or maybe tease her all day with endless sex talk &foreplay (phone, in person, text etc) but don't sex her until mad late and she's aching for a good one . Some of these may be your fantasies. Some of them may be hers. But it guarantees that everybody is getting their needs met. Me personally, the type of person I am, my needs also encompass hers - so her pleasure is something I personally get off on. So I understand your confusion, believe me! But it would be foolish not to inject your own desires into the union, just do it without encroaching on hers. 5
Author SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 It means try not to take a mechanical approach to sex. Experiment, be in the moment, because doing the same things over and over again will become boring to quite a few women - not all women, but I reckon a decent portion of them will have their sex drives completely shut down by boredom. I think it also means being fully accommodating and stimulating of a woman's sex drive does involve getting in touch fully with your own. And thus, the synthesis will be created when both person's needs are being met - especially when both are fully engaged with both the sexuality of themselves and the significant other. So instead of doing the same "kissing, foreplay, sex, pillow talk" routine, occasionally do something wild like come home in the afternoon, take her, kiss her passionately and f*ck her hard in the kitchen and pull her hair a little bit. Or take her to the beach, and f*ck her there. Or in the car. Or maybe tease her all day with endless sex talk &foreplay (phone, in person, text etc) but don't sex her until mad late and she's aching for a good one . Some of these may be your fantasies. Some of them may be hers. But it guarantees that everybody is getting their needs met. Me personally, the type of person I am, my needs also encompass hers - so her pleasure is something I personally get off on. So I understand your confusion, believe me! But it would be foolish not to inject your own desires into the union, just do it without encroaching on hers. Thanks TW but my problem is that he doesn't go into detail. So what you said (good take!) could be 100% what he meant but it could NOT be what he meant. Pretty vague for a book IMO, especiallyb by a "professional". The only other detial he goes into is saying when people have sex they are supposed the meet their own needs, even more confusing. If I had to guess it would be don't sacrifice your pleasure to pleasure her. 1
ThaWholigan Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Thanks TW but my problem is that he doesn't go into detail. So what you said (good take!) could be 100% what he meant but it could NOT be what he meant. Pretty vague for a book IMO, especiallyb by a "professional". The only other detial he goes into is saying when people have sex they are supposed the meet their own needs, even more confusing. If I had to guess it would be don't sacrifice your pleasure to pleasure her. He's probably talking a bunch of babble. What book is this? Who is the author? I find that these professional counselors and therapists make awful material regarding sex and pleasure . Essentially, he is saying that make sure your needs are met if you're going to meet hers, but he's just said it in a roundabout way. 4
todreaminblue Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 I posted this here and not the sex section becuase it's not about the "act" or "how to?"... I recently purchased a book by a professional therapist/counselor and it has confused me MORE to my disappointment. The most confusing is that he makes it sound like trying to please your partner sexually is a bad thing?? here's a quote: "Sex that focuses on trying to please the other guarentees a routine, do what worked last time kind of experience. Trying to be a great lover pretty much ensures that a nice guy will not have passionate, reciprocal, spontaneous, serrendipitous, or intimate sexual experiences-hardly a recipie for good sex" Am I mis-interpreting this? What's wrong with trying to please your partner? It makes it seem like a bad thing. Mabye he's trying to say make sure you get yours too so don't put too much pressure on yourself to please her? Opinons on this please:rolleyes: when you put yourself under pressure you arent in the moment you are worrying about when the next moment is and what that moment involves so you truly dont have enjoyment or pleasure just worry..sex is actually meant to have a little fun attached, a little teasing and variety always helps.....and its all in the moment.sometimes its even good when one parnter doesnt want to seek their own pleasure at all, a totally unexpected show of intimacy for no reason other than to hear that person moan and watch them smile totally out of the blue...no time limit ......no time fo day....just a bit of unexpected bliss in a routine day......thats fun.deb 1
Author SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) I didn't even buy the book for sex info but his part about it really confused me. I'm going to buy a book I've heard about for men that's specifically about sex so mabye that'll clear up this confusion lol. I'm really not pleased with the book at all, he makes it seem like you need to be selfish in all aspects of a relationship or a woman will lose respect for you. I promise that's not a back handed jab by me toward women, he really makes it seem that way:( I don't know what the rules here about posting titles but it may be 'No more Mr.....' Edited February 7, 2013 by SJC2008 add 1
xxoo Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Neither extreme is good. Selfish isn't good, but selfless isn't good, either. Maybe this book was recommended for you because the counselor believes you are swinging too far in the selfless direction, and could benefit from balance. Try to think of it in a big-picture sort of way--moving your own needs up the priority ladder in a healthy way--not "do this, don't do that".
Author SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) Neither extreme is good. Selfish isn't good, but selfless isn't good, either. Maybe this book was recommended for you because the counselor believes you are swinging too far in the selfless direction, and could benefit from balance. Try to think of it in a big-picture sort of way--moving your own needs up the priority ladder in a healthy way--not "do this, don't do that". Lol I'm not seeing a counselor, it was written by a professional therapist/counsler. I lost my faith in therapists/counselors a couple years ago... I had a bad panick attack and my anxiety was through the roof. They put me on an SSRI and had me go to "counseling" sessions. Well, after a few sessions I bailed. I wasn't about to pay a co-pay and let them bill my insurance company x amount of dollars to ask me how I'm doing and if I'm feeling better. They didn't help me get to the root of the problem nor teach me skills at handling them. Now to toot my horn for a minute, I've pretty much figured out my problem on my own thank god and am med free! Edited February 7, 2013 by SJC2008 edit
xxoo Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Lol I'm not seeing a counselor, it was written by a professional therapist/counsler. I lost my faith in therapists/counselors a couple years ago... I had a bad panick attack and my anxiety was through the roof. They put me on an SSRI and had me go to "counseling" sessions. Well, after a few sessions I bailed. I wasn't about to pay a co-pay and let them bill my insurance company x amount of dollars to ask me how I'm doing and if I'm feeling better. They didn't help me get to the root of the problem nor teach me skills at handling them. Now to toot my horn for a minute, I've pretty much figured out my problem on my own thank god and am med free! Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. I'm curious, then, why did you choose this book? There are a lot of relationship books written by counselors; why did you choose this one?
AMusing Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Thanks TW but my problem is that he doesn't go into detail. So what you said (good take!) could be 100% what he meant but it could NOT be what he meant. Pretty vague for a book IMO, especiallyb by a "professional". The only other detial he goes into is saying when people have sex they are supposed the meet their own needs, even more confusing. If I had to guess it would be don't sacrifice your pleasure to pleasure her. Sounds like a mediocre book, but there are a lot of mediocre self-help books out there and very few good ones. My recommendation? Stop trying to decipher what the author meant and just follow Wholigan's interpretation.... Whether it was what the author meant or not, it was free, clear, and spot-on. And it put a big smile on my face this morning.
MidwestUSA Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Sounds like a mediocre book, but there are a lot of mediocre self-help books out there and very few good ones. My recommendation? Stop trying to decipher what the author meant and just follow Wholigan's interpretation.... Whether it was what the author meant or not, it was free, clear, and spot-on. And it put a big smile on my face this morning. ThaWholigan nailed it. No pun intended! 2
Els Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 Thanks TW but my problem is that he doesn't go into detail. So what you said (good take!) could be 100% what he meant but it could NOT be what he meant. Pretty vague for a book IMO, especiallyb by a "professional". The only other detial he goes into is saying when people have sex they are supposed the meet their own needs, even more confusing. If I had to guess it would be don't sacrifice your pleasure to pleasure her. I agree that it's a really weird and crappy way to phrase something, especially in a book by a 'sex professional'. I do agree that people are sometimes afraid to try new things because they don't know how well they'll work out, so they stick to tried and tested methods. A good way to balance this is to see trying new things as PART of being a good lover. Being a good lover isn't necessarily all about bringing your partner to orgasm in the fastest way possible each time. 1
Author SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. I'm curious, then, why did you choose this book? There are a lot of relationship books written by counselors; why did you choose this one? I chose it because it's specifically about men, even more specific, about "nice" guys. And to add to my list of disappointments it doesn't talk one ioda about communication or intimacy. It basically says put you first, don't be afraid to have a woman mad at you and don't be afraid to be mad at a woman. I coulda got better advice here. Like I said, very disappointing for a professional:( That's why I bought it, because it was not PUA or silly dating advice. I thought it was the real deal.
sabre80 Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 I have read this book you are referring to. By Glover right. First off the book is NOT about sex. It is about being a co-dependent "Nice Guy". It is written for the guys that become a complete beta by doing **** like cleaning the whole house and catering to every woman's needs in the hopes she will sprinkle some sex on you as a reward. Women do loose respect and attractiveness to men who forsake their needs in a passive aggressive way and try and guilt women into meeting theirs by care taking to the women's. The book focuses on the aspect that the man is responsible for meeting his own needs or making his needs known in an open direct way rather than being a passive aggressive wimp. We are all responsible for our own happiness. Not just in sex but in all aspects of life. When read objectively this is a good book. It is not a book about sex though.
sweetkiwi Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 What a weird book. I consider myself a good lover and I am extremely giving in bed. I dont just do A B and C. I switch it up everytime because I get bored easily. This book is junk.
Author SJC2008 Posted February 7, 2013 Author Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) I have read this book you are referring to. By Glover right. First off the book is NOT about sex. It is about being a co-dependent "Nice Guy". It is written for the guys that become a complete beta by doing **** like cleaning the whole house and catering to every woman's needs in the hopes she will sprinkle some sex on you as a reward. Women do loose respect and attractiveness to men who forsake their needs in a passive aggressive way and try and guilt women into meeting theirs by care taking to the women's. The book focuses on the aspect that the man is responsible for meeting his own needs or making his needs known in an open direct way rather than being a passive aggressive wimp. We are all responsible for our own happiness. Not just in sex but in all aspects of life. When read objectively this is a good book. It is not a book about sex though. You're right it's not about only sex, I may not have been clear. TBS you and TW explained better than him! I wish he'd be more clear and not leave things open to interpretation! Since this thread has steered toward the book (I'm totally cool w that) let me ask you: What's you're overall opinion on it? There are some good things in in but overall I was disappointed. He's vague, seems like you should be selfish to succeed and doesn't really seem to put any responsibility on the women. A good example would be his RL example of not trying to solve a womans problems. A man was upset because his wife was coming home in a bad mood during work and he'd try to "help" her. Long story short, he left her alone for a few days (after his visit to the author) and she was better a few days later. Ok so I know women don't want us to solve there problems but just listen to them occaisonally. Where I'm coming from is why couldn't the woman have said let me be for a few days and I'll be fine? If the author gave context and said the guy behaved like his world was collapsing because his wife was in a bad mood and he'd do anything to fix it I would of understood. He wrote it like we know what he's thinking IMO. You and TW gave way more context to your thoughts. Edited February 7, 2013 by SJC2008 add
sabre80 Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 You're right it's not about only sex, I may not have been clear. TBS you and TW explained better than him! I wish he'd be more clear and not leave things open to interpretation! Since this thread has steered toward the book (I'm totally cool w that) let me ask you: What's you're overall opinion on it? There are some good things in in but overall I was disappointed. He's vague, seems like you should be selfish to succeed and doesn't really seem to put any responsibility on the women. A good example would be his RL example of not trying to solve a womans problems. A man was upset because his wife was coming home in a bad mood during work and he'd try to "help" her. Long story short, he left her alone for a few days (after his visit to the author) and she was better a few days later. Ok so I know women don't want us to solve there problems but just listen to them occaisonally. Where I'm coming from is why couldn't the woman have said let me be for a few days and I'll be fine? If the author gave context and said the guy behaved like his world was collapsing because his wife was in a bad mood and he'd do anything to fix it I would of understood. He wrote it like we know what he's thinking IMO. You and TW gave way more context to your thoughts. I read it over 2 years ago shortly after my divorce. Some things applied to me some did not. I think the big premise of the book is that it is OK to be nice. It is the motive behind why you are being nice. If you are being nice because you are being a loving and compassionate man then thats fine. But if you are being nice because you want something specific reciprocated you are not being nice you are being a Nice guy. A minipulative passive aggressive wimp. The book is not meant for fixing a relationship but fixing yourself. But with that said there were quite a bit of things I remember causing me to raise an eyebrow. 1
Recommended Posts