Reply to How many men would stay w/o sex

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "How many men would stay w/o sex "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Although this happens, it's not as common as a healthy wife with no physical problems preventing her from having sex, she just doesn't want to and refuses.  The better question is, how many men in THAT situation would stay?[/quote]

"She just doesn't want to and refuses" so you want to have sex with someone against their will? Should they just lie back and take it? What on earth is wrong with you?[/quote]

Where did he say that? Wow, gaslight much? When you marry someone and unilaterally decide to take sex off the table is the pinnacle of selfish. [/quote]

It's almost like sex involves TWO interested and enthusiastic parties, and that people's libidos can change with age, relationship status/closeness, life events, etc. Get over it. [/quote]

sute. but if you love someone and are not a selfish jerk like you, you try to meet their needs. its not surprising to see you come back with anotner "me, me, me" comment to justify your selfishness. [/quote]

Sex is not actually a need, that's ridiculous. Sure, it makes life more fun when you have an active and engaged sex life. Then again, why is it expected that the male sex drive takes primacy? After all, many women consider themselves to have an active, fulfilling sex life when they have sex, say, once a week or maybe even once a month. For many women that's more than enough, and they're excited and fulfilled by such frequency. Why is it that the male libido is supposed to set the tone and pace, to the point where men will whine about a "sexless marriage" when that's clearly not the case and theyre still having regular sex with their wife, only it's maybe just ever two weeks instead of every day the way they'd prefer? Many women prefer quality over quantity, i.e. a really amazing sexual encounter where THEY GET TO ORGASM (not just the husband) over daily rushed sex and quickies, that men seem to like more. So if the woman is happy with the frequency, why are we supposed to treat it like some kind of crisis? Meanwhile, when women bend to men's desires, and force themselves to have sex every few days regardless of whether they want it or not, it's just taken as de rigeur, "healthy compromise". There's such a double standard. [/quote]

One, sex is litteraly a biological need. This is how we have continued to exist for millions of years. Two, you’re moving the goalposts. If you’re having sex with your husband, then you didn’t decide to stop having sex as the poster you replied to originally suggested. Three, in a loving, caring relationship no one’s needs are more important. If you know your husband likes it every day, but you like it twice a month, maybe you talk about it and find a compromise. You don’t do it as often as he likes maybe but you also just find a way to connect even if it’s not the perfect mood/situation you need. Marriage is mostly about compromise and sex is no different. [/quote]

If sex was legitimately a "need", half the men on this forum, according to them, wouldnt be around anymore. And yet most of them stay, and just whine and moan about it and make up victim nonsense towards their wife. [/quote]

I think these discussions here tend to founder on arguments over the meaning of the term “need,” which ultimately aren’t very productive and often seem to involve bad faith from some on both sides.  Let’s use a more neutral terminology.  For most men, there is a level of sexual activity that is, let’s say, “essential to happiness.”  This of course varies quite a lot for different people.  The real issue is what is to be done when a relationship evolves in certain ways that make it impossible for one of the parties to be happy in it. I also think there is a little bit of gaslighting going on among some who would rather obscure the fundamental divide.  Many women here seem to think that sex is a discretionary, dispensable aspect of marriage, while many men think that it’s a fundamental aspect of marriage that cannot be replaced by any level of other positive qualities in a marriage.  Neither view is wrong, IMO, both are defensible. The question is what to do when spouses are at impasse on that issue, and it’s not an easy one.[/quote]

Well, I think people just need to stop using the word need when they talk about sex.

Because it’s not a need.

I think it’s fine for a man to say that it’s want that they have and it’s a dealbreaker if there’s no sex in the marriage and that they will leave.

Also, I think it is valid for a woman to say if you don’t make a certain amount of money and keep me in a home that I will be happy in and a school for my kids that will make me happy. I will leave you for another man.

That’s not a need that’s a want both are the same. Better are quite selfish, but they are the same.[/quote]

Here you go you intellectually lacking moron.

https://www.cnn.com/world/maslows-hierarchy-of-needs-explained-wellness-cec/index.html[/quote]

[b]So you just proved her point, [/b]lol. Sex is nowhere near the bottom of the pyramid, which confers life threatening "needs" in the sense that we popularly use the term "need".  Most people would never, ever list making art or music as a NEED or necessity, or that someone is in crisis and being deeply negatively affected because theyre, say, unable to play the violin. Same goes for the other things at the top of the pyramid, including sex. Not a need in any real sense of the term, not in terms of the popular conception of need. Unless you drop everything and panic because your poetic wife is unable to spend the afternoon writing, then you need to check yourself as to why you feel everyone should cater to your sexual cravings/wants. It makes you look petulant and incredibly selfish/immature. [/quote]

Isn’t it great when they do that, and then crow that they’ve “won?” Gloriousl[/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