[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
Humm… I guess I reached the opposite conclusion. [/quote]
Seeing as it is the huffington post, pretty sure you can feel good about your conclusions here.
[quote]stefan128 wrote:
I am only 21 so this article doesn’t mean much to me but I felt like for most of it near the beginning the author was attacking the male by saying he needed the sex to feel good about himself and whatever. Rarely said anything about the female. That is just me though. [/quote]
I think what the article and the man stated was pretty accurate… but then again… I’m not 21(25) anymore.
[quote]orion wrote:
And just when I thought marriage looked so good.
I have a serious question though.
Why do women who do not fuck their man object when he gets it somewhere else?
The only way this would make sense to me is when its a powerplay, first you monopolize a mans sexuality, then you manipulate him with it.
I also believe thats what it really is, but what stories do women tell themselves to make it all ok?
[/quote]
“the pussy trap” per Kat Williams
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
The idea that women?s sex drive can match men?s is politically correct piffle, says Sewell, who is 45. Her memoir, I?d Rather Eat Chocolate: Learning to Love My Low Libido, recounts one frustration after another in a buildup to an anticlimactic conclusion: she?s just not that into sex. Such a pronouncement may not be titillating, but it?s groundbreaking, says Sandra Tsing Loh in the March issue of the Atlantic.
[/quote]
A couple doesn’t even need much libido to have a great sex life. I wake up horny every morning but I take a shower then head for the kitchen and throw down 5 eggs and a banana. At that point I’m not much in the mood for sex. I hate sex on a full stomach, but I go upstairs anyway and wake up my wife. I doubt she’s horny when I wake her up but ten minutes later she meets me down in our spare bedroom anyway.
I’m not horny and she’s probably not horny but we cuddle, stroke each other and keep progressing until we are both in the mood. Then we fucking do it. That is our routine every morning. All you need is enough libido to get turned on. You don’t need to be itching to go before you even do it.
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
The idea that women?s sex drive can match men?s is politically correct piffle, says Sewell, who is 45. Her memoir, I?d Rather Eat Chocolate: Learning to Love My Low Libido, recounts one frustration after another in a buildup to an anticlimactic conclusion: she?s just not that into sex. Such a pronouncement may not be titillating, but it?s groundbreaking, says Sandra Tsing Loh in the March issue of the Atlantic.
[/quote]
A couple doesn’t even need much libido to have a great sex life. I wake up horny every morning but I take a shower then head for the kitchen and throw down 5 eggs and a banana. At that point I’m not much in the mood for sex. I hate sex on a full stomach, but I go upstairs anyway and wake up my wife. I doubt she’s horny when I wake her up but ten minutes later she meets me down in our spare bedroom anyway.
I’m not horny and she’s probably not horny but we cuddle, stroke each other and keep progressing until we are both in the mood. Then we fucking do it. That is our routine every morning. All you need is enough libido to get turned on. You don’t need to be itching to go before you even do it.[/quote]
Sincere kudos to you and your wife for making it work. I think when people say that relationships take work, this is exactly what they’re referring to. Not the soul-sucking arguments and the daily grind that wears you down, but the large and small acts that bring you closer.
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
I was expecting some of you to be offended at the analogy of lack of physical intimacy being like a little boy standing in his crib waiting to be picked up.[/quote]
We’re all kids really, no one suddenly flipped a switch and became an adult.
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
Over lunch, the Puffs had an interesting discussion about this article from today’s WSJ. I thought some of you might enjoy discussing it with your significant other. There’s some interesting research about sex and long-term pair bonding.
From the WSJ - He Says ‘More’ and She Says 'No"
[/quote]
I am from Eastern Europe,so let me offer my perspective as an outsider.
- First,this is very ATYPICAL couple picked up to represent a typical couple.Mormon people who got married virgins at 21 years of age.Very very atypical.
2.They said to had high expectations of their first sex,but were dissapointed.This tells me theres very low sexual chemistry between them.
3.the women experienced a trauma that further aggravated the situation.
4.now the fairy tale ending-she reads a book and everything is cake and creams suddenly.Does author of this article gets a fat percentage of the book? Is book promotion the secret intention of the article writer?
5.In my region a stay-at-home mum is considered a lazy slacker that watches a TV half a a day and it is believed that kids that dont go to kindergarten and socialize with other children turn into asocial spoiled geeeks.On top of that,not providing any sex to your wife/husband is considered that you are giving up on relationship.Its only considered normal in very old age.
I am just stating what is mentality here.
Thanks for the cliffs notes, I posted the link off my phone and didn’t even read it properly… kind of glad though since it was a load of rubbish lol
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
A weak opinion in every respect.[/quote]
Cliff’s Notes.
The WSJ publishes a very short article about ONE couple’s experience and how they improved that aspect of their marriage.
They get criticized for not including same-sex relationships.
They are criticized for not including other scenarios where women have a higher “priority for sex” than their man.
They author dismisses the WSJ as once again portraying sex “as a duty instead of a pleasure”. Humm… I guess I reached the opposite conclusion. [/quote]
I can’t really blame the chick for not getting wet at the site of this guy.
[quote]SmilingPolitely wrote:
I can’t really blame the chick for not getting wet at the site of this guy. [/quote]
The girl isn’t much of a looker either.
[quote]SmilingPolitely wrote:
I can’t really blame the chick for not getting wet at the site of this guy. [/quote]
Just because you wouldn’t doesn’t mean that others wouldn’t.
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
2.They said to had high expectations of their first sex,but were dissapointed.This tells me theres very low sexual chemistry between them.[/quote]
Now hold on a minute not necessarily. Was anyone’s first time really THAT good? I mean I wasn’t disappointed, because I knew better than to have high expectations lol, but me and her were both virgins and it was comically bad, but we did have good sexual chemistry and went on to have some great times.
[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Wow, a story about a couple of virgins who couldn’t do the deed before they got married…and they ended up having sexual issues…and then they fixed them.
Just absolutely groundbreaking work here!
Okay everyone, you can all go home now, we have solved all relationship and gender issues.
What is this CNN? Shame on you WSJ.[/quote]
I agree with this. There wasn’t any substance to the article at all and certainly nothing to shed light into the differences between men and women regarding sex drive.
OP, is there a specific discussion you were hoping to drive with this article? I don’t see how you can make any conclusions with what was written here. And there’s no such thing as “average” when it comes to people.
james
[quote]csulli wrote:
Now hold on a minute not necessarily. Was anyone’s first time really THAT good? I mean I wasn’t disappointed, because I knew better than to have high expectations lol, but me and her were both virgins and it was comically bad, but we did have good sexual chemistry and went on to have some great times.[/quote]
I also agree with this. Maybe the pair had unrealistic expectations for what sex is and feels like. Maybe they literally expected to see stars and didn’t so were disappointed. And it’s never that good when one or the other doesn’t know what they are doing. It’s like the first time you squat or deadlift. Your form sucks and you hate it. But time and practice it all improves.
james
I apologize for not responding to every comment. I’ve read them all, and have really enjoyed the discussion. I usually stay away from this topic here because it tends to spiral down fairly quickly, but people have overall been really respectful and interesting. Thanks.
Shorty-Blitz - Hey, thanks for sharing the Huffington link. I didn’t mean to flame you. It’s interesting to read the counter-points. I read quite a few of the comments and there were some really thoughtful ones, along with some CRAZY. I always want to empathize with some of the feminists, but am often disappointed by the people on the extreme who see everything through the “this is patriarchy” lens.
Beans - Thanks for your comments. Both insightful and funny. And I think that was a complement about my hair. Thank you!
On Edge - Nice. Thanks for sharing. Some people may think it’s not very spontaneous or romantic to have a routine, but most of us with busy families and demanding work schedules can see the wisdom. It puts maintaining physical intimacy in your marriage as a priority, so it’s not something that gets left out because the day got away from you and you’re both exhausted. Like the old object lesson where you have some rocks (the important stuff) and sand (the small stuff) to put in a jar. You put the rocks in first, then let the sand fill in. If you try to do it the other way, you will have a jar full of sand, and won’t have any room left for the rocks. I hope I described that well enough for you to know what I mean. I’m sure you and your wife are better for starting your day out with your relationship as the first and most important thing. I’d think it would help to insulate you against all the stress that is going to hit you as the day goes on.
BlueColarTr8n - I appreciated your point about drives/needs. And off topic, but I have seen some of your training video on the check-in thread. It’s nice to see someone in my age bracket who is using all the gears, not driving around in first or second all the time. It’s inspiring, but watching you usually makes me feel like I need a nap.
Csulli - About first times. From a woman’s perspective, I didn’t think much about the comment that the first time wasn’t “the greatest ever”. In my experience, the first few times a woman can expect some pain or discomfort. And the sex response in women is more of a learned thing than in men. It’s healthy to just assume that if it isn’t awesome the first time, it might take some patience and practice, not that you are doomed because you have no chemistry. Lower your expectations. Also, about the wedding night a lot of people are exhausted, drunk, stressed, and have the expectation that this should go down as the best ever…All of those things almost guarantee that it won’t be. The couple in the article said that despite the rough start, they had frequent sex for the first year or two, so they did eventually get on their game and then lost it. I think the fact that they were inexperienced when they married is almost irrelevant. Besides, even if you have been with 40 partners, you would still need to “learn” your wife. I don’t think having a lot of sex partners, particularly in a young man, necessarily makes him into the vagina whisperer. 
Skelac - Thanks for sharing another perspective. See my notes to Csulli above. Also, Mormons are not unique in this. Here in the states, there are a lot of Evangelical Christians and others who will at least attempt to keep sex in a committed relationship or marriage.
Atypical - Sorry you didn’t find the article or discussion here interesting. I wasn’t sure what to expect from Tnation, but I’ve enjoyed reading all the comments here. People have been really frank and respectful overall.
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Wow, a story about a couple of virgins who couldn’t do the deed before they got married…and they ended up having sexual issues…and then they fixed them.
Just absolutely groundbreaking work here!
Okay everyone, you can all go home now, we have solved all relationship and gender issues.
What is this CNN? Shame on you WSJ.[/quote]
I agree with this. There wasn’t any substance to the article at all and certainly nothing to shed light into the differences between men and women regarding sex drive.
OP, is there a specific discussion you were hoping to drive with this article? I don’t see how you can make any conclusions with what was written here. And there’s no such thing as “average” when it comes to people.
james
[/quote]
A couple of things occur to me when I read this. First, it seems that people are trying to read too much into the article. The article is in fact a weekly column called “Bonds” (not the glue type saiyan) where the author tries “to explore the manifold aspects of human interactions, whether at home, at work or among friends.” It is not supposed to be a comprehensive expose on human sexuality.
What I read was a column focusing on one couple’s challenges in dealing with their sexual relationship. The take home message for me was that sex fills far more than physical needs and that the emotional side of it is often overlooked, especially in the case of men. I don’t think that the idea is to educate so much as provide insight - maybe it will ring a bell for some people, but not educate the masses.
[quote][quote]csulli wrote:
Now hold on a minute not necessarily. Was anyone’s first time really THAT good? I mean I wasn’t disappointed, because I knew better than to have high expectations lol, but me and her were both virgins and it was comically bad, but we did have good sexual chemistry and went on to have some great times.[/quote]
atypical1 wrote:
I also agree with this. Maybe the pair had unrealistic expectations for what sex is and feels like. Maybe they literally expected to see stars and didn’t so were disappointed. And it’s never that good when one or the other doesn’t know what they are doing. It’s like the first time you squat or deadlift. Your form sucks and you hate it. But time and practice it all improves.
james [/quote]
This actually mirrors what on edge said earlier about love being a choice. Sure, we can experience problems but we decide to let those problems be a wall or a speed bump. We can choose to continue to practice, or we can choose to give up and find something/someone else.
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
Csulli - About first times. From a woman’s perspective, I didn’t think much about the comment that the first time wasn’t “the greatest ever” The first few times a woman can expect some pain or discomfort. And the sex response in women is more of a learned thing than in men. It’s healthy to just assume that if it isn’t awesome the firs time, it might take some patience and practice, not that you are doomed because you have no chemistry. The couple in the article said that despite the rough start, they had frequent sex for the first year or two, so they did eventually get on their game and then lost it. I think the fact that they were inexperienced when they married is almost irrelevant. Besides, even if you have been with 40 partners, you would still need to “learn” your wife. I don’t think having a lot of sex partners, particularly in a young man, necessarily makes him into the vagina whisperer. :)[/quote]
This comment supports what research has shown concerning those who are more content with their sex lives. Generally speaking, men and women who have been married a while and been completely faithful tend to be much more satisfied with their sex lives than other groups. This makes total sense, based on what Puff has written above: “the sex response in women is more of a learned thing”. It takes time and practice for a couple to get their groove on, and once they learn each other and get that groove on, it only gets better.
