Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

When A Woman Isn't In The Mood: Part II (Female Nature, Sex And Men Alert)
Townhall.com ^ | 12/30/2008 | Dennis Prager

Posted on 12/29/2008 11:11:17 PM PST by goldstategop

n Part I, I made the argument that any woman who is married to a good man and who wants a happy marriage ought to consent to at least some form of sexual relations as much as possible. (Men need to understand that intercourse should not necessarily be the goal of every sexual encounter.)

In Part II, I advance the argument that a wife should do so even when she is not in the mood for sexual relations. I am talking about mood, not about times of emotional distress or illness.

Why?

Here are eight reasons for a woman not to allow not being in the mood for sex to determine whether she denies her husband sex.

1. If most women wait until they are in the mood before making love with their husband, many women will be waiting a month or more until they next have sex. When most women are young, and for some older women, spontaneously getting in the mood to have sex with the man they love can easily occur. But for most women, for myriad reasons -- female nature, childhood trauma, not feeling sexy, being preoccupied with some problem, fatigue after a day with the children and/or other work, just not being interested -- there is little comparable to a man’s “out of nowhere,” and seemingly constant, desire for sex.

2. Why would a loving, wise woman allow mood to determine whether or not she will give her husband one of the most important expressions of love she can show him? What else in life, of such significance, do we allow to be governed by mood?

What if your husband woke up one day and announced that he was not in the mood to go to work? If this happened a few times a year, any wife would have sympathy for her hardworking husband. But what if this happened as often as many wives announce that they are not in the mood to have sex? Most women would gradually stop respecting and therefore eventually stop loving such a man.

What woman would love a man who was so governed by feelings and moods that he allowed them to determine whether he would do something as important as go to work? Why do we assume that it is terribly irresponsible for a man to refuse to go to work because he is not in the mood, but a woman can -- indeed, ought to -- refuse sex because she is not in the mood? Why?

This brings us to the next reasons.

3. The baby boom generation elevated feelings to a status higher than codes of behavior. In determining how one ought to act, feelings, not some code higher than one’s feelings, became decisive: “No shoulds, no oughts.” In the case of sex, therefore, the only right time for a wife to have sex with her husband is when she feels like having it. She never “should” have it. But marriage and life are filled with “shoulds.”

4. Thus, in the past generation we have witnessed the demise of the concept of obligation in personal relations. We have been nurtured in a culture of rights, not a culture of obligations. To many women, especially among the best educated, the notion that a woman owes her husband sex seems absurd, if not actually immoral. They have been taught that such a sense of obligation renders her “property.” Of course, the very fact that she can always say “no” -- and that this “no” must be honored -- renders the “property” argument absurd. A woman is not “property” when she feels she owes her husband conjugal relations. She is simply wise enough to recognize that marriages based on mutual obligations -- as opposed to rights alone and certainly as opposed to moods -- are likely to be the best marriages.

5. Partially in response to the historical denigration of women’s worth, since the 1960s, there has been an idealization of women and their feelings. So, if a husband is in the mood for sex and the wife is not, her feelings are deemed of greater significance -- because women’s feelings are of more importance than men’s. One proof is that even if the roles are reversed -- she is in the mood for sex and he is not -- our sympathies again go to the woman and her feelings.

6. Yet another outgrowth of ’60s thinking is the notion that it is “hypocritical” or wrong in some other way to act contrary to one’s feelings. One should always act, post-’60s theory teaches, consistent with one’s feelings. Therefore, many women believe that it would simply be wrong to have sex with their husband when they are not in the mood to. Of course, most women never regard it as hypocritical and rightly regard it as admirable when they meet their child’s or parent’s or friend’s needs when they are not in the mood to do so. They do what is right in those cases, rather than what their mood dictates. Why not apply this attitude to sex with one’s husband? Given how important it is to most husbands, isn’t the payoff -- a happier, more communicative, and loving husband and a happier home -- worth it?

7. Many contemporary women have an almost exclusively romantic notion of sex: It should always be mutually desired and equally satisfying or one should not engage in it. Therefore, if a couple engages in sexual relations when he wants it and she does not, the act is “dehumanizing” and “mechanical.” Now, ideally, every time a husband and wife have sex, they would equally desire it and equally enjoy it. But, given the different sexual natures of men and women, this cannot always be the case. If it is romance a woman seeks -- and she has every reason to seek it -- it would help her to realize how much more romantic her husband and her marriage are likely to be if he is not regularly denied sex, even of the non-romantic variety.

8. In the rest of life, not just in marital sex, it is almost always a poor idea to allow feelings or mood to determine one’s behavior. Far wiser is to use behavior to shape one’s feelings. Act happy no matter what your mood and you will feel happier. Act loving and you will feel more loving. Act religious, no matter how deep your religious doubts, and you will feel more religious. Act generous even if you have a selfish nature, and you will end with a more a generous nature. With regard to virtually anything in life that is good for us, if we wait until we are in the mood to do it, we will wait too long.

The best solution to the problem of a wife not being in the mood is so simple that many women, after thinking about it, react with profound regret that they had not thought of it earlier in their marriage. As one bright and attractive woman in her 50s ruefully said to me, “Had I known this while I was married, he would never have divorced me.”

That solution is for a wife who loves her husband -- if she doesn’t love him, mood is not the problem -- to be guided by her mind, not her mood, in deciding whether to deny her husband sex.

If her husband is a decent man -- if he is not, nothing written here applies -- a woman will be rewarded many times over outside the bedroom (and if her man is smart, inside the bedroom as well) with a happy, open, grateful, loving, and faithful husband. That is a prospect that should get any rational woman into the mood more often.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: behavior; dennisprager; feelings; femalenature; genderwars; maritalvows; marriage; men; mood; obligations; partii; psychology; relationships; sex; townhall
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-524 next last
To: goldstategop

read the first one now I gotta read part II

thanks


101 posted on 12/30/2008 5:10:53 AM PST by Rightly Biased (McCain is the reason Sarah Lost <><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

read


102 posted on 12/30/2008 5:11:54 AM PST by sauropod (An expression of deep worry and concern failed to cross either of Zaphod's faces - hitchhiker's guid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

placemat...


103 posted on 12/30/2008 5:12:27 AM PST by Gilbo_3 ("JesusChrist 08"...Trust in the Lord......=...LiveFReeOr Die...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

You nailed it. It’s like a guy complaining the Sox won’t let him play centerfield for them, and never looking at himself to realize he doesn’t belong there.


104 posted on 12/30/2008 5:12:44 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Men are always ready.

Horse hockey. Why the market for the male stimulants, then? Surely all the customers don't have war injuries ...

Men may *think* they're "always ready," possibly because popular culture tells them they should be, but often enough, they really aren't. They're sick, or they've been working out too much and not taking their vitamins, or they had too much to drink, or they're stressed out about work or money or a race, or there's been a lot of *activity* over several days ... and then they just, don't.

Absolutely, flippin, hogwash being peddled here.

105 posted on 12/30/2008 5:14:57 AM PST by Tax-chick (You exist, okay? YOU EXIST! Now stop talking to me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
On one hand you make perfect sense. On the same hand you have an excellent Churchill quote for your tagline. Then on the other hand, you go and call yourself “Jeff Gordon.” I'm soooo conflicted....
106 posted on 12/30/2008 5:15:36 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: marsh2
Women don’t want to be merely a physical convenience secured by marriage to be used regularly in that manner.

Bingo. If a guy just needs to void his prostate, then he can find another man or a goat. Any orifice will do, right?

107 posted on 12/30/2008 5:22:18 AM PST by Tax-chick (You exist, okay? YOU EXIST! Now stop talking to me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Any man who can’t get his woman “in the mood” in under five minutes is doing it wrong. If she won’t even give him the chance, that’s another issue.


108 posted on 12/30/2008 5:23:39 AM PST by nina0113 (Hugh Akston is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
It may sound harsh but if a man is inept, he will be lonely, a lot.

As long as he insists upon placing the blame for his loneliness on his wife, he will stay lonely.

109 posted on 12/30/2008 5:24:29 AM PST by Jeff Gordon ("An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Hegewisch Dupa
Then on the other hand, you go and call yourself “Jeff Gordon. I'm soooo conflicted....”

What if my real name just happened to Jeffery Earl Gordon?

110 posted on 12/30/2008 5:27:58 AM PST by Jeff Gordon ("An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
Oh. My apologies. And I thought “Dupa” was a burdensome name to bear...
111 posted on 12/30/2008 5:30:13 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: malkee
That is the problem with the GOP and why they have such problems attracting and promoting women. Women are completely objectified.

So what do you want the GOP to do? Send you roses? Tell you it loves you?

The point of getting involved in influencing government is to promote the policies that it make it most likely you can sleep or walk down the street in safety, and that the lights come on when you flick the switch and that there is food on supermarket shelves. It really isn't a matter of emotion unless the emotion is fear of what fools are capable of doing.

And with regard to the lights coming on and the food being available it almost always means keeping government out of the hair of those doing the work to make it happen.

And if some politician told you he loved you, would you believe it?

112 posted on 12/30/2008 5:41:48 AM PST by Tribune7 (Obama wants to put the same crowd that ran Fannie Mae in charge of health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
You know Prager has his experiences and complaints, and he's basically right in that a wife should not withhold.

OTOH, you are also just as right in that a husband should not withhold and that it is just as big a problem

It's even in the Bible.

113 posted on 12/30/2008 5:54:17 AM PST by Tribune7 (Obama wants to put the same crowd that ran Fannie Mae in charge of health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
In my opinion, Prager's an elderly adolescent with nothing to say that hasn't been said better by others. It's true, on the stopped-clock principle, that some of his general points are supported by legitimate sources.

However, there's "withholding," and then there's "just not happening." Sometimes men just can't, and honest ones will admit it. And yes, a man can do his business even if his wife is crouched head-down over the toilet, or five kids have diarrhea, or she's just had surgery, but decent people think that's filthy, don't we?

Find a man or a goat, if you're that Islamic. (Rhetorical "you," not you personally.)

114 posted on 12/30/2008 6:00:06 AM PST by Tax-chick (You exist, okay? YOU EXIST! Now stop talking to me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
In my opinion, Prager's an elderly adolescent with nothing to say that hasn't been said better by others.

I don't think he's talking about what you think he's talking about.

115 posted on 12/30/2008 6:10:53 AM PST by Tribune7 (Obama wants to put the same crowd that ran Fannie Mae in charge of health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

This is my opinion of pretty much his whole oeuvre. However, I know plenty of others disagree. Cebu.


116 posted on 12/30/2008 6:14:59 AM PST by Tax-chick (You exist, okay? YOU EXIST! Now stop talking to me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

And so are you. I feel sorry for your husband.


117 posted on 12/30/2008 6:19:13 AM PST by mikeus_maximus (In matters of style, swim with the current.; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.-- Thomas J)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: svxdave
Dennis Prager has a woman who comes on his radio program named Allison Armstrong. She is an expert in male-female relationships and is quite interesting to listen to. She believes that men need to be appreciated and that many women don’t do this which eventually leads to the “breaking point”.

That's why the Scriptures tell men to love their wives, but tells women to respect their husbands. Studies have shown that each is the greatest emotional need of the respective sex. The Author of the "owners manual" knew what He was saying.

118 posted on 12/30/2008 6:24:50 AM PST by mikeus_maximus (In matters of style, swim with the current.; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.-- Thomas J)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Cebu?


119 posted on 12/30/2008 6:34:52 AM PST by Tribune7 (Obama wants to put the same crowd that ran Fannie Mae in charge of health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

Filler word, same function as, “Oh, well,” or “Whatever.”


120 posted on 12/30/2008 6:36:13 AM PST by Tax-chick (You exist, okay? YOU EXIST! Now stop talking to me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 521-524 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson