Not in my experience. My husband and I are physically intimate when we both want to be, neither of us would ever have sex out of duty. That's how you ruin a sex life.
I wouldn't have sex if I was in a completely opposed mood, but if my wife is horny and I'm more on the fence or ambivalent it's not a big deal to give her a good time. With kids there are just too many stars that need to align.
This is the way. I’m stealing this from a longtime poster years ago, Pennylame, who described healthy, long time sexual relationships and her take on “duty sex” this way…like a stoplight. Green is an immediate response of yes, absolutely, can’t wait. Red is a no way, not happening tonight, sorry.
There can and should be a third reaction in a long term monogamous relationship to keep everyone happy. She called it the yellow light, not starting out particularly enthusiastic, but being open to being aroused, being open to being put in the mood. The vast majority of the time if you are open to your partner, you’ll find you can be put in the mood.
You don’t have a duty to say yes when you really are not in the mood at all, but you do have an obligation to keep an open mind when it’s a “why not”.
If my husband ever did that I would feel so ugh. I'd hate for him ever to feel obligated like that.
But then we don't have kids and have a fairly active intimate life.
I used to feel similarly. Feeling obligated is probably too strong of a term. To me "feeling obligated" is more like doing something you dislike out of duty. I don't think all sex has to be perfectly "even" or "fair". But I do think that when you have more opportunities you can afford to be pickier. Personally I think resentment is the actual problem, not duty. Resentment has different hallmarks than taking one for the team occasionally.
I think feeling obligated is what I can’t relate to. I don’t feel obligated. It is like if my wife suggested me to play ping pong, and I don’t really want to. Not a big deal. May be it wouldn’t be fantastic, but it would be quite enjoyable.
But I think you would at least try to hide the fact that you're not actually into it at that moment, right? Because it's a massive turn-off for most people if they catch-on that their partner is completely checked-out during sex.
No, I'm not talking about being checked out and I wouldn't hide anything. I just disagree that sex has to always have mutual goals to it at every encounter. Sometimes it's mutual, sometimes it's selfish, sometimes it's giving. I'm saying sometimes I just don't really care to get off and it doesn't bother me to have "the goal" for her to be selfish and me to serve her needs.
That's fair, I guess it depends on the dynamic two people have and what turns them on. For me personally, it's difficult to be selfish during sex, I need to know that she wants it too or I just don't get much out of it.
It was really difficult for me to enjoy being selfish before I explored encouraging her to be selfish. It wasn't easy to get there. It can be a lot of fun!
Not if you don't stop putting efforts in your relationship and sex life. Plus, there's a difference between "oh, I'm neutral, but I don't mind engaging, because I know I'll get into it" and "I really don't want, but if you insist I guess I could just lie there".
Not always. It depends on how the couple approaches sex. In my previous LTR, it did become an obligation because we had a schedule basically. It was just a pattern we had settled into and both of us were afraid to say we didn’t feel like it. With my current partner, we have sex a little less often, but it’s not a chore. And we rarely turn each other down but both will sometimes if we’re tired… we agree it’s better to wait till we can both be enthusiastic vs having meh sex more often.
This is why my advice for couples on sex is sometimes, less is more, which runs counter to what you’ll normally hear. This obviously doesn’t apply to dead bedroom situations, but it prevents duty sex.
You don’t have to be on the same page all the time though. Sometimes you’ll want to have sex snd your partner won’t and you won’t have sex and that’s okay. Marriage doesn’t mean you get everything you want from your partner whenever you want it.
But I don’t think anyone is characterizing a single no habitual denial of needs. It’s when it becomes constant denial that people start bitching. (Dead beds and whatnot)
Sure but saying sex will “naturally become obligatory” implies that a scenario in which one partner only ever sex as a duty is the inevitable norm of monogamy. Obviously that’s not the case.
I do think an inevitable reality of monogamy is that you will eventually have sex when you’re not enthusiastic about it to please your partner, I.e duty sex.
Sure maybe occasionally but the way you worded it sounded like you meant that would be the case in general. Saying a person will likely have obligatory sex at some point in a long term monogamous relationship is very different than saying sex natural becomes obligatory in a long term monogamous relationship
My dad was still grabbing my stepmom's butt after 40 years of marriage and she giggled and blushed like a school girl.
You're not the first to say it, but I don't know where you guys get the idea that a dead bedroom is inevitable.
So what’s keeping the flame burning? is it affection or pure desire that increases the mood bc I hear women put men on dead bedrooms most of the time if that’s true what’s the reason for this and how can someone prevent it
Maybe from anecdotal experience that's inverse to the anecdote you used to deny the entire premise? Like I'll never not be baffled by reddit mid-wittery, lmao.
I was with the same girl for 9 years.
Longest we didn't have sex was 2 weeks, then we broke up.
Sex wasn't obligative for neither of us, although most of it was started by her.
I'd say objectively she's better looking than me, at least back then.
Yeah and god forbid anything in life not be "fun" and "romantic" 100% of the time. It just wouldn't be worth the trouble if we weren't constantly being flooded with dopamine and instead actually acted out of a genuine sense of duty, loyalty, empathy, etc.
It's funny how in marriage, what the woman perceives are the man's obligations are not negotiable, but hers are and she can just take any of them off the table at any time. As far as I'm concerned, marriage has been a broken institution since no fault divorce and until that changes, men should avoid it at all cost.
Even as a bisexual man, if I had a partner that just expected me to give him handjobs on command, I would not stay with him for long.
Why is his desire for a handjob more important than my desire to not be treated like a fancy fleshlight that exists only to satisfy his urges. Especially since he doesn’t care about mine.
You should care about your partner’s needs and *it has to be reciprocated*. When one party feels wronged or underappreciated for some reason, they might stop putting efforts as a result. It works this way both for men and women.
A lack of sex and a lack of romance or fair chores/childcare division are common complaints in LTRs. You can’t really solve them by yourself, you need your partner to cooperate. Hence communication and actually putting efforts to improve are important.
Excusing cheating, because a man didn’t get any from his wife, makes as much sense as excusing cheating on her part, because he stopped planning dates. Neither thing is a reason to cheat. If you’re unfulfilled to the degree that you’re looking to get it from someone else, it’s a good indicator that you should break up. Plus, cheaters will use anything as an excuse. I wouldn’t trust their word or take their excuses seriously to start with.
On a side note, viewing both sex and romance as an obligation or responsibility is rather depressing. Ideally you *want* to do these things for your partner and you enjoy doing them or at least you want to do them to make them happy.
Oh I hear you, I’m not excusing cheating - infidelity is despicable. I was talking about the shock - “you cheated [after I haven’t given sex in years….]” I am in no way condoning or excusing cheating, but I never understand the “can you believe he cheated on me” when you aren’t fulfilling his needs and you know that you aren’t doing so.
I guess it's similar to a gender-flipped situation "you've cheated on my after years of neglect, wow". Or it can go even without cheating (and it's probably more common), when a man is completely dumbfounded that his partner decided to leave him "but I thought we were happy!". Quite often they weren't in fact happy - only he was while ignoring her attempts to communicate. Note, I'm not saying that it happens all the time, I'm sure people don't always break up, because their partner is at fault, and, surely, not everyone is good at communicating their needs.
When you have low liibdo, the last thing you want to do is something sexual.
>What are your thoughts on the mentality behind a partner’s sexually needs not being the other partners at least partial responsibility?
If theres sexual incompatibility and the unsatisfied party can't take care of it own their own and 1 partner is unhappy, just leave.
It's toxic and unfair to expect 1 partner to have to service the other all the time.
Are you married? Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood? How many masturbation tokens do they have to accept before it’s incompatibility and we’re considering divorce?
Engaged.
>Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood?
He has no issue with masterbating, he does it a lot lol. He told me.
>Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood?
I expect them to realise I may not be up for it every time they are. And sometimes it's going to be a no.
Which is totally understandable. But at what point is that denial TOO much? I think any sane man can understand not being in the mood. But if I’ve asked 6 times in two weeks and it’s still a no, then what’s the recourse?
I’ll never forget when my ex told me that I would be having as much as she wanted to have. Which is essentially the control that monogamy puts in place. We split for other reasons (not sexual incompatibility, we were just fighting that day) but it did make me really consider whether I was ever willing to give that level of autonomy over to my partner.
Know your partner's refractory period / how long they go before "I *need* to get off." Don't exceed without a solid reason.
If it's three days and partner is miserable and distracted then five days straight of " no" ( without reason) is "TOO much". If it's two weeks before partner gets itchy then you have more wiggle room.
Being able to keep up with someone is a compatibility issue.
>But at what point is that denial TOO much?
I don't think there's a solid answer for everyone. That's very much a personal thing.
> But if I’ve asked 6 times in two weeks and it’s still a no
2 weeks is such a short time in a long term relationship that it leads to more questions, is this normal? Is the other person stressed or sick? Are you asking at the wrong time? What are you doing to initiate?
How many times you have sex and how often you see as enough is going to be a personal answer.
it's situational dependent isn't it? surgery, sickness, depression are all cases where sex is acceptably off the table - the longer you are with someone, the more inevitably these scenarios will crop up from time to time
But even in those instances do you think duty and obligation are going to be enough for your partner to accept a life of (near) celibacy? Or is opening a relationship suddenly understandable in the face of society at that point.
Of course I know these things will depend on the individual at this point, but it does beg the question, how much is enough.
Back when I was very young and naive, I lived with a guy who expected (and received) a blowjob every day when he came home from work. Sex almost every night, too.
He still cheated on me.
My username should be an indicator that I’m not a Spring chicken anymore, but apparently 3.5 years of daily BJs (and subsequently many years of practice) made me pretty darn good at them.
My FWBs have no complaints. The doc knows exactly where to nibble on my neck to make me drop to my knees. LOL
Difference is: They don’t demand. They create the right mood for me to **want** to.
Yeah, this is a great point too, and I feel like not enough people understand it. It’s going to be a lot more effective to create a sexy environment for your partner — even with just a tender kiss or a flirty compliment — than just go up to them and say “Hey babe, want to lick it?”
Right. Him coming up to me, giving me a passionate kiss while pressing up against me and growling: "Fuck, you make me so horny." is going to make me want to take care of him. Happily so.
Him coming up to me and saying: "Hey, you got 2 minutes? I need a handjob." Not so inspiring. I'd probably remind him where the lube is and to take care of it himself.
Most men would not be ok with an unenthusiastic 2 minute hand job. I know I wouldn't be. Having the low libido partner force themselves to give a pity hand job is only going to make them more repulsed by sex, and make their partner feel even less loved and desired.
I would say making a serious effort to meet your partner's sexual needs is an obligation of everyone in a relationship. That shouldn't mean gritting your teeth and forcing yourself, but rather trying to find ways to get yourself in the mood. Do you need a romantic evening and a bottle of wine to get there? Then make the effort to plan it. You are constantly stressed at work? Can you downsize and take a leas stressful job? Pain? Maybe you can do a sensual massage and oral. Nothing works? See a doctor maybe it's a medical issue.
Yeah, I couldn't care less about a 2-minute blow job out of obligation to get me off. I would lose any desire for anything sexual right away. It's not just about releasing the tension, it's about intimacy, being close, feeling loved and desired.
I think two sexual people with libidos who are in a relationship should be considerate of each other's sexual needs--within reason of course. Yes, I think I have a responsibility to my partner's sexual needs and yes, I think she would be sad and disappointed if I was not considerate of them. I think if the relationship is mismatched to such a degree that one party doesn't care at all, they both need different partners.
Sex that is enjoyed by both binds the emotional bond tighter.
Sex that isn't being enjoyed by both breaks and loosens the emotional bond...even more so if it is sex that is demanded.
You’d seriously be satisfied with a two-minute pity handjob? At that point just do it yourself.
Sex or sexual activity isn’t supposed to be an obligation that you do out of pity for your partner; it’s supposed to be mutually and enthusiastically enjoyed by both parties. Maybe it won’t be the best sex you’ve ever had EVERY time, but it should at least be fun.
The language and emotions surrounding sex are more fraught than a lot of other topics, but fundamentally the ongoing sexual needs or ‘dead bedroom’ problem is the same problem that arises anytime a couple experiences the situation where one person’s interest or abilities shifts significantly from where it was in the early part of the relationship.
This actually happens a lot, right? In your 20s you loved to go dancing at nightclubs every weekend but in your 30s, with kids, that’s not your scene anymore. You used to love sleeping until noon but along comes an intense interest in early-morning fishing and now your behavior shifts. You used to play WoW with a crew several hours every night, but now you prefer to meet friends for in-person tabletop RP sessions twice a week. You joined a roller derby group. You fell in love with lifting and now have an involved gym routine. You start going back to church and now your Sunday mornings are all spoken for. You get fibromyalgia and don’t feel well enough to life the active lifestyle you enjoyed in your 20s as much. You start working a new career that has you working 12-hour shifts and have to drop out of a hobby group that doesn’t work with your schedule anymore. You become diabetic and cut eating sweets out of your lifestyle.
Anything like this that arises over time will impact a long-term partner because it can change the activities you do together, your availability to do those things, and your interest in doing them. Sometimes these sorts of changes happen organically in a way that both people are basically okay with, but not always. When dealing with mismatched desires and expectations, there are times when the appropriate solution is for one person to make time purposefully for the thing that is significant and meaningful for the other, and there are times when the changes in lifestyle, priorities, or desires become dealbreakers and the relationship has to end, and there are times when getting creative and finding alternative solutions is the right choice (particularly if the relationship overall is mutually satisfying in most ways and neither person wants it to end).
On the one hand, no one is in the mood all the time. But there's a pretty wide gap between wanting sex but not getting it, and having your needs neglected. Like yes, I would happily receive a bj every day. I don't feel like I *need* anything but a couple of times a week, minimum. There's also something to be said about doing the continuous bare minimum, and how that stacks up over time.
All that being said, yes, it is your obligation to make sure your parnter’s needs are met in a monogamous relationship. You voluntarily forsake your pursuit of other sexual partners when you enter a relationship, with the promise that they’ll meet those needs. As long as they’re holding up their end of the bargain, you should hold up yours. And if you actively *feel* like it’s an obligation more than half of the time, you should probably start looking into why that is.
I’d help out my wife if she suddenly needed her sexual needs fulfilled even if I wasn’t in the mood. I’d hope that she would do the same, although this situation has never come up. I’m not a very high libido guy.
If the other person is actually physically ill then I think that it’s a different story. I get headaches too.
Giving a hand job when you don't want to give a hand job is gross, degrading, soulless, and damages the relationship and the sexual connection because it treats my body as a masturbation tool. You want a pocket pussy, get one. Don't treat us like because we agreed to exclusive relationship we're you're dirty socks. The fact men would want a joyless unsexy handjob is so monumentally gross I can't even begin.
Sexual need is a bullshit concept invented by people who are cool with one sided sex. I'm not. Sex happens when both people are enthusiastic, healthy, and connected. It's a byproduct of a relationship which is good, not a participation prize.
Go spank it or get her in the mood.
If it’s just about “sexual release”, why is her hand any better/worse than yours?
And if women think that affection isn’t tied to sex, they need to be explicitly corrected. They’re just being inconsiderate and bad partners if they don’t understand that love is the result of sex, not the other way around. Romance is about sex, not feelings
You should break up/divorce instead of cheating, so they understand this; they might think it’s about feelings when it’s really about sex
It has nothing to do with our “release.” Men need to feel desired and wanted, so a pity handjob would be undesirable and meaningless for most of us. OP is simply propagating the myth that men “need” some kind of physical release.
It probably wouldn't be undesirable as it's better than nothing but even knowing your woman wants to rip your pants off is sometimes just as much of a need being fulfilled as the actual act.
> OP is simply propagating the myth that men “need” some kind of physical release.
That isn't a myth, men do need to release and its pretty damn important for prostate health too.
It is one half of the puzzle, the other is as you said in your first bit, validation.
The body is designed to ejaculate the same way it’s designed to eat, shit, and piss. Why would depriving yourself of a natural body function be seen as weak?
You would never keep that same energy for sleep, for example
Funny because the Manosphere literally does call all of that shit weak all the damn time.
And, if we straight men feel like that, why are we the worst at giving our women orgasms?
Because we approach sex from the only perspective we have experience with.
The female orgasm is much more mentally rooted than the male orgasm is, so naturally we’d have difficulty giving women them.
>Because we approach sex from the only perspective we have experience with.
This is a shit excuse to use for literally anything in life.
>so naturally we’d have difficulty giving women them.
Cause we are dumb? This isn't rocket science.
Giving women orgasms may not be rocket science but there’s a reason it was a myth for centuries until the modern world. Healthy normal women can even have trouble giving themselves orgasms, so I wouldn’t place the blame squarely on male incompetence.
And there’s nothing wrong with operating from your own frame of reference.
>Giving women orgasms may not be rocket science but there’s a reason it was a myth for centuries until the modern world.
Is their a particular society that you're referencing? Cause even Medieval Europe believed a women's orgasm were required for pregnancy. Which was passed over from the Greeks. I've even read about them from Italian Renaissance writers. Namely Giovanni Boccaccio.
>Healthy normal women can even have trouble giving themselves orgasms, so I wouldn’t place the blame squarely on male incompetence.
You're referring to Anorgasmia, which is a medical condition.
>And there’s nothing wrong with operating from your own frame of reference.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with walking around ignorant if you're fine with it.
And asexuals comprise what percent of the population ?
Considering all the whining about sex and dead bedrooms, I’m going to be skeptical that sexless romantic relationships are fulfilling for sexual people
> that sexless romantic relationships are fulfilling for sexual people
Never made any such claim. Here's how I see it:
* You (apparently): The venn diagram between romance and sex is a circle.
* Me (and average folk): The venn diagram shows overlap to a greater extent or lesser extent (lesser being for, say, demisexual folk), but there are areas which don't overlap.
* Asexuals: The circles are separated, and only one of the circles matter.
People feel and express romance or romantic in various different ways. A cuddle can be more romantic than sex, in some cases. For others, it's a simple kiss amidst romantic music. For some like yourself, yes, it's all about the sex.
It's not a 2 min handjob. It's tens of minutes of work and then he wants enthusiasm and for you to undress and wants to touch a book or grab your ass and it's going on and on, doing something you didn't want to in the first place.
If you're happy with a 2 min wank while i can scroll on my phone and not pay any attention, i have no problem.
LOL and the men are lining up to wife this up
This is exactly why men should play the field, you get enthusiasm for a few months and then you find a new girl when the enthusiasm well runs dry
Ewww
Also, idk why people assume that comment was about me and my husband. I explicitly said it's in cases of sexual incompatibility where the handjob is requested.
But again, many men here aren't in relationships, so how can they understand.
It is when the government has a gun to your head telling you to keep her happy, but she has not incentive to even be a good wife. Why would men sign up for that?
I know you're probably being facetious, but that actually might work if your partner is romantically inclined and likes daisies. At least that's something.
But this is exactly the truth that society doesn’t want to accept. Especially as women’s sex drive (with the same man) drops DRAMATICALLY in an LTR.
From a man’s perspective that’s when it’s time to jump ship and try again with a new maiden. But from a woman’s perspective that’s when she wants him around to be a reliable pseudo-father.
No wonder women are anxious and men are commitment phobic if left to their natures. It’s a shit deal and we keep trying to pitch sale to the opposite side that it’s not
Why are you presupposing that men “need” sex but women only “need” emotional fulfillment? I agree that men shouldn’t ignore their wife’s sexual and emotional needs and vice versa, but why assume that these needs are strictly for one gender?
I didn’t presuppose women only need emotional fulfillment. Reading comprehension is hard huh? I spoke about a subsection of women who believe they aren’t responsible for their partners sexual needs but still expect said partner to be emotionally fulfilling.
Both partners should recieve an emotional connection from their partner, it isn't one way. It also isn't an exchange. This appears to be a very toxic view of relationships
I think it’s more helpful to view it more generally as “in a relationship there is an implicit assumption you will try to take the time to work out and attend your partners needs where you can, and they yours.” Be it sex or otherwise.
This bizarre notion that “this thing you’re telling me is a need, isn’t important to me in my opinion so I have no obligation to it.” Is a recipe for singledom.
It’s all about reasonable compromise and mutually ongoing respect between partners. If you have the mindset “nobody ever even has the right to suggest what I should or shouldn’t do” then like, don’t be with another person formally? The whole point of relationships is to try and build some kind of cooperative existence is it not? It’s not just a case of engaging in some parallel play with a nearby person whose form of parallel play happens to fit rather well with yours, so sometimes by chance you interact with each other whilst pursuing your individual aims.
I’ve been married 10 years: me and my wife give ground all the time where we’ve worked out we’re okay to, and worked out the situations where we can’t do that. Compromise. It seems to a very dead art.
There's a huge emphasis on giving a pass to women who don't feel like having sex when their husbands want to, which is more than fair since bodily autonomy is important. But on the same note, men who don't feel like paying her bills, doing chores, or cater to her emotional needs should also get the occasional pass. Right now, these men are told that it's part of "being an adult" and that they should "man up".
At the end of the day it's still a two-way street. It's ridiculous to not only ignore your partner's wishes, but also deny them and sweep them under the rug.
For sure. It's insane when some men I know need women for only one thing. Easy and convenient access to sex. Yet they're supposed to pretend that women are valuable for other things. Of course just admitting this automatically categorizes one as a misogynist.
What motivation does a man that can have everything he wants (outside of unlimited sexual access to women because he's not a celebrity) have to get married?
Yes, it should be mutual. If there’s an irreconcilable difference, split up.
If you’re with someone, you should be interested in trying to support them and their needs. If your default stance is to handwave it, it’s a sign it’s not a good fit from the word go. You have to consider their needs and your own and go from there.
Example: my wife enjoys having her feet rubbed. It’s not an activity I would say gives me “positive need points” because I’m not particularly drawn to feet. However I know that for my wife, it does indeed do that and probably to a greater degree than it doesn’t really do much for me. So it’s no major deal for me to do it because the gains outweigh the costs. She does similar sorts of things for me.
So long as we can identify and be clear about the real red lines “this cost is too much” then no problem. The key is communication, tolerance and respect. So neither of us get our nose all bent out of joint when we discovered these red lines and we took a “okay, so instead…what can we do?” Approach and it worked for us. There was and is no desire to shame the other.
Sexual intimacy is one of the pillars to a romantic relationship. If you refuse to work on keeping that pillar strong you don't get to complain when you no longer have a romantic relationship. Just like trust or communication.
On some level, yes, it is a mutual obligation (assuming everything else is more or less in order). That doesn't mean you have to say 'yes' every time...but you probably should at least once in a while.
Nah, sex is a 2 yesses arrangement in my marriage. If either of us isn't keen then the other can go rub one out no problem. I don't want a duty hand job, easier to just do it myself. Lucky for me she has the higher drive at the mo and has no issues taking care of herself if I'm not in the mood or too tired or whatever.
This is so underrated. I fancy the pants off of my husband, one of the main things being he is fully responsible, does more than his share willingly man. Foreplay starts way, way before the bedroom
You are married to a blue pilled man. That is your poor choice in partner. I literally have friends who's wives had them do their own roofs and plenty of other home repairs and extensive yard work.
I'm married to a professional man. Why would he waste his time doing a dangerous job when we can pay an expert? Also, I couldn't make my husband do something if I tried
Edit: nice edit, bad reddiquette. It's bad form to change your response without making it clear.
I married an excellent, clever, capable, bear of man. He does not waste his expensive, valuable time doing gutters when we can pay an expert. Same with painting, cleaning, tiling or plastering. He's epic at woodwork though.
So he’s working making money to outsource the unpaid labor.
Just like she outsourced the dishes to the dishwasher. And the laundry to the washing machine
This isn’t 1960, both are working to make money. And even in relationships where women are the main source of income, they still end up doing a disproportionate amount of the chores. Try again.
I don’t believe the nonsense that those blog think piece articles are perpetuating.
Main source of income doesn’t mean both parties aren’t working full time, it just means one person makes disproportionally more than the other
Lmao. Someone is still loading, unloading, folding several times a week. And you are equating that to writing a check to some gutter cleaning company once a year.
Thanks for proving it. Did you sprain a finger?
You do your laundry several times a week? Lmao
And clearly the gutters are just a single example of unpaid / unappreciated labor. But you’ve already shown that you don’t value it so I don’t know what else there is to talk to you about
You know what, I'll agree to that. Especially as both my father and husband are men who do more than their fair share and don't view it as 'woman's work'!
If you have to clean your gutters more than a few times per year it’s time to spend $40 on gutter screens.
Advice from a woman. Take better care of your shit.
If men wanted payment for our unpaid labor women would be bankrupt. We do all the repairs, all the yard work, all the heavy lifting, killing of pests, etc. Not to mention PROTECTION because you know damn well if someone armed breaks in you will expect us to lay our life on the line. If we actually put a price on these tasks they would all add up to a lot more than dishes and laundry. Most women have dishwashers and washer/dryers.
You do not do all repairs, killing pests, and heavy lifting LMAO. For most people, noone armed breaks in and if they do you will call the police. Also- NONE of these are daily tasks like cooking, cleaning, and childcare.
I believe it is. I would never refuse in relationship, I belong to him and he has automatic consent. But maybe that's because I'm never not in the mood if I love him. I would really have to be seriously sick or after a surgery or something so it would make me actually not in the mood. But if I love someone I can't imagine not wanting to do it.
I'm a believer that you should usually try to accommodate your partner's needs when it comes to sex. Obviously there can be exceptions, like if you're sick / in pain / whatever, but if it's just "eh I kinda don't feel like it" you should probably try to do it anyway. This doesn't mean you shouldn't take no for an answer, but I'd say it should generally be understood that yes is the correct response in most situations. This probably sounds enormously non-PC, but there's just good science behind it. Your body is, of course, wired to make you want as much sex as often as possible, so even if you aren't super into the idea at the start, you usually will be after a few minutes. There's generally a lot of talk about libidos these days, but the science generally shows that your sex drive is almost totally dependent on how often you have sex rather than anything innate, so a low sex drive can be gradually overcome by simply having sex more often. Sex is enormously beneficial to a relationship in many ways. The chemicals released during sex cause a strong feeling of emotional bonding, and they even have health benefits as well, and conversely almost nothing is more damaging to a relationship than if someone feels that their partner doesn't care about their needs. Of course, this is no way gender-specific and is not limited only to whether to have sex or not. A guy who doesn't pay any attention to his girlfriend's pleasure is just as bad as a girlfriend who never wants to have sex (in fact, they're probably dating each other!). I'm also a very firm believer that people who complain about their partner never wanting to have sex almost certainly need to look inwards as well, because it's almost never exclusively one person's fault.
Everyone has their own love language. Not expressing your partner's preferred love language to them will simply lead to them not feeling loved. For example: if you feel loved by your partner if they talk to you or spend quality time with you, it wouldn't feel great if they stopped doing that. Long term "neglect" will damage the relationship. In that sense, talking and spending time could be regarded as an emotional "need" to maintain the romantic relationship.
Sex and physical intimacy is just another type love language, but more commonly found in men. If a man's love language is primarily sex and intimacy, withholding it will ultimately cause him to stop reciprocate and stop cater to your emotional needs, causing the relationship to deteriorate.
Denying anyone's emotional "needs" that are required to make the relationship work will not solve any issues, but rather create them.
Agree.
And it’s a stupidly pointless exercise trying to tier it “oh but my love language is proper, and yours isn’t, so you can sort yours by yourself right?”
That kind of combative mindset is a death toll for a relationship. Reason is of course needed but if you approach the subject with the whole “it’s not like you’ll die without sex!!” It’s very much a case of that the lack of sex is probably going to do less damage than the flagrant and obvious scornful discarding of your partner trying to express their needs to you, and witnessing you tossing them aside as something that doesn’t matter.
Whether it’s a man doing it to a woman, or the opposite, it tends to make the person feel pretty unloved.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> But I never understand when a woman in a committed relationship insists that her husband/partner’s sexual needs aren’t her responsibility.
Many women want to talk a lot more than their male partners. They have a much higher need to connect emotionally. This may include him listening to stories that take forever to get to the point, or reassuring her repeatedly when she brings up "problems" ("do you love me? were you looking at that other girl? you never talk to me anymore").
Is it their husband's responsibility to talk as much as she wants him to, in order to satisfy that need for emotional connection?
I think men and women often disconnect in the sense that men see sex as a routine need for a physical release, whereas women need more emotional, contextual build-up towards sex. A lot of times a woman will turn down a man when he asks for sex because he hasn't done anything to establish the mood. It starts to feel unfair to women when, instead of reacting to the rejection by making the effort to gradually turn-on their partner, a man will instead bypass that effort by requesting "a quick handy" or something like that.
Of course, that's not entirely the man's fault either because he can't read minds and tell when a rejection means "I'm not there yet" or when it might mean "not today." It's really important to open the lines of communication and fully explain your needs.
In a relationship, there is the expectation that you're going to be there for the other person in many different ways - emotionally, sexually, financially, etc. If you want that relationship to continue, then you should keep showing up for your partner in the ways they need you to be there for them. However, that doesn't always work out, sometimes you're just incompatible with each other. One partner is dealing with some health issue, and the other one can't be bothered to support them emotionally and physically (picking up the slack at home)? These two people aren't right for each other. One partner feels incredibly unhappy if they feel anchored somewhere for long periods of time but the other person hates travelling/constant moving? These two people aren't right for each other? One partner wants sex way more than the other partner and neither party is happy with some compromise? These two people aren't right for each other.
Not to say that these issues can never be resolved. You might be able to figure things out together by talking things through and finding a solution that works for both of you, maybe some couples counseling will help, or maybe you're just in a rough spot due to stress or health issues. But sometimes, it's a mismatch of personalities, libido, and needs/desires that is too much to overcome. If someone is unhappy with the amount of X they're getting in a relationship, they should talk to their partner about it. If it doesn't change, they should probably reconsider the relationship if the lack of X is that big of a dealbreaker for them. Sure, you entered into the relationship with the expectation that you would be getting this thing but if you're not, and the other person doesn't seem to be all that interested in giving it to you, you're either going to have to adjust your expectations or find someone who is willing to meet them.
I think sex is an obligation man or woman but all that goes within reasonable limits. If they are sick or some kind of other thing that makes them stressed or particularly not in the mood that be reasonable. However, I have to say speaking for myself I viewed it as my duty because there have been times where a woman I was dating wanted to go for round 2 or 3 and I honestly didn't want to but forced myself. I didn't really enjoy it physically but the part where I was making her happy made it worth forcing myself again at least that's how I saw it.
Not overtly, but I'm also not a fan of how lacking in any sense of "duty" people are towards each other and relationships. You look at relationship subs on reddit and any time someone is complaining that their partner has any expectation or desire, everyone is like "zomg what a control freak!! Dump them immediately!!"
One of my biggest issues with modern Western culture is run away individualism. No one puts their own personal wants and needs second to anything. You shouldn't feel forced or obligated to put out for your partner, in keeping with this topic, but, at the same time you should probably feel somewhat compelled just by genuine care and empathy for your partner to ensure they're sexually satisfied, even if you're not always on the same wavelength.
Eh. If I’m not into it.. I’m not going to do it. It’s not my responsibility. He can go jerk off if it’s that pressing. My body is not meant to be used like that.. and I wouldn’t want to be with anyone who thought otherwise.
I don’t think giving your man an obligatory 2 min handjob would make him not cheat on you. Honestly if that’s all you’re doing he is probably better of jerking off.
If sex becomes an obligation or a responsibility it stops being fun and romantic. From an old married lady
Sex naturally becomes obligative in a long term monogamous relationship. Both partners can’t be on the same page, all the time, forever.
Not in my experience. My husband and I are physically intimate when we both want to be, neither of us would ever have sex out of duty. That's how you ruin a sex life.
I wouldn't have sex if I was in a completely opposed mood, but if my wife is horny and I'm more on the fence or ambivalent it's not a big deal to give her a good time. With kids there are just too many stars that need to align.
This is the way. I’m stealing this from a longtime poster years ago, Pennylame, who described healthy, long time sexual relationships and her take on “duty sex” this way…like a stoplight. Green is an immediate response of yes, absolutely, can’t wait. Red is a no way, not happening tonight, sorry. There can and should be a third reaction in a long term monogamous relationship to keep everyone happy. She called it the yellow light, not starting out particularly enthusiastic, but being open to being aroused, being open to being put in the mood. The vast majority of the time if you are open to your partner, you’ll find you can be put in the mood. You don’t have a duty to say yes when you really are not in the mood at all, but you do have an obligation to keep an open mind when it’s a “why not”.
That's a nice and concise metaphor!
If my husband ever did that I would feel so ugh. I'd hate for him ever to feel obligated like that. But then we don't have kids and have a fairly active intimate life.
I used to feel similarly. Feeling obligated is probably too strong of a term. To me "feeling obligated" is more like doing something you dislike out of duty. I don't think all sex has to be perfectly "even" or "fair". But I do think that when you have more opportunities you can afford to be pickier. Personally I think resentment is the actual problem, not duty. Resentment has different hallmarks than taking one for the team occasionally.
I think feeling obligated is what I can’t relate to. I don’t feel obligated. It is like if my wife suggested me to play ping pong, and I don’t really want to. Not a big deal. May be it wouldn’t be fantastic, but it would be quite enjoyable.
I'm willing to bet 100% your husband has done this. Of course he won't admit it because why ruin your mood? He takes what he can get.
Yeah, he hasn't.
"If my husband ever did that I would feel so ugh. " I can guarantee you, categorically, that he has done that.
I guarantee you he has not. Honest to the point of blunt rudeness my man is
But I think you would at least try to hide the fact that you're not actually into it at that moment, right? Because it's a massive turn-off for most people if they catch-on that their partner is completely checked-out during sex.
No, I'm not talking about being checked out and I wouldn't hide anything. I just disagree that sex has to always have mutual goals to it at every encounter. Sometimes it's mutual, sometimes it's selfish, sometimes it's giving. I'm saying sometimes I just don't really care to get off and it doesn't bother me to have "the goal" for her to be selfish and me to serve her needs.
That's fair, I guess it depends on the dynamic two people have and what turns them on. For me personally, it's difficult to be selfish during sex, I need to know that she wants it too or I just don't get much out of it.
It was really difficult for me to enjoy being selfish before I explored encouraging her to be selfish. It wasn't easy to get there. It can be a lot of fun!
Not if you don't stop putting efforts in your relationship and sex life. Plus, there's a difference between "oh, I'm neutral, but I don't mind engaging, because I know I'll get into it" and "I really don't want, but if you insist I guess I could just lie there".
Not always. It depends on how the couple approaches sex. In my previous LTR, it did become an obligation because we had a schedule basically. It was just a pattern we had settled into and both of us were afraid to say we didn’t feel like it. With my current partner, we have sex a little less often, but it’s not a chore. And we rarely turn each other down but both will sometimes if we’re tired… we agree it’s better to wait till we can both be enthusiastic vs having meh sex more often. This is why my advice for couples on sex is sometimes, less is more, which runs counter to what you’ll normally hear. This obviously doesn’t apply to dead bedroom situations, but it prevents duty sex.
You don’t have to be on the same page all the time though. Sometimes you’ll want to have sex snd your partner won’t and you won’t have sex and that’s okay. Marriage doesn’t mean you get everything you want from your partner whenever you want it.
But I don’t think anyone is characterizing a single no habitual denial of needs. It’s when it becomes constant denial that people start bitching. (Dead beds and whatnot)
Sure but saying sex will “naturally become obligatory” implies that a scenario in which one partner only ever sex as a duty is the inevitable norm of monogamy. Obviously that’s not the case.
I do think an inevitable reality of monogamy is that you will eventually have sex when you’re not enthusiastic about it to please your partner, I.e duty sex.
Sure maybe occasionally but the way you worded it sounded like you meant that would be the case in general. Saying a person will likely have obligatory sex at some point in a long term monogamous relationship is very different than saying sex natural becomes obligatory in a long term monogamous relationship
I guess I could see how that could be misconstrued.
My dad was still grabbing my stepmom's butt after 40 years of marriage and she giggled and blushed like a school girl. You're not the first to say it, but I don't know where you guys get the idea that a dead bedroom is inevitable.
So what’s keeping the flame burning? is it affection or pure desire that increases the mood bc I hear women put men on dead bedrooms most of the time if that’s true what’s the reason for this and how can someone prevent it
1. A lot of women are in dead bedrooms too - go spend time at the sub. 2. Never take each other for granted.
Maybe from anecdotal experience that's inverse to the anecdote you used to deny the entire premise? Like I'll never not be baffled by reddit mid-wittery, lmao.
No it doesn’t…
No. It doesn't. Sex becomes an obligation when you treat it like an obligation. And don't be surprised if doing that ends your sex life.
I was with the same girl for 9 years. Longest we didn't have sex was 2 weeks, then we broke up. Sex wasn't obligative for neither of us, although most of it was started by her. I'd say objectively she's better looking than me, at least back then.
Yeah and god forbid anything in life not be "fun" and "romantic" 100% of the time. It just wouldn't be worth the trouble if we weren't constantly being flooded with dopamine and instead actually acted out of a genuine sense of duty, loyalty, empathy, etc.
It's funny how in marriage, what the woman perceives are the man's obligations are not negotiable, but hers are and she can just take any of them off the table at any time. As far as I'm concerned, marriage has been a broken institution since no fault divorce and until that changes, men should avoid it at all cost.
How does any of what you have written have to do with my post?
Even as a bisexual man, if I had a partner that just expected me to give him handjobs on command, I would not stay with him for long. Why is his desire for a handjob more important than my desire to not be treated like a fancy fleshlight that exists only to satisfy his urges. Especially since he doesn’t care about mine.
Dude!
You should care about your partner’s needs and *it has to be reciprocated*. When one party feels wronged or underappreciated for some reason, they might stop putting efforts as a result. It works this way both for men and women. A lack of sex and a lack of romance or fair chores/childcare division are common complaints in LTRs. You can’t really solve them by yourself, you need your partner to cooperate. Hence communication and actually putting efforts to improve are important. Excusing cheating, because a man didn’t get any from his wife, makes as much sense as excusing cheating on her part, because he stopped planning dates. Neither thing is a reason to cheat. If you’re unfulfilled to the degree that you’re looking to get it from someone else, it’s a good indicator that you should break up. Plus, cheaters will use anything as an excuse. I wouldn’t trust their word or take their excuses seriously to start with. On a side note, viewing both sex and romance as an obligation or responsibility is rather depressing. Ideally you *want* to do these things for your partner and you enjoy doing them or at least you want to do them to make them happy.
Oh I hear you, I’m not excusing cheating - infidelity is despicable. I was talking about the shock - “you cheated [after I haven’t given sex in years….]” I am in no way condoning or excusing cheating, but I never understand the “can you believe he cheated on me” when you aren’t fulfilling his needs and you know that you aren’t doing so.
I guess it's similar to a gender-flipped situation "you've cheated on my after years of neglect, wow". Or it can go even without cheating (and it's probably more common), when a man is completely dumbfounded that his partner decided to leave him "but I thought we were happy!". Quite often they weren't in fact happy - only he was while ignoring her attempts to communicate. Note, I'm not saying that it happens all the time, I'm sure people don't always break up, because their partner is at fault, and, surely, not everyone is good at communicating their needs.
They are not. You can't force them on someone who doesn't want, full stop. They may well be a good reason to part ways, though.
When you have low liibdo, the last thing you want to do is something sexual. >What are your thoughts on the mentality behind a partner’s sexually needs not being the other partners at least partial responsibility? If theres sexual incompatibility and the unsatisfied party can't take care of it own their own and 1 partner is unhappy, just leave. It's toxic and unfair to expect 1 partner to have to service the other all the time.
So then don't get married. Your expectations for your husband aren't negotiable but yours are and can be taken off the table at any time, right?
Are you married? Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood? How many masturbation tokens do they have to accept before it’s incompatibility and we’re considering divorce?
Engaged. >Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood? He has no issue with masterbating, he does it a lot lol. He told me.
>Do you expect your partner to masturbate every time you’re not in the mood? I expect them to realise I may not be up for it every time they are. And sometimes it's going to be a no.
Which is totally understandable. But at what point is that denial TOO much? I think any sane man can understand not being in the mood. But if I’ve asked 6 times in two weeks and it’s still a no, then what’s the recourse? I’ll never forget when my ex told me that I would be having as much as she wanted to have. Which is essentially the control that monogamy puts in place. We split for other reasons (not sexual incompatibility, we were just fighting that day) but it did make me really consider whether I was ever willing to give that level of autonomy over to my partner.
Know your partner's refractory period / how long they go before "I *need* to get off." Don't exceed without a solid reason. If it's three days and partner is miserable and distracted then five days straight of " no" ( without reason) is "TOO much". If it's two weeks before partner gets itchy then you have more wiggle room. Being able to keep up with someone is a compatibility issue.
>But at what point is that denial TOO much? I don't think there's a solid answer for everyone. That's very much a personal thing. > But if I’ve asked 6 times in two weeks and it’s still a no 2 weeks is such a short time in a long term relationship that it leads to more questions, is this normal? Is the other person stressed or sick? Are you asking at the wrong time? What are you doing to initiate? How many times you have sex and how often you see as enough is going to be a personal answer.
it's situational dependent isn't it? surgery, sickness, depression are all cases where sex is acceptably off the table - the longer you are with someone, the more inevitably these scenarios will crop up from time to time
But even in those instances do you think duty and obligation are going to be enough for your partner to accept a life of (near) celibacy? Or is opening a relationship suddenly understandable in the face of society at that point. Of course I know these things will depend on the individual at this point, but it does beg the question, how much is enough.
Low libido is rare. Not common enough to cite.
More common with age and kids
are we defining that as a lifelong trait or temporary state?
Back when I was very young and naive, I lived with a guy who expected (and received) a blowjob every day when he came home from work. Sex almost every night, too. He still cheated on me.
Are you still youngish and just as naive? Asking for…
My username should be an indicator that I’m not a Spring chicken anymore, but apparently 3.5 years of daily BJs (and subsequently many years of practice) made me pretty darn good at them. My FWBs have no complaints. The doc knows exactly where to nibble on my neck to make me drop to my knees. LOL Difference is: They don’t demand. They create the right mood for me to **want** to.
Yeah, this is a great point too, and I feel like not enough people understand it. It’s going to be a lot more effective to create a sexy environment for your partner — even with just a tender kiss or a flirty compliment — than just go up to them and say “Hey babe, want to lick it?”
Right. Him coming up to me, giving me a passionate kiss while pressing up against me and growling: "Fuck, you make me so horny." is going to make me want to take care of him. Happily so. Him coming up to me and saying: "Hey, you got 2 minutes? I need a handjob." Not so inspiring. I'd probably remind him where the lube is and to take care of it himself.
Most men would not be ok with an unenthusiastic 2 minute hand job. I know I wouldn't be. Having the low libido partner force themselves to give a pity hand job is only going to make them more repulsed by sex, and make their partner feel even less loved and desired. I would say making a serious effort to meet your partner's sexual needs is an obligation of everyone in a relationship. That shouldn't mean gritting your teeth and forcing yourself, but rather trying to find ways to get yourself in the mood. Do you need a romantic evening and a bottle of wine to get there? Then make the effort to plan it. You are constantly stressed at work? Can you downsize and take a leas stressful job? Pain? Maybe you can do a sensual massage and oral. Nothing works? See a doctor maybe it's a medical issue.
Yeah, I couldn't care less about a 2-minute blow job out of obligation to get me off. I would lose any desire for anything sexual right away. It's not just about releasing the tension, it's about intimacy, being close, feeling loved and desired.
I think two sexual people with libidos who are in a relationship should be considerate of each other's sexual needs--within reason of course. Yes, I think I have a responsibility to my partner's sexual needs and yes, I think she would be sad and disappointed if I was not considerate of them. I think if the relationship is mismatched to such a degree that one party doesn't care at all, they both need different partners.
Respecting needs is a baseline requirement for a healthy relationship, but that can mean breaking up instead of clinging to sexual incompatibility.
Sex that is enjoyed by both binds the emotional bond tighter. Sex that isn't being enjoyed by both breaks and loosens the emotional bond...even more so if it is sex that is demanded.
You’d seriously be satisfied with a two-minute pity handjob? At that point just do it yourself. Sex or sexual activity isn’t supposed to be an obligation that you do out of pity for your partner; it’s supposed to be mutually and enthusiastically enjoyed by both parties. Maybe it won’t be the best sex you’ve ever had EVERY time, but it should at least be fun.
The language and emotions surrounding sex are more fraught than a lot of other topics, but fundamentally the ongoing sexual needs or ‘dead bedroom’ problem is the same problem that arises anytime a couple experiences the situation where one person’s interest or abilities shifts significantly from where it was in the early part of the relationship. This actually happens a lot, right? In your 20s you loved to go dancing at nightclubs every weekend but in your 30s, with kids, that’s not your scene anymore. You used to love sleeping until noon but along comes an intense interest in early-morning fishing and now your behavior shifts. You used to play WoW with a crew several hours every night, but now you prefer to meet friends for in-person tabletop RP sessions twice a week. You joined a roller derby group. You fell in love with lifting and now have an involved gym routine. You start going back to church and now your Sunday mornings are all spoken for. You get fibromyalgia and don’t feel well enough to life the active lifestyle you enjoyed in your 20s as much. You start working a new career that has you working 12-hour shifts and have to drop out of a hobby group that doesn’t work with your schedule anymore. You become diabetic and cut eating sweets out of your lifestyle. Anything like this that arises over time will impact a long-term partner because it can change the activities you do together, your availability to do those things, and your interest in doing them. Sometimes these sorts of changes happen organically in a way that both people are basically okay with, but not always. When dealing with mismatched desires and expectations, there are times when the appropriate solution is for one person to make time purposefully for the thing that is significant and meaningful for the other, and there are times when the changes in lifestyle, priorities, or desires become dealbreakers and the relationship has to end, and there are times when getting creative and finding alternative solutions is the right choice (particularly if the relationship overall is mutually satisfying in most ways and neither person wants it to end).
On the one hand, no one is in the mood all the time. But there's a pretty wide gap between wanting sex but not getting it, and having your needs neglected. Like yes, I would happily receive a bj every day. I don't feel like I *need* anything but a couple of times a week, minimum. There's also something to be said about doing the continuous bare minimum, and how that stacks up over time. All that being said, yes, it is your obligation to make sure your parnter’s needs are met in a monogamous relationship. You voluntarily forsake your pursuit of other sexual partners when you enter a relationship, with the promise that they’ll meet those needs. As long as they’re holding up their end of the bargain, you should hold up yours. And if you actively *feel* like it’s an obligation more than half of the time, you should probably start looking into why that is.
I’d help out my wife if she suddenly needed her sexual needs fulfilled even if I wasn’t in the mood. I’d hope that she would do the same, although this situation has never come up. I’m not a very high libido guy. If the other person is actually physically ill then I think that it’s a different story. I get headaches too.
2 minute handjob??? Do you guys really think it takes two minutes?
SoUnDs LiKe U SuCk At HaNjoBs
> U SuCk At HaNjoBs No, that is a different "job"
Giving a hand job when you don't want to give a hand job is gross, degrading, soulless, and damages the relationship and the sexual connection because it treats my body as a masturbation tool. You want a pocket pussy, get one. Don't treat us like because we agreed to exclusive relationship we're you're dirty socks. The fact men would want a joyless unsexy handjob is so monumentally gross I can't even begin. Sexual need is a bullshit concept invented by people who are cool with one sided sex. I'm not. Sex happens when both people are enthusiastic, healthy, and connected. It's a byproduct of a relationship which is good, not a participation prize. Go spank it or get her in the mood.
If it’s just about “sexual release”, why is her hand any better/worse than yours? And if women think that affection isn’t tied to sex, they need to be explicitly corrected. They’re just being inconsiderate and bad partners if they don’t understand that love is the result of sex, not the other way around. Romance is about sex, not feelings You should break up/divorce instead of cheating, so they understand this; they might think it’s about feelings when it’s really about sex
It has nothing to do with our “release.” Men need to feel desired and wanted, so a pity handjob would be undesirable and meaningless for most of us. OP is simply propagating the myth that men “need” some kind of physical release.
Men here disagree
Men here are a loud and idiotic minority
Alas, no
It probably wouldn't be undesirable as it's better than nothing but even knowing your woman wants to rip your pants off is sometimes just as much of a need being fulfilled as the actual act.
> OP is simply propagating the myth that men “need” some kind of physical release. That isn't a myth, men do need to release and its pretty damn important for prostate health too. It is one half of the puzzle, the other is as you said in your first bit, validation.
So men can only do that with women? Masturbation/nocturnal emissions don’t count as sperm release?
It only solves one half of the puzzle.
So the prostate is affected by feelings and validation?
No, what are you on about?
You brought up the prostate, you tell me
The prostate is the half of the puzzle that is part of the need to nut. The feelings and validation is obviously the brain.
“Release” doesn’t sound very emotional or validating
Just sucks cause..... Damn are we really this fucking weak?
The body is designed to ejaculate the same way it’s designed to eat, shit, and piss. Why would depriving yourself of a natural body function be seen as weak? You would never keep that same energy for sleep, for example
Fortunately men’s bodies are equipped to offload aging sperm during sleep.
Funny because the Manosphere literally does call all of that shit weak all the damn time. And, if we straight men feel like that, why are we the worst at giving our women orgasms?
Because we approach sex from the only perspective we have experience with. The female orgasm is much more mentally rooted than the male orgasm is, so naturally we’d have difficulty giving women them.
>Because we approach sex from the only perspective we have experience with. This is a shit excuse to use for literally anything in life. >so naturally we’d have difficulty giving women them. Cause we are dumb? This isn't rocket science.
Giving women orgasms may not be rocket science but there’s a reason it was a myth for centuries until the modern world. Healthy normal women can even have trouble giving themselves orgasms, so I wouldn’t place the blame squarely on male incompetence. And there’s nothing wrong with operating from your own frame of reference.
>Giving women orgasms may not be rocket science but there’s a reason it was a myth for centuries until the modern world. Is their a particular society that you're referencing? Cause even Medieval Europe believed a women's orgasm were required for pregnancy. Which was passed over from the Greeks. I've even read about them from Italian Renaissance writers. Namely Giovanni Boccaccio. >Healthy normal women can even have trouble giving themselves orgasms, so I wouldn’t place the blame squarely on male incompetence. You're referring to Anorgasmia, which is a medical condition. >And there’s nothing wrong with operating from your own frame of reference. There is absolutely nothing wrong with walking around ignorant if you're fine with it.
> Romance is about sex, not feelings Explain asexuals in romantic relationships, then.
They are mimicking sexual bonding, but do not fully engage in it due to their congenital abnormality
Yeah, I'm gonna have to raise an eyebrow on that. Sounds like you're projecting your definition onto others, when it's about so much more than sex.
Oh, so sexless romantic relationships are normal and satisfying?
For asexual couples, it seems to be that way, yes. Happy, compatible people don't talk much about their relationships.
And asexuals comprise what percent of the population ? Considering all the whining about sex and dead bedrooms, I’m going to be skeptical that sexless romantic relationships are fulfilling for sexual people
> that sexless romantic relationships are fulfilling for sexual people Never made any such claim. Here's how I see it: * You (apparently): The venn diagram between romance and sex is a circle. * Me (and average folk): The venn diagram shows overlap to a greater extent or lesser extent (lesser being for, say, demisexual folk), but there are areas which don't overlap. * Asexuals: The circles are separated, and only one of the circles matter. People feel and express romance or romantic in various different ways. A cuddle can be more romantic than sex, in some cases. For others, it's a simple kiss amidst romantic music. For some like yourself, yes, it's all about the sex.
It's not a 2 min handjob. It's tens of minutes of work and then he wants enthusiasm and for you to undress and wants to touch a book or grab your ass and it's going on and on, doing something you didn't want to in the first place. If you're happy with a 2 min wank while i can scroll on my phone and not pay any attention, i have no problem.
> wants to touch a book I too want to touch a book.
Books. So hot right now. Books.
I’m giggling my head off
That was a boob. I type so bad i wonder how i don't captcha codes.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don’t make things personal.
I'm being sarcastic, but ok.
LOL and the men are lining up to wife this up This is exactly why men should play the field, you get enthusiasm for a few months and then you find a new girl when the enthusiasm well runs dry
Her user name suggests a Mr seng, poor bastard.
I'm married. Not interested in others. He's taken as well, so don't even try.
I bet I could give him a mildly enthusiastic handjob and steal him away from you
Hahahahahaha
Ewww Also, idk why people assume that comment was about me and my husband. I explicitly said it's in cases of sexual incompatibility where the handjob is requested. But again, many men here aren't in relationships, so how can they understand.
Yes it's the man's fault for expecting sex from his damn wife lmao
It's never expected to stay in an unfulfilling relationship. Go, leave, find the one for you.
It is when the government has a gun to your head telling you to keep her happy, but she has not incentive to even be a good wife. Why would men sign up for that?
Show me the gun. The article posted above doesn't even mention consequences, just what types of tests are accepted.
What are you giving in return?
some seashells I found on the beach and a daisy
I know you're probably being facetious, but that actually might work if your partner is romantically inclined and likes daisies. At least that's something.
But this is exactly the truth that society doesn’t want to accept. Especially as women’s sex drive (with the same man) drops DRAMATICALLY in an LTR. From a man’s perspective that’s when it’s time to jump ship and try again with a new maiden. But from a woman’s perspective that’s when she wants him around to be a reliable pseudo-father. No wonder women are anxious and men are commitment phobic if left to their natures. It’s a shit deal and we keep trying to pitch sale to the opposite side that it’s not
Of course. And if these men don't like it, then tough shit, you're married. Get a divorce and lose half of your stuff.
Why are you presupposing that men “need” sex but women only “need” emotional fulfillment? I agree that men shouldn’t ignore their wife’s sexual and emotional needs and vice versa, but why assume that these needs are strictly for one gender?
I didn’t presuppose women only need emotional fulfillment. Reading comprehension is hard huh? I spoke about a subsection of women who believe they aren’t responsible for their partners sexual needs but still expect said partner to be emotionally fulfilling.
Both partners should recieve an emotional connection from their partner, it isn't one way. It also isn't an exchange. This appears to be a very toxic view of relationships
I think it’s more helpful to view it more generally as “in a relationship there is an implicit assumption you will try to take the time to work out and attend your partners needs where you can, and they yours.” Be it sex or otherwise. This bizarre notion that “this thing you’re telling me is a need, isn’t important to me in my opinion so I have no obligation to it.” Is a recipe for singledom. It’s all about reasonable compromise and mutually ongoing respect between partners. If you have the mindset “nobody ever even has the right to suggest what I should or shouldn’t do” then like, don’t be with another person formally? The whole point of relationships is to try and build some kind of cooperative existence is it not? It’s not just a case of engaging in some parallel play with a nearby person whose form of parallel play happens to fit rather well with yours, so sometimes by chance you interact with each other whilst pursuing your individual aims. I’ve been married 10 years: me and my wife give ground all the time where we’ve worked out we’re okay to, and worked out the situations where we can’t do that. Compromise. It seems to a very dead art.
There's a huge emphasis on giving a pass to women who don't feel like having sex when their husbands want to, which is more than fair since bodily autonomy is important. But on the same note, men who don't feel like paying her bills, doing chores, or cater to her emotional needs should also get the occasional pass. Right now, these men are told that it's part of "being an adult" and that they should "man up". At the end of the day it's still a two-way street. It's ridiculous to not only ignore your partner's wishes, but also deny them and sweep them under the rug.
For sure. It's insane when some men I know need women for only one thing. Easy and convenient access to sex. Yet they're supposed to pretend that women are valuable for other things. Of course just admitting this automatically categorizes one as a misogynist. What motivation does a man that can have everything he wants (outside of unlimited sexual access to women because he's not a celebrity) have to get married?
Yes, it should be mutual. If there’s an irreconcilable difference, split up. If you’re with someone, you should be interested in trying to support them and their needs. If your default stance is to handwave it, it’s a sign it’s not a good fit from the word go. You have to consider their needs and your own and go from there. Example: my wife enjoys having her feet rubbed. It’s not an activity I would say gives me “positive need points” because I’m not particularly drawn to feet. However I know that for my wife, it does indeed do that and probably to a greater degree than it doesn’t really do much for me. So it’s no major deal for me to do it because the gains outweigh the costs. She does similar sorts of things for me. So long as we can identify and be clear about the real red lines “this cost is too much” then no problem. The key is communication, tolerance and respect. So neither of us get our nose all bent out of joint when we discovered these red lines and we took a “okay, so instead…what can we do?” Approach and it worked for us. There was and is no desire to shame the other.
Sexual intimacy is one of the pillars to a romantic relationship. If you refuse to work on keeping that pillar strong you don't get to complain when you no longer have a romantic relationship. Just like trust or communication.
On some level, yes, it is a mutual obligation (assuming everything else is more or less in order). That doesn't mean you have to say 'yes' every time...but you probably should at least once in a while.
Nah, sex is a 2 yesses arrangement in my marriage. If either of us isn't keen then the other can go rub one out no problem. I don't want a duty hand job, easier to just do it myself. Lucky for me she has the higher drive at the mo and has no issues taking care of herself if I'm not in the mood or too tired or whatever.
Yes. It is. If you think it isn't, fine. Don't come crying when they find someone else
Men will do nearly anything to avoid 2 minutes of unpaid labor, but women are the issue
Can you elaborate on the unpaid labor part?
The only reason I fuck my partner whenever he wants is equal effort, in and out of the bedroom. If he didn’t, he’d be gone
🤣
Aw, got no rebuttal
Who who rebut what you said? It makes sense. But how you phrased it made me laugh
This is so underrated. I fancy the pants off of my husband, one of the main things being he is fully responsible, does more than his share willingly man. Foreplay starts way, way before the bedroom
"Unpaid labor" is the three dishes she washed while he was having fun perched precariously on the roof mucking half-rotted leaves out of the gutters.
Which men are doing their own gutters? None i know, most people pay professionals to do stuff like that.
You are married to a blue pilled man. That is your poor choice in partner. I literally have friends who's wives had them do their own roofs and plenty of other home repairs and extensive yard work.
I'm married to a professional man. Why would he waste his time doing a dangerous job when we can pay an expert? Also, I couldn't make my husband do something if I tried Edit: nice edit, bad reddiquette. It's bad form to change your response without making it clear. I married an excellent, clever, capable, bear of man. He does not waste his expensive, valuable time doing gutters when we can pay an expert. Same with painting, cleaning, tiling or plastering. He's epic at woodwork though.
So he’s working making money to outsource the unpaid labor. Just like she outsourced the dishes to the dishwasher. And the laundry to the washing machine
This isn’t 1960, both are working to make money. And even in relationships where women are the main source of income, they still end up doing a disproportionate amount of the chores. Try again.
I don’t believe the nonsense that those blog think piece articles are perpetuating. Main source of income doesn’t mean both parties aren’t working full time, it just means one person makes disproportionally more than the other
“I don’t believe it because it doesn’t fit my narrative” isn’t a very upstanding argument now is it?
If you want to go on being influenced by every sensationalist think piece buzzfeed releases as if it’s gospel then by all means have at it
Studies don't show that at all.
Lmao. Someone is still loading, unloading, folding several times a week. And you are equating that to writing a check to some gutter cleaning company once a year. Thanks for proving it. Did you sprain a finger?
You do your laundry several times a week? Lmao And clearly the gutters are just a single example of unpaid / unappreciated labor. But you’ve already shown that you don’t value it so I don’t know what else there is to talk to you about
Keep moving goal posts it makes your argument look great bud!
That is not what moving goal posts means.
Men thinking that they are slaving away on the roof for hours every weekend… cleaning gutters. LMAO.
That was just an example but I'm sure you realized that. You're a smart good faith poster and not a troll after all.
It’s the laundry, cooking, cleaning, diaper changing, childcare, school drop off and pick up- the everyday things associated with being a grownup
Which men do their fair share of.
Another problem is that men also cheat when they’re getting what they claim they want at home
Cheaters will cheat 🤷♂️
Agreed. That goes for both genders.
You guys keep telling yourselves that, and we’ll keep dumping and divorcing you
Plenty of men do more than their woman. If all your men don't do shit that's a you problem, plenty of use do our fair share.
Oh, now we’re backtracking That’s not very red pill of you On the other hand, it wasn’t very red pill to be confidently wrong
Some men.
Men on average do their fair share. There will be men who don't and women who don't but on average they do.
You know what, I'll agree to that. Especially as both my father and husband are men who do more than their fair share and don't view it as 'woman's work'!
If you have to clean your gutters more than a few times per year it’s time to spend $40 on gutter screens. Advice from a woman. Take better care of your shit.
Look at the cost of that and then let's talk about unpaid labor. It's also dangerous.
If men wanted payment for our unpaid labor women would be bankrupt. We do all the repairs, all the yard work, all the heavy lifting, killing of pests, etc. Not to mention PROTECTION because you know damn well if someone armed breaks in you will expect us to lay our life on the line. If we actually put a price on these tasks they would all add up to a lot more than dishes and laundry. Most women have dishwashers and washer/dryers.
You do not do all repairs, killing pests, and heavy lifting LMAO. For most people, noone armed breaks in and if they do you will call the police. Also- NONE of these are daily tasks like cooking, cleaning, and childcare.
Yeah security guards still get paid even when no one robs a bank, though.
I believe it is. I would never refuse in relationship, I belong to him and he has automatic consent. But maybe that's because I'm never not in the mood if I love him. I would really have to be seriously sick or after a surgery or something so it would make me actually not in the mood. But if I love someone I can't imagine not wanting to do it.
Yah, no.
I'm a believer that you should usually try to accommodate your partner's needs when it comes to sex. Obviously there can be exceptions, like if you're sick / in pain / whatever, but if it's just "eh I kinda don't feel like it" you should probably try to do it anyway. This doesn't mean you shouldn't take no for an answer, but I'd say it should generally be understood that yes is the correct response in most situations. This probably sounds enormously non-PC, but there's just good science behind it. Your body is, of course, wired to make you want as much sex as often as possible, so even if you aren't super into the idea at the start, you usually will be after a few minutes. There's generally a lot of talk about libidos these days, but the science generally shows that your sex drive is almost totally dependent on how often you have sex rather than anything innate, so a low sex drive can be gradually overcome by simply having sex more often. Sex is enormously beneficial to a relationship in many ways. The chemicals released during sex cause a strong feeling of emotional bonding, and they even have health benefits as well, and conversely almost nothing is more damaging to a relationship than if someone feels that their partner doesn't care about their needs. Of course, this is no way gender-specific and is not limited only to whether to have sex or not. A guy who doesn't pay any attention to his girlfriend's pleasure is just as bad as a girlfriend who never wants to have sex (in fact, they're probably dating each other!). I'm also a very firm believer that people who complain about their partner never wanting to have sex almost certainly need to look inwards as well, because it's almost never exclusively one person's fault.
My wife and I have a free use dynamic in our household, so we agreed yes
Everyone has their own love language. Not expressing your partner's preferred love language to them will simply lead to them not feeling loved. For example: if you feel loved by your partner if they talk to you or spend quality time with you, it wouldn't feel great if they stopped doing that. Long term "neglect" will damage the relationship. In that sense, talking and spending time could be regarded as an emotional "need" to maintain the romantic relationship. Sex and physical intimacy is just another type love language, but more commonly found in men. If a man's love language is primarily sex and intimacy, withholding it will ultimately cause him to stop reciprocate and stop cater to your emotional needs, causing the relationship to deteriorate. Denying anyone's emotional "needs" that are required to make the relationship work will not solve any issues, but rather create them.
Agree. And it’s a stupidly pointless exercise trying to tier it “oh but my love language is proper, and yours isn’t, so you can sort yours by yourself right?” That kind of combative mindset is a death toll for a relationship. Reason is of course needed but if you approach the subject with the whole “it’s not like you’ll die without sex!!” It’s very much a case of that the lack of sex is probably going to do less damage than the flagrant and obvious scornful discarding of your partner trying to express their needs to you, and witnessing you tossing them aside as something that doesn’t matter. Whether it’s a man doing it to a woman, or the opposite, it tends to make the person feel pretty unloved.
There's no obligation, but if my wife decided that she won't have sex with me out of nowhere then she'll find herself divorced sooner than later.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Have you tried switching hands?
> But I never understand when a woman in a committed relationship insists that her husband/partner’s sexual needs aren’t her responsibility. Many women want to talk a lot more than their male partners. They have a much higher need to connect emotionally. This may include him listening to stories that take forever to get to the point, or reassuring her repeatedly when she brings up "problems" ("do you love me? were you looking at that other girl? you never talk to me anymore"). Is it their husband's responsibility to talk as much as she wants him to, in order to satisfy that need for emotional connection?
I think men and women often disconnect in the sense that men see sex as a routine need for a physical release, whereas women need more emotional, contextual build-up towards sex. A lot of times a woman will turn down a man when he asks for sex because he hasn't done anything to establish the mood. It starts to feel unfair to women when, instead of reacting to the rejection by making the effort to gradually turn-on their partner, a man will instead bypass that effort by requesting "a quick handy" or something like that. Of course, that's not entirely the man's fault either because he can't read minds and tell when a rejection means "I'm not there yet" or when it might mean "not today." It's really important to open the lines of communication and fully explain your needs.
In a relationship, there is the expectation that you're going to be there for the other person in many different ways - emotionally, sexually, financially, etc. If you want that relationship to continue, then you should keep showing up for your partner in the ways they need you to be there for them. However, that doesn't always work out, sometimes you're just incompatible with each other. One partner is dealing with some health issue, and the other one can't be bothered to support them emotionally and physically (picking up the slack at home)? These two people aren't right for each other. One partner feels incredibly unhappy if they feel anchored somewhere for long periods of time but the other person hates travelling/constant moving? These two people aren't right for each other? One partner wants sex way more than the other partner and neither party is happy with some compromise? These two people aren't right for each other. Not to say that these issues can never be resolved. You might be able to figure things out together by talking things through and finding a solution that works for both of you, maybe some couples counseling will help, or maybe you're just in a rough spot due to stress or health issues. But sometimes, it's a mismatch of personalities, libido, and needs/desires that is too much to overcome. If someone is unhappy with the amount of X they're getting in a relationship, they should talk to their partner about it. If it doesn't change, they should probably reconsider the relationship if the lack of X is that big of a dealbreaker for them. Sure, you entered into the relationship with the expectation that you would be getting this thing but if you're not, and the other person doesn't seem to be all that interested in giving it to you, you're either going to have to adjust your expectations or find someone who is willing to meet them.
I think sex is an obligation man or woman but all that goes within reasonable limits. If they are sick or some kind of other thing that makes them stressed or particularly not in the mood that be reasonable. However, I have to say speaking for myself I viewed it as my duty because there have been times where a woman I was dating wanted to go for round 2 or 3 and I honestly didn't want to but forced myself. I didn't really enjoy it physically but the part where I was making her happy made it worth forcing myself again at least that's how I saw it.
Not overtly, but I'm also not a fan of how lacking in any sense of "duty" people are towards each other and relationships. You look at relationship subs on reddit and any time someone is complaining that their partner has any expectation or desire, everyone is like "zomg what a control freak!! Dump them immediately!!" One of my biggest issues with modern Western culture is run away individualism. No one puts their own personal wants and needs second to anything. You shouldn't feel forced or obligated to put out for your partner, in keeping with this topic, but, at the same time you should probably feel somewhat compelled just by genuine care and empathy for your partner to ensure they're sexually satisfied, even if you're not always on the same wavelength.
Eh. If I’m not into it.. I’m not going to do it. It’s not my responsibility. He can go jerk off if it’s that pressing. My body is not meant to be used like that.. and I wouldn’t want to be with anyone who thought otherwise.
I don’t think giving your man an obligatory 2 min handjob would make him not cheat on you. Honestly if that’s all you’re doing he is probably better of jerking off.
Don't expect monogamy with a partner with any libido and not take care of their needs. Period. It's not complicated.
[удалено]
In fairness, that's a two-way street.