who lets the husband try "new" things ? like massages, escorts, anything paid
that is not enough to define a womanwho lets the husband try "new" things ? like massages, escorts, anything paid
It's not really enough to form any sort of opinion. Generally speaking I think what two people decide about how to run their relationship is up to them. Just because something works or doesn't work for one relationship it doesn't mean it will be the same in another relationship.
definitely not fairthat's true.
the problem is that while she agrees with his "escapades" and finds it okay if he wants to talk about it , he does not allow her to have any. and i found it unfair. or is it fair from a guy's point of view ?
Just because she abandoned the idea of being the one responsible for his sexual pleasure doesn't mean he should do the same. Of course if he there is something he refuse to do with her he can't complain if she goes take it somewhere else.that's true.
the problem is that while she agrees with his "escapades" and finds it okay if he wants to talk about it , he does not allow her to have any. and i found it unfair. or is it fair from a guy's point of view ?
for me my wife's need are my duty...Refusing sexual things to my wife would be the same as refusing to provide food for my kids.
I'm talking about sexual needs, the basic need that is supposed to be fulfilled by the other party in a couple no matter how rich or poor they are. And I wouldn't complain if someone else buy her a car every week, what I wouldn't accept is that someone else gives her sexual pleasure while I'm ready to do that wherever whenever.So you will provide her with anything that she decides to need? Like a new car every week? No, because you mean only sex things? Well, if she doesn't happen to like sex that's as easy a promise as her promising to provide you with a new pair of high heels any time you want.
Unless you are into wearing high heels, not judging!
And the second thing just doesn't make any sense as if you don't feed your kids you'll have the cops show up soon but I've never heard anyone being sued for not providing sex to their spouse.
A marriage is not a promise for sex, as I am pretty sure many men, and some women, have already found out. At least if you didn't get married with Asia Carrera who in her wedding vows promised to give her hubby lots of nookie, at least once a day every day.
I don't think its unfair if they both honestly agree on it.that's true.
the problem is that while she agrees with his "escapades" and finds it okay if he wants to talk about it , he does not allow her to have any. and i found it unfair. or is it fair from a guy's point of view ?
that's true.
the problem is that while she agrees with his "escapades" and finds it okay if he wants to talk about it , he does not allow her to have any. and i found it unfair. or is it fair from a guy's point of view ?
Tbh, my relationships probably haven't lasted long enough (past 10 years or whatever ) for me to desperately grave for other women nor the intra relationship sex to completely dry out. So my opinion might change at some point.
However for what it's worth, I'm not very fond of the idea to sexually share my partner with others. I would be very reluctant to deals to play outside exactly because of what you describe, the implied expectation that it goes both ways.
Then again there is probably a reason why she decided to give him this permission in the first place and that's individual to them, so I can't judge.
But generally I don't agree with you. Either you agree upfront on a deal for both sides or not, but later bringing fairness arguments to get what you eventually wanted from the start, no thanks.
It may very well feel unfair to the woman in question that the guy demands rights that he isn't willing to grant to the girl, but then it's up to her to take consequences or not. Given that they have ever really discussed the topic.
I explained the reasons to be reluctant in my previous message and to summarize it he has every right to be reluctant if he's ready to give her all the sex she need. Maybe she's not ready to give all the sex HE needs.It's this reluctance that you are talking about that I don't understand. I mean, it's not okay both ways, why ? She gave him permission because they are together for more than ten years and even if they still have great sex, there is always for a man a need to 'try' another woman. and I also talked to a lot of other married women who understand their husband's desires and find it ok to let him try as long as it's not a threat to their marriage.
However, it still doesn't go both ways.
I agree when you said that the woman should be upfront about what she wants. But she might be true to herself and doesn't want it. And that might change in a couple of years, I don't think it's a deal for life.
I explained the reasons to be reluctant in my previous message and to summarize it he has every right to be reluctant if he's ready to give her all the sex she need. Maybe she's not ready to give all the sex HE needs.
Then she has every right to refuse him to have sex with another woman. Why did she accept the deal ?Let's say that she is ready to give everything he needs.
Let's say that she is ready to give everything he needs.
Just because she abandoned the idea of being the one responsible for his sexual pleasure doesn't mean he should do the same. Of course if he there is something he refuse to do with her he can't complain if she goes take it somewhere else.
Many guys will think the same and maybe others will disagree but for me my wife's need are my duty, I can never refuse to satisfy her sexually, that would make me feel like I'm not a real man. Refusing sexual things to my wife would be the same as refusing to provide food for my kids.
But many/most women don't think this way, they don't feel like they are not real women when they refuse intimacy. They don't think it's a big deal to turn their husband's approach down but I see that women whose approach is turned down are deeply affected and take it as insult.
I used to think it's not fair but now I think fairness doesn't have anything to do with it, it's just a different way of thinking. But I think it's fair that someone who's ready to provide anytime refuses you to take from a different supplier.
Then she has every right to refuse him to have sex with another woman. Why did she accept the deal ?
The impression I have is that most women need less sex activity than most men. Maybe I'm wrong but what is the average masturbation frequency for most women and men ?I wonder why she abandoned the idea of having sex with him. Why women turn down their husbands ? Are they bored ? wanna try something new ? Or they don't like it anymore ? Or he just doesn't do much but expect her to look like a supermodel and turn him on every time.
What I said is that she can refuse to let other women touch that ball if she's gonna be playing with it all the time. If she doesn't want to play then she should accept others to play with it.Well, this is not gonna solve the problem. Not allowing him to have sex with other women is like saying that 'if I cannot play with that ball than neither do you'.
it's like a contract of exclusive provider that is broken by the refusal to provide.
Well I said that If she's willing to provide then she has every right to want him to stick with the exclusivity clause of the contract.Well, it's not. Because she didn't refuse to provide but just didn't provide as much as was requested. So only in the case where there was a specific amount mentioned in the agreement there is a breech of contract.
On the other hand if it was exclusive contract then getting provided by someone else is breaking the contract.
I'm not saying I think it's fair. Because it's not. I am saying you should stop trying to justify your actions and agree it's against what the society thinks is allowed. Because only after that you can say fuck you society, I don't care about your rules.
Society and the relationship are also two different things though.I'm not saying I think it's fair. Because it's not. I am saying you should stop trying to justify your actions and agree it's against what the society thinks is allowed. Because only after that you can say fuck you society, I don't care about your rules.
It's this reluctance that you are talking about that I don't understand. I mean, it's not okay both ways, why ? She gave him permission because they are together for more than ten years and even if they still have great sex, there is always for a man a need to 'try' another woman. and I also talked to a lot of other married women who understand their husband's desires and find it ok to let him try as long as it's not a threat to their marriage.
However, it still doesn't go both ways.
I agree when you said that the woman should be upfront about what she wants. But she might be true to herself and doesn't want it. And that might change in a couple of years, I don't think it's a deal for life.
Well I said that If she's willing to provide then she has every right to want him to stick with the exclusivity clause of the contract.
But maybe you skipped that part.
I think the same.But even if another partner gives the permission is it because they see no other option, or do they just not care anymore? I would think most people who are not into group sex don't really want to share their partner with others.