Convincing women that they need to have sex with their husbands

[Anonymous]

Making women feel like it is somehow THEIR problem when they react in an emotionally healthy way to a husband who has hurt them (I.e. By losing respect/desire for them) is a key part of patriarchy. The advice from men (and sadly, women too) is far too often to "lie back and take it"- or that there is something wrong with her if she is not sleeping with her husband on a regular basis. Our culture likes to pathologize female lack of desire for awful men and act like the women are "frigid" for not wanting to have sex with someone who has degraded them and treating them badly. By shaming women who won't have sex with husbands who treat them badly, and acting like the lack of sexual participation on her part is the reason why she is being treated badly, they are able to intimidate women into giving sexual access to men when they don't want to, and when the men themselves have acted in horrible ways to the women involved.

[Anonymous]

I agree. However, we'd say the same to a man denying his wife, right? One of the reasons people get married is regular sex. If either party boycotts, it's unfair. Doesn't the Torah require men to fulfill their wives this way? It's not JUST patriarchy.

[Anonymous]

You know, I used to think it was a myth that women would be convinced that they ought to have sex with their husbands. Sex isn't something you owe men and don't modern women know that?

That's until I found out that one of my friends from college is now a evangelical Christian and at a dinner with a bunch of us from college, she started talking to the other women about how we owe it to our men to give them sex so that they don't corrupt themselves with prostitutes. 0.o

No mention of her pleasure or whether or not her husband was legitimately turning her on or whether assholery on his part may contribute to her lack of sex drive, nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know, I used to think it was a myth that women would be convinced that they ought to have sex with their husbands. Sex isn't something you owe men and don't modern women know that?

That's until I found out that one of my friends from college is now a evangelical Christian and at a dinner with a bunch of us from college, she started talking to the other women about how we owe it to our men to give them sex so that they don't corrupt themselves with prostitutes. 0.o

No mention of her pleasure or whether or not her husband was legitimately turning her on or whether assholery on his part may contribute to her lack of sex drive, nope.

Sadly, a lot of that rhetoric would fit in perfectly on DCUM, which considers itself such an educated place.

But when you try to say women should not be obligated to have sex with their husband? You might as well try to say that murdering toddlers is a fun hobby. People will come after you with everything they have.

We still live in a patriarchy. And that patriarchy is still built on granting men sexual access to women whether women like or not.

[Anonymous]

But if you are married, and you want to stay married, don't you need to do this? Whether it's moral or not, patriarchy or not, if you don't put out for your DH he won't be around for long. Will he?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But if you are married, and you want to stay married, don't you need to do this? Whether it's moral or not, patriarchy or not, if you don't put out for your DH he won't be around for long. Will he?

He should. It's funny how men will go for long periods of time. It getting laid but when they are married they feel they are owed it constantly or hey are being denied something

[Anonymous]

Another point I'd like to throw into the ring is the fact that some women marry men they are never truly attracted to because they panic about the clock running out. In those situations the husband might do all the right things and be a great partner but still end up in a sexless marriage. I'm a woman FWIW but can we at least agree that this very common situation is not fair to the husband?

[Anonymous]

Actually, I think encouraging women to use sex as some sort of carrot is just as sexist and misogynist as telling women to put up and shut up.

My view is this: Sex is a part of marriage. If you are upset with your spouse and don't want to have sex, then you need to figure out how to resolve that. If it can't be resolved and if you don't foresee ever wanting to have sex with your spouse, then you should divorce or agree to an open marriage. This goes for men and women.

It's manipulative to use sex as some sort of punishment or reward.

No, no one should feel forced to have sex. But if you don't want to have sex with your spouse, you shouldn't be married to him/her. If you are staying married for the kids or for some economic reason, then you should at the least allow for an open marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I think encouraging women to use sex as some sort of carrot is just as sexist and misogynist as telling women to put up and shut up.

My view is this: Sex is a part of marriage. If you are upset with your spouse and don't want to have sex, then you need to figure out how to resolve that. If it can't be resolved and if you don't foresee ever wanting to have sex with your spouse, then you should divorce or agree to an open marriage. This goes for men and women.

It's manipulative to use sex as some sort of punishment or reward.

No, no one should feel forced to have sex. But if you don't want to have sex with your spouse, you shouldn't be married to him/her. If you are staying married for the kids or for some economic reason, then you should at the least allow for an open marriage.

No one is saying anyone should use sex as a carrot. What they are saying is that women should be able to listen to THEIR OWN SEXUAL DESIRES including the desire not to have sex. That that urge is totally valid, and totally important. Particularly in situations where someone has hurt the woman- of course she's not going to want to sleep with them.

God. Just once I would love that when people talk about sex it was not centered around the male perspective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I think encouraging women to use sex as some sort of carrot is just as sexist and misogynist as telling women to put up and shut up.

My view is this: Sex is a part of marriage. If you are upset with your spouse and don't want to have sex, then you need to figure out how to resolve that. If it can't be resolved and if you don't foresee ever wanting to have sex with your spouse, then you should divorce or agree to an open marriage. This goes for men and women.

It's manipulative to use sex as some sort of punishment or reward.

No, no one should feel forced to have sex. But if you don't want to have sex with your spouse, you shouldn't be married to him/her. If you are staying married for the kids or for some economic reason, then you should at the least allow for an open marriage.

No one is saying anyone should use sex as a carrot. What they are saying is that women should be able to listen to THEIR OWN SEXUAL DESIRES including the desire not to have sex. That that urge is totally valid, and totally important. Particularly in situations where someone has hurt the woman- of course she's not going to want to sleep with them.

God. Just once I would love that when people talk about sex it was not centered around the male perspective

It's actually sexist for you to assume that believing sex is an important part of marriage is the "male perspective." If my husband stopped having sex with me and expressed to me that he has no desire to have sex with me, that would be a problem. If he was unwilling to try to resolve that problem, I'd want a divorce.

There is nothing "male-centric" about the position that a sexless marriage is a problem, especially if one spouse still has desire and the other does not. Something has to give. I would never advise a woman to have sex if she doesn't want to. I would never advise a man to have sex if he doesn't want to. But if you don't see a resolution, then you should split or reach some sort of an agreement about an open marriage. No spouse should force another spouse to live indefinitely without sex. That's just as controlling and manipulative as telling a spouse you're not going to have sex with him/her, but she/he is not allowed to pursue their sexual desire outside of the marriage.

I saw the thread about the woman forcing herself to have sex with her husband, and it was horrible. At that point, get a divorce or give your spouse permission to have an affair.

If someone has hurt the woman so badly that she doesn't want to sleep with them, then they really shouldn't stay together.

[Anonymous]

You women are scary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I think encouraging women to use sex as some sort of carrot is just as sexist and misogynist as telling women to put up and shut up.

My view is this: Sex is a part of marriage. If you are upset with your spouse and don't want to have sex, then you need to figure out how to resolve that. If it can't be resolved and if you don't foresee ever wanting to have sex with your spouse, then you should divorce or agree to an open marriage. This goes for men and women.

It's manipulative to use sex as some sort of punishment or reward.

No, no one should feel forced to have sex. But if you don't want to have sex with your spouse, you shouldn't be married to him/her. If you are staying married for the kids or for some economic reason, then you should at the least allow for an open marriage.

No one is saying anyone should use sex as a carrot. What they are saying is that women should be able to listen to THEIR OWN SEXUAL DESIRES including the desire not to have sex. That that urge is totally valid, and totally important. Particularly in situations where someone has hurt the woman- of course she's not going to want to sleep with them.

God. Just once I would love that when people talk about sex it was not centered around the male perspective

It's actually sexist for you to assume that believing sex is an important part of marriage is the "male perspective." If my husband stopped having sex with me and expressed to me that he has no desire to have sex with me, that would be a problem. If he was unwilling to try to resolve that problem, I'd want a divorce.

There is nothing "male-centric" about the position that a sexless marriage is a problem, especially if one spouse still has desire and the other does not. Something has to give. I would never advise a woman to have sex if she doesn't want to. I would never advise a man to have sex if he doesn't want to. But if you don't see a resolution, then you should split or reach some sort of an agreement about an open marriage. No spouse should force another spouse to live indefinitely without sex. That's just as controlling and manipulative as telling a spouse you're not going to have sex with him/her, but she/he is not allowed to pursue their sexual desire outside of the marriage.

I saw the thread about the woman forcing herself to have sex with her husband, and it was horrible. At that point, get a divorce or give your spouse permission to have an affair.

If someone has hurt the woman so badly that she doesn't want to sleep with them, then they really shouldn't stay together.

No, it's sexist if you to subsume that the traditionally male libido (I.e. Wanting sex frequently and often) is healthier or more valid than the average female libido (which drastically tends to be less often). It's also sexist of you to assume when I tell a woman to respect her feelings towards sex and her own natural drive, that you assume I am advocating "punishing men". Check yourself and your perspective. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

This thread makes no sense.

You don't have to have sex with your spouse, I suppose. Nor do you have to speak to them. Or be kind. Or go on dates. It's a free country, neglect your spouse, you reap what you sow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, I think encouraging women to use sex as some sort of carrot is just as sexist and misogynist as telling women to put up and shut up.

My view is this: Sex is a part of marriage. If you are upset with your spouse and don't want to have sex, then you need to figure out how to resolve that. If it can't be resolved and if you don't foresee ever wanting to have sex with your spouse, then you should divorce or agree to an open marriage. This goes for men and women.

It's manipulative to use sex as some sort of punishment or reward.

No, no one should feel forced to have sex. But if you don't want to have sex with your spouse, you shouldn't be married to him/her. If you are staying married for the kids or for some economic reason, then you should at the least allow for an open marriage.

No one is saying anyone should use sex as a carrot. What they are saying is that women should be able to listen to THEIR OWN SEXUAL DESIRES including the desire not to have sex. That that urge is totally valid, and totally important. Particularly in situations where someone has hurt the woman- of course she's not going to want to sleep with them.

God. Just once I would love that when people talk about sex it was not centered around the male perspective

It's actually sexist for you to assume that believing sex is an important part of marriage is the "male perspective." If my husband stopped having sex with me and expressed to me that he has no desire to have sex with me, that would be a problem. If he was unwilling to try to resolve that problem, I'd want a divorce.

There is nothing "male-centric" about the position that a sexless marriage is a problem, especially if one spouse still has desire and the other does not. Something has to give. I would never advise a woman to have sex if she doesn't want to. I would never advise a man to have sex if he doesn't want to. But if you don't see a resolution, then you should split or reach some sort of an agreement about an open marriage. No spouse should force another spouse to live indefinitely without sex. That's just as controlling and manipulative as telling a spouse you're not going to have sex with him/her, but she/he is not allowed to pursue their sexual desire outside of the marriage.

I saw the thread about the woman forcing herself to have sex with her husband, and it was horrible. At that point, get a divorce or give your spouse permission to have an affair.

If someone has hurt the woman so badly that she doesn't want to sleep with them, then they really shouldn't stay together.

No, it's sexist if you to subsume that the traditionally male libido (I.e. Wanting sex frequently and often) is healthier or more valid than the average female libido (which drastically tends to be less often). It's also sexist of you to assume when I tell a woman to respect her feelings towards sex and her own natural drive, that you assume I am advocating "punishing men". Check yourself and your perspective. Seriously.

Who says that the average female libido is to not have interest in sex? You are advocating punishing men, because you are saying that basically if a woman doesn't want to have sex in a marriage, that's fine. No, it's not. She should totally respect her own libido, but she shouldn't expect someone else to live without sex because she no longer desires it. That is punishing the spouse.

I have REPEATEDLY said that a woman shouldn't be forced to have sex and shouldn't if she doesn't want to, but I don't think that any spouse, man or woman, should be forced into celibacy either. You aren't just asking people to respect a woman's feelings with regard to sex. You are asking for people to accept that the spouse should live without sex in response to that. If one spouse no longer wants to have sex but the other does, they should split or reach some sort of agreement.

You also keep changing your position. At first, you are saying that women who don't want to have sex because their partners are horrible should be respected. Now you are saying that women naturally have lower libidos and lower interest in sex and that should be respected. It's unclear what you are advocating for. It sounds to me like you think that one spouse (so long as it's the woman) should be able to say she no longer wants to have sex but she doesn't want a divorce and doesn't want her spouse to see sex elsewhere so she expects him to live without sex, and anyone who disagrees with that is sexist because, you know, women *naturally* have lower sex drives. I pretty much disagree with everything about that position.

[Anonymous]

that should read "should NOT be forced into celibacy."