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.
>>So if you are over 40 and a woman, where are all these supposed horndog husbands?<<
I was 44 when I was “cast free” after 20 years. There was this 28 year old receptionist that had “attributes” that most the guys in the building liked to discuss from time to time. Anyway, she had always given me a nice smile when I came in.
Well, I actually “dated” her for a bit but it was like dating one of my daughters. She looked fantastic but I could not relate to her at all. She invited me to a cabin in the mountains for a weekend and I just couldn’t bring myself to start a relationship with this woman. She was nice and, frankly the natural man in me would have truly savored that weekend. But there was no common ground beyond the plumbing being compatible so I opted out.
Then I went to my 25th class reunion and met (sort of re-met although we had never dated) the future Mrs. Robroy. She is attractive, smart, thoughtful and all those other great attributes I love about women in general but in her specifically. She has been my best friend for over ten years. We relate. Not to trivialize, but when I make some obscure reference to a 1960’s event, she immediately catches on. It matters.
And at 55 we both still want each other - very much!
She also firmly agrees with what she read in the book, “The Submissive Wife”. The book is not for men. It is for women. We both understand that we cannot control whether or not our spouse loves us, but we can control whether or not we love our spouse. If both of us feel that way, the rest will take care of itself. If one doesn’t, well, that’s how I got the opportunity to meet my wife. :)
That is just pure and utter BS.
John, spend some time on the Sarah Palin threads.
If you want to blame feminists, that’s fine. It doesn’t do either of us any good.
>>But what I resent is that he is thinking that all women are like that.<<
He’s not.
If you are, learn from his words. If not, skip it. It certainly is not a problem my wife has. My first wife could have really learned from it, but she was not really teachable and still isn’t (from what I hear from time to time).
>>If you treat her right she will treat you right..;)
Treat your wife like a queen and she will treat you like a king and you might get it every knight!<<
Nope. Depends on the woman. Some simply will NOT respond. It is for them that this article is written. He is trying to help them to understand the “error of their ways” and the true consequences of their actions.
>>Sex should be more than a bodily function. Women don’t want to be merely a physical convenience secured by marriage to be used regularly in that manner. Wooing is the art of conveying to the woman that she is an individual person, worthy of spending time and conversing with. It is also conveying to that woman that she is a sexually exciting female worth flirting with and demonstrating courtship behavior upon. That means a man must approach courtship considering the values and validations of the female from her point of view if he wants to evoke a positive response.<<
And what if that doesn’t work?
>>If a guy just needs to void his prostate, then he can find another man or a goat. Any orifice will do, right?<<
If that is all he wants, yes. Unfortunately for married guys they have, via the marriage vow, limited their options. But fortunately for them another person, during the same ceremony, has committed to fulfilling that role! ;)
>>It’s noxious feminist claptrap that reduces a husband to the status of a Garfunkel running about begging for scraps.<<
Heh, heh.
You mean, “whupped”.
I see it all around me. It used to be me, actually. It makes it easy to spot.
This is so true. At the last hospital where I worked, a friend of mine was talking to a co-worker about marriage. This guy said he was always careful to be a gentleman around his wife, minding his manners (no crude bodily noises, functions, etc), well groomed and respectful. He got sex anytime he wanted. Everything set the stage. The attitude and the nature of the relationship determined the outcome.
>>No it doesn’t. You and certain other male posters just don’t want to hear about sex from a woman’s point of view. It just doesn’t matter to you. And for that matter, most women don’t matter to you either. That is the problem with the GOP and why they have such problems attracting and promoting women. Women are completely objectified.<<
Sorry. I gotta call BS on that one. It is also narcissistic. This article is about women married to GOOD men who DO care.
I was married to a woman where I took out the trash regularly, kept my messes cleaned up, in the last year bought her a motorhome, fancy jewelry, clothes, listened, went to “relationship” classes and read books.
What I got for it was over a year of forced celebacy followed by divorce papers completely out of the blue. Oh, and I later learned that during that time she socked away $12,000 in a separate bank account.
A comical side note. During that time she accused me of sexual abuse to the pastor but could give no specifics (there were none to give). His response was “you know, withholding sex is a form of sexual abuse”. She was done. With him and with me.
This article is not about men using women. It is about helping women understand their man. There are also articles helping men understand women. I’ve read dozens, if not hundreds, of them.
But that is outside the scope of this particular article. Speaking as a man, this article nails it. And because my wife came out of the box understanding this, I am a vary happy husband indeed. And, frankly, she is enjoying the fruit of all the reading I did.
Funny thing is, it is not work. I enjoy it.
Don't forget "Take out the garbage."
>>Do guys understand that their actions contribute to an unhealthy relationship?<<
Yes. I’ve read many articles about it actually. But an article can not be all things to all people. What good would a “how to please your woman” article be in Cosmo? This article, like all articles, has a limited scope. Within those limits it nails its subject.
On a side note, if you do not like the way God wired men, you’re gonna have to take it up with Him.
Thanks for your story. Sort of gives me hope that there can be life after divorce in your 40’s. Thanks again for sharing.
>>Sex should be more than a bodily function.<<
Two questions:
1. Always?
2. If the answer to number 1 is “yes”, then why?
>>Can there be lust in a marriage? And is it right?<<
If the lust is for your spouse, then the answers to your question are yes and yes.
Has your wife ever read “Fascinating Womanhood”? Opinion?
>>Yeah, go ahead and keep expecting and treating sex in a relationship as a woman’s “obligation.” At that rate I’ll never be in the mood for you. <<
Fortunately, you are not my wife.
You miss the point of the article. It is not that man that he is telling to see it as the woman’s obligation. It is the woman.
He is also paraphrasing Biblical scripture:
Ephesians 5: 22-24
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
And this one really hits home on the subject:
1 Corinthians 7: 1-5
Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
>>When sex is as good for a woman as it is for a man, she will want it just about as often. Men who complain that their wives are never in the mood should look to their skills as a lover.<<
Being in my second marriage I can tell you that “can be” BS. The two relationships are night and day, at least regarding the topic at hand.
With some people, if their mind is made up about a thing, nothing you can do will change it.
Sometimes sex is NEVER good for a woman because of the demons she carries through from childhood. I pitty the men who marry them. Especially if they have a normal libido.
But they’ll know what to look for the second time around - and they will almost certainly get that “second chance”, usually at the wifes behest!
Notice I said “certain” other male posters. I wasn’t referring to every man, thank God. And your point reinforces the main point I was making in my first point on this thread — some women are just selfish. And the men who have married them either have to deal with it, or get out, as you did. BTW, I think most women very well understand men’s need for sex.
>>Doesn’t and shouldn’t<<
From where do you get this pearl of wisdom. The support for the pearl to which you are responding is everywhere.
IOW, Who told you that and why did you believe them?
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.