When does a woman owe you sex chart

Page 5 of 9 [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Marcia
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,218

25 Jul 2014, 2:20 am

AlexanderDantes wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
Not all men think this way,but some think that if they buy dinner you owe them something in return.If you are not into them they come back with names like dick tease,frigid.dyke,ice princess,user,etc...
Of couser there are some women that will go out with a man to get something,gold diggers,neither sex is perfect.


What the hell? Why are you even accepting dinner from men if you aren't engaging with them? In the same way, women shouldn't reciprocate or accept anything from men that they have no attraction for, why are you accepting dinner from them if you have no intention of engaging with them? I can understand if it's a blind date but other than that, shouldn't happen..

Maybe if women didn't flirt or absorb attention with no intention of engaging, this kind of behavior wouldn't happen.


Having dinner with someone is engaging with them. Just because you choose to spend time with someone, sharing time, conversation and a meal together doesn't mean that you will or should choose to do anything else with that person.

To think otherwise is to see women as little more than a lump of flesh which can be bought and sold.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,715
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

25 Jul 2014, 5:52 am

If she gives me oral, do I owe her oral? :lol:



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,777
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

25 Jul 2014, 5:57 am

tarantella64 wrote:
Using sex as reward/punishment is a mind game and, unless you're in a consensual kinky-sh** relationship, pretty f****d up.

As for the whole "our body" thing...mm nope. There are several things that are mine and don't belong to anyone else:

- my body
- my mind
- my time
- my money
- my talents
- my work.

I may decide to share them with someone else, but that doesn't mean I'm obliged to make it a permanent condition. And, having been in a marriage to someone who lied in pretty important ways on the way in, I'm very grateful I didn't go all romantic and stayed quite practical about what's mine. If I hadn't, my kid wouldn't have a house today, and likely wouldn't have college plans, either. A chunk of my retirement would also be gone.

If someone else is not enthusiastic about having sex with me, but is doing it as a favor? Egh, no. Just no. I don't need a whole other person as a sex toy. (I'm actually somewhat surprised by how hard that idea creeps me out.)

This whole business with "but you'll break up the marriage" as a goad...likewise, no. My not wanting something my spouse wants isn't 'me breaking up the marriage', it's him wanting something that's not in the marriage just then. And which may or may not come back. If he wants it regularly and bad enough to leave, well, so be it. If he's willing to walk out on kids to go get it, I won't have much respect for him, but so it goes. After ten years of being the responsible party here as a single mom, I really have little sympathy for the whole 'my needs!' thing once kids come along.

Someone not having sex with you because they don't want sex -- that's not being mean.

That's a self-centered attitude. I think that putting the needs of others ahead of my own and making that the focus of how I relate to my wife works out better. As an example, I never see a penny of my own paycheck. I rarely buy things for myself. All I know is the lights are still on, water still runs, and we have plenty food. She does bring financial issues to my attention. Most of the time, I'm, like, "hey, you're smart. Sounds good. Make it happen." Sometimes it's absolutely not, especially if it involves debt. I never even ask, but she feels it best to keep me informed wrt "our" money.

The ability to have ours vs. mine depends on both people agreeing willingly to it being a permanent condition. If someone is a liar or insists on a self-centered approach, then no, it's not going to work. We talked about this before we got married, and we took enough time to make sure it was something we could both get on board with. And, too, "ours" doesn't mean all that's yours is mine,mine, mine...it means we both share in everything we bring in regardless of how much/little or whether it's for good or bad. Your liability is our liability and I'm just as responsible.



Marcia
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,218

25 Jul 2014, 6:32 am

How a couple manage their financial affairs, household tasks etc is up to them, and something to be negotiated and agreed. What is not negotiable and shouldn't be negotiable is access to someone else's body. If a man or a woman doesn't want to have sex then that should be respected. In a mutually supportive, healthy relationship, one would hope that a persistent lack of interest in sex wouldn't be seen as "withholding" but rather as a possible symptom of a problem such as depression or other problems in that person's life, including but not necessarily the relationship itself.

For what it's worth - in relation to your financial affairs, which seem to be managed pretty much entirely by your wife - I was listening to a radio programme the other week and the discussion centred on the problems which can occur when individuals and couples don't plan ahead financially - particularly in terms of how money is managed. Examples where given of situation where one member of a couple dealt with all the money stuff - that person died or became seriously ill, and their partner really struggled because they didn't know what accounts they had, where to find information, how to access information or money etc. Even if one does the bulk of the money management, you both need to know what is happening.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,379
Location: Scandinavia

25 Jul 2014, 7:44 am

Misslizard wrote:


Actually, the Norwegian law states that married women and men are indeed entitled to sex.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


Cafeaulait
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,713
Location: Europe

25 Jul 2014, 8:26 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
If she gives me oral, do I owe her oral? :lol:


No. Don't ever let her trick you into you owing her something because she gave you sex.



Last edited by Cafeaulait on 25 Jul 2014, 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

alpineglow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,197

25 Jul 2014, 8:27 am

AlexanderDantes wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
Not all men think this way,but some think that if they buy dinner you owe them something in return.If you are not into them they come back with names like dick tease,frigid.dyke,ice princess,user,etc...
Of couser there are some women that will go out with a man to get something,gold diggers,neither sex is perfect.


What the hell? Why are you even accepting dinner from men if you aren't engaging with them? In the same way, women shouldn't reciprocate or accept anything from men that they have no attraction for, why are you accepting dinner from them if you have no intention of engaging with them? I can understand if it's a blind date but other than that, shouldn't happen..

Maybe if women didn't flirt or absorb attention with no intention of engaging, this kind of behavior wouldn't happen.


This [deleted] attitude is shared by my ex, who changes the subject and tells me he needs to get laid every time we talk about anything at all. A one track mind, or something.
Thanks for posting this MissLizard, as I had to talk to him yesterday and heard it yet again. Now I can have some levity about it.



tarantella64
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,901

25 Jul 2014, 9:00 am

Marcia wrote:
How a couple manage their financial affairs, household tasks etc is up to them, and something to be negotiated and agreed. What is not negotiable and shouldn't be negotiable is access to someone else's body. If a man or a woman doesn't want to have sex then that should be respected. In a mutually supportive, healthy relationship, one would hope that a persistent lack of interest in sex wouldn't be seen as "withholding" but rather as a possible symptom of a problem such as depression or other problems in that person's life, including but not necessarily the relationship itself.

For what it's worth - in relation to your financial affairs, which seem to be managed pretty much entirely by your wife - I was listening to a radio programme the other week and the discussion centred on the problems which can occur when individuals and couples don't plan ahead financially - particularly in terms of how money is managed. Examples where given of situation where one member of a couple dealt with all the money stuff - that person died or became seriously ill, and their partner really struggled because they didn't know what accounts they had, where to find information, how to access information or money etc. Even if one does the bulk of the money management, you both need to know what is happening.


Yep. Or, you know, there's a fair number of illnesses/conditions and commonly-prescribed meds that just kill the libido entirely. Vicissitudes of life. Sometimes you just have to accept that in order for your spouse not to be miserably depressed, his sex drive's going to be about nil, because that's the med that works. Or some such.

The point about money management is right on.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,895
Location: Aux Arcs

25 Jul 2014, 9:04 am

AlexanderDantes wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
Not all men think this way,but some think that if they buy dinner you owe them something in return.If you are not into them they come back with names like dick tease,frigid.dyke,ice princess,user,etc...
Of couser there are some women that will go out with a man to get something,gold diggers,neither sex is perfect.


What the hell? Why are you even accepting dinner from men if you aren't engaging with them? In the same way, women shouldn't reciprocate or accept anything from men that they have no attraction for, why are you accepting dinner from them if you have no intention of engaging with them? I can understand if it's a blind date but other than that, shouldn't happen..

Maybe if women didn't flirt or absorb attention with no intention of engaging, this kind of behavior wouldn't happen.

I'm clueless about flirting,I don't really know how,am I suppose to bat my eyes or something?I haven't been out to dinner in awhile,the last time was with a friendly guy and we had a good time,no sparks but he didn't call me those things,it was a nice evening and we parted on friendly terms.But I did get to hear my ex and his buddies talk about women in a very negative way for years.Those are terms they used.As far as owing sex during marriage,once I was running a fever and was sick,my ex pesters me for sex so I had it with him,wasn't very happy about it,what kind of person pressures their sick mate into sex?
So let's say I have a man and for some reason he can't preform,is it ok to put the squeeze on him to go down on me if he doesn't feel good?If people are happily married,healthy and both partners enjoy sex,no problem there,go at it like rabbits.


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


Yuzu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,248
Location: Bay area, California

25 Jul 2014, 9:31 am

Kurgan wrote:
Misslizard wrote:


Actually, the Norwegian law states that married women and men are indeed entitled to sex.


According to this article In Norway, Gender Equality Does Not Extend to the Bedroom, Norway is still one of 12 members of the European Union that do not explicitly criminalize rape within marriage,
That's surprising for a Scandinavian country.



tarantella64
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,901

25 Jul 2014, 9:33 am

AngelRho wrote:
tarantella64 wrote:
Using sex as reward/punishment is a mind game and, unless you're in a consensual kinky-sh** relationship, pretty f****d up.

As for the whole "our body" thing...mm nope. There are several things that are mine and don't belong to anyone else:

- my body
- my mind
- my time
- my money
- my talents
- my work.

I may decide to share them with someone else, but that doesn't mean I'm obliged to make it a permanent condition. And, having been in a marriage to someone who lied in pretty important ways on the way in, I'm very grateful I didn't go all romantic and stayed quite practical about what's mine. If I hadn't, my kid wouldn't have a house today, and likely wouldn't have college plans, either. A chunk of my retirement would also be gone.

If someone else is not enthusiastic about having sex with me, but is doing it as a favor? Egh, no. Just no. I don't need a whole other person as a sex toy. (I'm actually somewhat surprised by how hard that idea creeps me out.)

This whole business with "but you'll break up the marriage" as a goad...likewise, no. My not wanting something my spouse wants isn't 'me breaking up the marriage', it's him wanting something that's not in the marriage just then. And which may or may not come back. If he wants it regularly and bad enough to leave, well, so be it. If he's willing to walk out on kids to go get it, I won't have much respect for him, but so it goes. After ten years of being the responsible party here as a single mom, I really have little sympathy for the whole 'my needs!' thing once kids come along.

Someone not having sex with you because they don't want sex -- that's not being mean.

That's a self-centered attitude. I think that putting the needs of others ahead of my own and making that the focus of how I relate to my wife works out better. As an example, I never see a penny of my own paycheck. I rarely buy things for myself. All I know is the lights are still on, water still runs, and we have plenty food. She does bring financial issues to my attention. Most of the time, I'm, like, "hey, you're smart. Sounds good. Make it happen." Sometimes it's absolutely not, especially if it involves debt. I never even ask, but she feels it best to keep me informed wrt "our" money.

The ability to have ours vs. mine depends on both people agreeing willingly to it being a permanent condition. If someone is a liar or insists on a self-centered approach, then no, it's not going to work. We talked about this before we got married, and we took enough time to make sure it was something we could both get on board with. And, too, "ours" doesn't mean all that's yours is mine,mine, mine...it means we both share in everything we bring in regardless of how much/little or whether it's for good or bad. Your liability is our liability and I'm just as responsible.


I'd say you're fine right up to the...hm, no, actually. It's a highly romantic view, but over the long term can get quite problematic.

Say for instance that -- with regard to sex -- something happens along the way, You become ill, or someone assaults you sexually and it has a traumatic impact. Or your wife has a baby and the birth is difficult, and sex is painful for her for the next two years, and the struggle over it (and your pressure to, you know, solve the problem or just get you off somehow) makes her not want even to hear the word sex. Or you might have a serious falling-out. I don't know about you, but I don't have sex with people I'm really upset with, it feels violative. Or you have kids and wind up working opposite shifts for four years so you can afford their early childhood, and your wife is really too exhausted and stressed to be dealing with you wanting sex, too -- and there really isn't anything to be done about the exhausting, stressful time except to get through it and wait for the children all to be in school.

These are all ordinary things, in a marriage. They're why couples go years sometimes without sex. There isn't any permanent promising in that regard, and it doesn't mean the spouses are liars. It just means they're people.

As for the your-liability-is-mine...again, that's nice if all goes well and everyone behaves. When a spouse becomes an addict, embarks on retail therapy, or has a medical condition that can sink the family, that can and likely should change, particularly if you have children's financial wellbeing to consider.

I've had a fair number of men complain about my attitude in this, and get cranky because I won't just trust them to take care of me and mine, now and forever; they've taken it quite personally. But the fact is that all too often that turns into "I'm sorry" or "I really wanted to", and good wishes do not, alas, pay the bills. And it's funny how, in the eagerness to play provider and trusted guy, they've passed on accepting the compliment: if I'm financially independent and my own person -- financially, sexually -- then there can be only one reason I'm with them. I want to be. Every day I'm there.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,777
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

25 Jul 2014, 10:36 am

Marcia wrote:
How a couple manage their financial affairs, household tasks etc is up to them, and something to be negotiated and agreed. What is not negotiable and shouldn't be negotiable is access to someone else's body. If a man or a woman doesn't want to have sex then that should be respected. In a mutually supportive, healthy relationship, one would hope that a persistent lack of interest in sex wouldn't be seen as "withholding" but rather as a possible symptom of a problem such as depression or other problems in that person's life, including but not necessarily the relationship itself.

For what it's worth - in relation to your financial affairs, which seem to be managed pretty much entirely by your wife - I was listening to a radio programme the other week and the discussion centred on the problems which can occur when individuals and couples don't plan ahead financially - particularly in terms of how money is managed. Examples where given of situation where one member of a couple dealt with all the money stuff - that person died or became seriously ill, and their partner really struggled because they didn't know what accounts they had, where to find information, how to access information or money etc. Even if one does the bulk of the money management, you both need to know what is happening.

My wife is better at some things and I'm better at certain things. I excel in behavior modification, so child care typically falls on me. My wife is better at making money go, so I leave that up to her. I keep her informed and she keeps me informed. It works. She's good behind a desk, so she makes most of the money. I've got plenty of time on my hands, so I maintain the garden, rob wasp nests, and keep the yard neat. She believes I should have the last say on moral and spiritual issues, and I also get veto power when there's an impasse--and she's really smart, makes decisions I almost always agree with, so it's unusal for us to have an issue where I put my foot down and piss everyone off. So I do know where the money is going. I just know better than to stick my fingers in something I'd easily screw up if left to me!

The only money I hold back is related to supporting a business on the side that I'm trying to build into something profitable. I can't make money if I can't financially support a project and see it grow. She can't touch that money, but I don't hide that I have it, either.

A lot of tough decisions really have already been made before crises happen, and that largely has to do with ethical and moral choices we made prior to marriage. We DO have crises, and the little tweaks we make along the way to accomodate crises are due to the sometimes difficult tasks of making decisions about unforseen events that are in line with the direction we chose to go as a couple. I don't mean to say it's always easy, because it isn't. But if there are ever things we didn't know to plan for, we fall back on our values and that solves pretty much solves everything.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,715
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

25 Jul 2014, 11:00 am

AngelRho, you remind me of the Japanese marriage system:


Why male Japanese wage-earners have only 'pocket money'
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-19674306



Yuzu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,248
Location: Bay area, California

25 Jul 2014, 11:27 am

^ Not quite. His wife earns money and also manages it. In the Japanese system you've mentioned, men earn money and wives manage it and run the household.
In AngelRho's household it's just that the traditional gender roles are reversed. (Which seems to be working great.)



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,777
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

25 Jul 2014, 11:37 am

@tarantella: No worries...I'm not getting cranky. It IS a personal thing and people have varying attitudes. It's really simple. I don't entirely disagree with you, either.

I think it is largely romantic, but I don't think it's unrealistic. We're committed to it as a couple. If we have to go through a dry spell, we value more things than intimacy. But from the outset we made sure that those were values we held in common so that the expectation for intimacy wasn't something either of us would find unreasonable or would cause inequities down the road. And she did have a string of traumatic assault experiences in her past. That might potentially have been a hangup and subsequent dealbreaker. But it was dealt with in positive way such that she hasn't been affected quite to the extent some have in the long term. And look at it from the opposite side: If I'm the kind of guy who can't handle what she's dealing with because I want sex all the time, it's better for us to just be friends anyway.

Wrt. good behavior and liability, well, it goes back to two good, honest friends negotiating a romantic relationship. We leave very little room for compromise. If it doesn't mutually benefit us both, we move on to something else. We don't have to worry about "retail therapy" because there's little margin for it. I just bought a new pair of Nike tennis shoes because the sole was coming off the ones I've been wearing the last three years and new Levis jeans because my other nice jeans have holes in them. I've got two jeans from Dollar General at $15 a pop for more every day use. Between the two of us, we MIGHT get some good personal shopping once a year or so. We don't have a lot to spread around. But on the other hand, we own our house and lot and both vehicles are paid for and maintained. I think I have an outstanding doctor bill, a cable company that has completely given up on us, and student loans we have IBR on. We aren't in great shape, but we aren't destitute either. And if I was back making the kind of money I used to make, I'd happily pay off her loans in a year. She'd do the same for me if she made twice what she makes now.

We are fully aware that stuff happens and we're on thin ice. It's just I think we work harder at fixing problems than we do passing blame. I made a commitment to my wife first and she comes before the kids in terms of priority. If she gets in trouble, I share in that trouble. If the consequences are we lose the kids, then we lose the kids, which makes it all that much more important that we take care of each other. Our marriage is a big rock in our lives together. As long as that part has its place and works, the little rocks, like money, kids, etc., fall into place around it and it all fits nice and neat in a little bucket. If the marriage falls, everything falls, and I think between honoring our commitments to each other and facing such high stakes keeps us a little more driven to work at keeping it all together.

That and...well, we're still crazy about each other after 15 years...

I suppose that's the real secret. We were best friends before becoming consistently romantically involved beyond the on-again/off-again thing we had for a while. We would have known if the other was being disingenuous because we saw each other in ordinary circumstances. We often talked about what the ideal guy/girl was supposed to be, what we expected from husband/wife, what to do when about kids, etc... Our biggest disagreement was when to expect kids, and honestly I wasn't ready to become a father when it happened. But we were always friends first at every turn in our relationship, and I think putting the other person first as a PERSON and friend (as opposed to a husband/father, wife/mother) has really made the difference in keeping it all together. I started out fatherhood really just viewing kids as extra roommates/guests, and they grew on me from there. It never was something that caused much friction between us other than her screaming "hurry up and impregnate me, damnit!" It would have been unjust if I hadn't impregnated her simply because I'm afraid of kids, and we'd already talked before marriage that kids were to be in the picture, and the sooner the better. From what I see, MOST couples move quickly to marriage after first meeting and weren't really friends to begin with. I don't see that as healthy. As long as there are more criteria for relationship building than "we're in love," there's not that much to worry about.