Reply to S/O: Ladies - Would you have sex more often

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "S/O: Ladies - Would you have sex more often"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]All of these posts about how women need a connection to have sex with their husbands are hilarious after reading the "I can't get nasty with my DH" thread where so many posters talk about how they are able to let go and enjoy themselves more when there ISN'T a connection.  In other words, the OP talked about how she could really get nasty when it was casual sex but with her DH she holds back and is thus very unsatisfied with their sex life.  The problem isn't him, it's her own issues sabotaging their sex life.

I am beginning to believe the theory that women just get bored of fucking the same man and that's why marriages suffer from lack of sex over time.  Obviously, every case is different, but I think this probably applies in general and until women come to grips with this and figure out how to make that work to the advantage of the marriage, this will be the undoing of many a marriage's sexual component.[/quote]

I'm a guy, and I tend to agree with the frustration here. But, I also tend to believe that most people aren't intentionally deceptive. So, trying to understand the dynamic, I think what's going on is:

1. Nasty sex with relative strangers -- the newness gets the sex drive going. The lack of real connection means there isn't the emotional vulnerability, and if the person were inclined to judge her, she could walk away very easily.

2. Needing a connection with a husband -- when novelty is removed from the equation, a woman's sex drive needs a lot more to wake it up than a guy's does. Emily Nagoski, a sex researcher, talks about a dual control model for women's libido -- essentially a brake and a gas pedal. Women have a lot more things that seem to activate their brake pedal than men do (for example, all of those "to do" lists in their head.) I think that may be what a lot of women are talking about when they talk about the "connection." Someone who helps them ease up on the brake because he helps reduce the "to dos" or at least doesn't increase them; someone who isn't provoking resentment; someone who won't bring a lot of negative judgment. Once the brake is taken care of, then some of the sexy accelerator stuff has a chance of working. (Under this dual control model, I think a lot of what's going on with the strangers is that the novelty turbo charges the accelerator.) See: http://www.thedirtynormal.com/blog/2014/06/22/the-dual-control-model/

[/quote]

I'll read the article when I'm at a computer that will let me access it.  The rest of your post is very insightful and informative, but it still doesn't get the the heart of the matter:  why is it incumbent on men to get women to own their own shit?  If a woman's sex drive is a slave to her own (no doubt subconsciously) self-imposed limitations, why is it my fucking job to get her past them? Especially when it's more often than not just a bait and switch:  do more (x, y or z) and we'll have more sex.  Maybe that works for a while, but soon enough it's back to the same old pattern.  Why?  Because SHE isn't addressing her own issues, just putting it on the husband to address some external factor that is really nothing more than an excuse for her not to deal with her own issues.   [/quote]

why is it incumbent on men to get women to own their own shit?  Because men want women to have sex with them.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics