Recently
Jumping the Relationship Gun
Dear Annie: Last month, an old boyfriend contacted me. I hadn't seen "Bud" in 30 years. We had a wonderful conversation. I visited him at his home. He even sent me a large sum of money to help pay off a mortgage bill. We now talk at least …Read more.
Trusting Cheaters
Dear Annie: I'm in my early 20s and have been dating "Aidan" for a year. He attends college two hours away. He doesn't socialize much and stresses a lot about his grades. His only real friend is "Cara," a girl we went to high …Read more.
Bare Naked Mommies
Dear Annie: I am becoming excessively annoyed by a new trend I'm seeing with my friends who have recently become parents — the "naked mommy."
I'm 27 and have not yet had children. Several of my friends are having their second or …Read more.
The Long Trip to Tenuous
Dear Annie: My father and I have never had the best relationship. He was domineering, controlling and verbally abusive to me as a teenager, and as a result, I rebelled and did things specifically to irritate him. Several times, he kicked me out of …Read more.
more articles
|
Forever the Fiance, Never the Groom
Dear Annie: I am 57 years old and divorced. I am now engaged to a woman who is 29 years my junior. "Carla" is everything I ever wanted. I never intended to fall in love with her, but I needed a friend, and there she was. She feels the same way.
Here is the problem: Even though we are engaged, Carla's parents do not know I exist. For the past four years, she's been trying to figure out a way to tell them about us. Her father is a minister. Both parents are of the opinion that an older man and a younger woman do not make a biblically proper couple. I have read my Bible from front to back, and nowhere does it say this.
Carla says we should elope and then she will find the right time and the right words to tell her parents. But for four years, I've been hearing that we will "elope this year," and it has yet to happen. What do I do when I love a woman so much, but she doesn't have the inner strength to disappoint her parents? — Hurting Deeply
Dear Hurting: Carla is too young for you — not because of the age difference, but because she is immature. As daunting as it is to confront disapproving parents, someone who is truly committed to the relationship would have been willing to stand up for her choice of mate after four years and an engagement. Sorry to say, we do not have a great deal of confidence in your future together.
Dear Annie: I could have written that letter from "Sick of It," who doesn't want her husband to approach her for sex. Combine post-menopausal me with my husband's health problems and medications, and you could have a dreary sex life, except for one thing: I love my husband so much that even though sex is not as magical as it used to be, I cherish every moment of closeness we have together.
Even though I don't always feel like it, I jump at the chance to be intimate. Love is about the other person, not yourself. Sex should not be an obligation, but a fulfillment of the promise made by a husband and a wife. — Bring It On
Dear Bring: We wish more women would emulate your attitude, although we know it can be difficult. And too many women wrote to insist that having sex when you aren't in the mood is akin to rape. It is NOT. Read on for more:
From California: I was outraged by your answer to "Sick of It." I have a husband 12 years my senior with heart and impotency problems. That did not stop him from wanting to play with all the bells and whistles, push all the buttons and then say, "Oops, that's all." Meanwhile, I was hot and bothered with no relief. Finally, I made him understand that all that groping was not welcome. True intimacy at our age comes from love and tenderness. Now we cuddle. He is sad that sex has disappeared, but love is full of compromises.
Florida: A lot of women think the lack of sex in their marriage is perfectly fine. They decide they don't need it anymore, so their husbands don't need it, either. I wonder how many of those women would like to have their husbands visiting prostitutes, watching porn or having affairs. Intimacy is part of marriage, and if they aren't willing to participate, they shouldn't get upset when the husband finds someone else.
Kentucky: I don't get why a man insists on continuing to attempt something his body is clearly no longer up to. He gets embarrassed and frustrated. I get groped and bored. I want him to stop pestering me.
Tennessee: Historically, women were not destined to live into old age. We would have died in childbirth at some point, and our husbands would have found younger wives.
Annie's Mailbox is written by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar, longtime editors of the Ann Landers column. Please e-mail your questions to anniesmailbox@comcast.net, or write to: Annie's Mailbox, c/o Creators Syndicate, 5777 W. Century Blvd., Ste. 700, Los Angeles, CA 90045. To find out more about Annie's Mailbox and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
52 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
It is interesting it is back to aged people and sex again. Our life spans are extended by our knowledge in the sciences, health care, how we take care of ourselves etc.
According to one scientific site I found: From the 30's to the 50's it was 10 years longer and from the 50s to 2007 it was 25 more years longer. When you stop and think of those people who are in the 70-85 years of age, their bodies did not start in a healthy state as children, etc. You have to compensate the longivity has taken its toll greatly.
Fast forward to people who are in the 40-50 age group should have no problem having with body parts and functions by the time they are in the 75-90 year old age group.
You can't take the people in the older catagory now and tell them there is no reason their bodies can't do everything.
Take it mechanical. Does your 1950 car run as well, have the bells and whistles, mag wheels, cool lifters and dual exhaust with rapping pipes that muscle cars of the 70s tempted many with? How many of those cars from the 50s are still around? How many of the ones from the 30s are still around? We take great care of our cars at these ages but when it is the human body, we expect all to fall in line and make our bodies comply.
Sorry, but my 1954 model is probably a 4 door family car--a plymouth most likely. Kind of lumpy, not as fast as some of the other cars that pass me by. When I was a prime 18--the GTO got me everywhere fast. Soon we were back to family car station wagon status and now I am the mini van crowd with 2 child car seats in the 2nd row and the emergency winter car kit full of goodies if I should get stranded.
So again goes the circle of life. What I did in hot and passionate days of yesteryear is not that of today, nor will I expect it to be the same as today when adding another 20 years on.
This is the female side of things---when asking a friend my age, he said that is why old men wear out their pants pockets. Playing with something from yesteryear--fits right in with the change you carry. He said old age does funny things to people, and people do funny things. Our bodies go and so do the brains to old age. Most often not at the same rate. Something to look forward to ----- if you can remember it by then! (Friend is a comedic pharmacist.)
Comment: #1
Posted by: Joyce/MN
Tue Dec 6, 2011 9:49 PM
|
|
|
|
LW1: If honey Carla wanted her parents to know, she would have found some way to tell them long before. Her future is not with you, she has other plans. How much money do you have left--after 4 years of 'being with your perfect woman?' I would take your head out of the ME ME ME cloud, bring yourself down to reality, take a giant step back. Your answer will be waiting for you there.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Joyce/MN
Tue Dec 6, 2011 9:53 PM
|
|
|
|
LW1: You and Carla are NOT engaged. Engagement means you're planning your wedding, and after 4 years you haven't even started. Sorry, but you'll have to find yourself a grown woman if you want to get married.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Baldrz
Tue Dec 6, 2011 10:30 PM
|
|
|
|
Joyce/MN
That is the best post you have ever written. It was so amusing and thought-provoking. Well done!
Have a great day in Marvellous Minnesota.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Beguiling Miss Pasko
Tue Dec 6, 2011 10:50 PM
|
|
|
|
If husbands found younger wives after the first one died in childbirth, was he able to do anything with her?
If the guy is so old the equipment doesn't work anymore, a younger wife isn't going to help. Matter of fact, she might go looking for a younger, more virile man!
Comment: #5
Posted by: sarah stravinska
Tue Dec 6, 2011 11:17 PM
|
|
|
|
LW1
Forget about eloping. Forget about marrying Carla. Tell her (NOW) she will have to remain a tabby unless she can emblazon your relationship with her family instead of sneaking around. This Bible excuse is just that - an excuse. See Tennessee's comment ATL: "Historically, women were not destined to live into old age. We would have died in childbirth at some point, and our husbands would have found younger wives."
```
Comment: #6
Posted by: Word A Day Mate
Wed Dec 7, 2011 2:21 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1 - Carla will never marry you. If she really wanted to marry you, she would've told her parents about you and went ahead and eloped with you. Do yourself a favor and take a big step back and take a break from her and re-think your future because it's not with her.
LW2 - Intimacy is what holds a realtionship together. Without intimacy, you have a roommate.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Michelle
Wed Dec 7, 2011 2:41 AM
|
|
|
|
@sarah, yes, absolutely -- look up any genealogical records from the 17th or 18th century, and you'll find plenty of examples of men in their 50s or 60s marrying their 2nd or 3rd wives in their 20s and producing children over the next 10 years. In some cases men were expected to remarry after their wife died because they needed a young woman to take care of their household, to take care of their other children, and to produce more children.
LW1: The fact that Carla is incapable of talking to her parents about you means that -- despite her chronological age -- she's still too immature to stand up to her parents and live her own life. I would adjust my expectations of this relationship if I were you.
LW2 and follow-up comments above-the-line: It's not really a "compromise" if the wife unilaterally substitutes cuddling for sex. Unless there is a medical reason, physical intimacy is possible for many couples well into their senior years. How an older couple where they don't have the same drive or need negotiates their physical relationship in their twilight years is important in how healthy their relationship will be. If a wife unilaterally takes sexual intimacy off of the menu entirely, then that will likely create a problem... resentment in the husband, the husband seeking release elsewhere. We've seen this happen over and over again.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 3:29 AM
|
|
|
|
Two of my great-grandfathers had two families...after the first one died, they got a new one to look after the children and run the household (or for love, maybe I am just a cynic!). However, my grandmother's generation seems to full of widows who outlived husbands by many years. I have to chime in though, the age difference in LW 1's case is kind of creepy in my book. Her boyfriend is probably older than her parents. No wonder she doesn't want to tell them.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Stephanie
Wed Dec 7, 2011 3:42 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1--"I am 57 years old and divorced. I am now engaged to a woman who is 29 years my junior." "Even though we are engaged, Carla's parents do not know I exist." That's probably because 'Carla' knows her parents reaction will be something akin to "WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU THINKING!?!?" And personally, I would be thinking the same thing. I totally agree with the Annies. If Carla can't own up to her own decisions (e.g., figure out a way, after four years, to introduce her parents to the man she's intending to marry) then that speaks volumes about her level of maturity. Forget about the Bible; there are myriad of practical reasons why a much older man and a much younger woman are a bad idea. First of all, what could the two of you possibly have in common besides what's between the sheets?!? If you take off the rose colored glasses and think about, you'll agree. Do you realize you'll be at least 76 years old at your child's high school graduation? You'll be at least 80 when he graduates college and approaching or in your 90's by the time he marries. Sadly, you probably won't be there to meet your grandchildren. This is just one single aspect of a January-December romance. Think about the impact on your sex life when your wife is entering her sexual prime around mid-thirties and you'll be struggling to figure out how to get it up. Do you think she's going to stick around and take care of a fading old man when she's a vibrant, well-established woman? My advice is to tell Carla the wait is over and so is the relationship.
Comment: #10
Posted by: Chris
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:02 AM
|
|
|
|
I'm beginning to wonder, after reading columns and blogs, what happens to women when they get older, that they don't want sex anymmore. Is it because they no longer feel sexy and pretty, like they did when they were younger? Too tired? To many responsibilities? Is taking (let's be honest ladies) 5 to 20 minutes out of their day to make their husbands happy too much? Is it that they don't love their husbands "that way" anymore? The whole topic disturbs me. I really want to know what the deal is.
Comment: #11
Posted by: happymom
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:11 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: HappyMom
No, I think there's more going on there. Women are trained to NOT put sex at the forefront of their minds from the time they're small (and especially so with the older generations). It was a duty, and only "mature" women got orgasms. It was considered immature to have clitoral orgasms (the way most women do) and anything else was generally considered bad, not appropriate, etc. Sex was to please men.
Add in menopause where often sex can be painful and/or a person who can't do the things they used to do and couples just quit. Personally, the LW who decided that cuddling was a great compromise should have taught her husband a few things and perhaps added a toy so she could have an orgasm and he could still be close to his wife. But, I agree with MikeH: unilaterally deciding that cuddling is an adequate compromise is NOT an adequate compromise.
Comment: #12
Posted by: AgLee16
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:50 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1: well, there's one born every minute! I know someone who started such a relationship in her 30s. She let the "old" guy get just "enough" to keep him on the string (and, believe me, it wasn't much at all), and he paid her electric bill and bought her clothes and had workmen fix her house and make a patio and all kinds of things, all for the illusion that he was in a "relationship," which meant dinner and/or a movie 2-3 times a month and a 20 minute phone chat once a week or so. I can't say it's all that different from a, uh, more common sort of financial transaction involving such matters, not that I care. Of course, as we all do, I'm extrapolating from skimpy statements in a brief letter, and it's possible they have a very fulfilled physical and emotional relationship other than the not getting married thing. But I've seen this play out the other way, where the guy is, in fact, getting played.
Comment: #13
Posted by: Ms. Rowena
Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:07 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: happymom
There is a reccent thread on thie (December 1) that I would suggest you read.
Many women put their lack of desire as a result of menopause. and yes, that does affect your "sex drive". Or the better way I would put it is it affects your BIOLOGICAL sex drive. By the way, I've seen this lack of sex drive being blamed on menopause in women as young as 38 (one of my friends), but once she found a boyfriend she really loved, suddenly sex became important to her again and her sex drive returned.
The reasons you list I would put under a lack of EMOTIONAl sex drive. Some women, especially older women in their late 50s and 70s, who married before the Sexual revolution of the 1970s (and sadly even beyond) were taught that sex was something to be endured to procreate and not something to be enjoyed. Many of these women (some of which post here, by the way if you read through the thread on the 1st) look at a sex drive as something almost to be considered bad (Bad women are dirven by their sexual desire, still laughing at the poster who said that about ME!). When menopause came around, they looked at is a perfect opportunity to stop having sex.
The problem is that their husbands don't, as a rule, stop wanting sex, even when their own "equipment" isn't working as well. By the way, sometimes it is the MEN who don't want sex, but it seems to happen much more often with the women. Then you have a problem: One partner wants sex, the other doesn't. both are frustrated.
We've seen so many answers here over the weeks on this one, but I honestly think it boils down to this. If two people really love each other, they can work it out. Either within the marital unit or with counseling. Sex counseling is NOT about going and visiting a hooker. These are licensed professionals who work to help couples of all ages (lack of sexual desire can happen at any age) to work through the frustrations to rebuild (ins some cases better) sex lives.
It's the DESIRE TO PLEASE YOUR PARTNER that to me is more important than sexual desire. Haven't most of us gotten into bed with a partner thinking "Oh man, i really hope he doesn't want any tonight, I'm too tired, spent all the working , etc etc" and yet out of love and a desire to please our partner gone ahead and done it anyway and ended up having the best sex!/ i know I certainly have.
To me, withholding sex and affection from a partner is the height of selfishness. It shows you don't care about a basic human desire to connect. To me (allegedly driven by my hormones) it's like denying a startving man food because you don't want to hand him a plate. And I agree, happymom, how much effort does it really TAKE?
Comment: #14
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:20 AM
|
|
|
|
10 years ago mu husband of 23 years left me for another woman. I was outraged as I thought that sex every 6-8 weeks was more than acceptable, and since he needed me to participate, I always thought that it had to be on my terms. I also thought that since I worked part time, took the children to their appointments and kept a clean house, that life should have been all about me. I stopped being a friend, and a lover, and he eventually got sick of it and left. Through A LOT of counseling, I have come to realize that he left, not for another women, but he left mostly because of me. I have learned that I love is about caring about the other person and about myself. I have also learned that we weren't right for one another and that we probably should have split years ago, or never gotten together in the first place. And although our issues weren't my fault alone, my use of emotional blackmail only made them worse. I hope someone can learn from this post and realize that if the marriage is worth saving, you have to take a good long look in the mirror, and if it's not worth saving, have the grace to let it go.
Comment: #15
Posted by: Marianne
Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:20 AM
|
|
|
|
"I wonder how many of those women would like to have their husbands visiting prostitutes, watching porn or having affairs."
I am perfectly happy to have my boyfriend watching porn if I am unavailable or not in the mood, or any time he wants to, for that matter. To lump in watching porn with visiting prostitutes or having an affair is assinine.
Comment: #16
Posted by: Alexandra
Wed Dec 7, 2011 5:39 AM
|
|
|
|
@Alexandra, while I absolutely agree with you, to be fair, we've actually seen *LWs* who write in because they DO equate catching their man watching porn as the same as having an affair or going to a prostitute. (I think it's an invalid comparison, but it has been made before int he columns.)
Comment: #17
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:02 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1: Oh, honestly! if she hasn't married you after 4 years of being engaged, she's not going to. Move on. I'm not going to fall into the trap of judging this based on an extreme age difference, so look at it this way. If YOU were her age and she hadn't introduced her to her parents, you'd be like, what do you think is WRONG with me that you are ashamed of me?
Let her go. Find someone who will be proud of you and not hide you from her family. Honestly.
PS: Marianne: well written and touching post. You sound like a very cool person to have delved into yourself to be honest about your part in the breakup of your marriage. So often it's all about blaming the other guy. I really admire your approach. Best of luck to you in the future.
Comment: #18
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:09 AM
|
|
|
|
"I am 57 years old and divorced. I am now engaged to a woman who is 29 years my junior. For the past four years, she's been trying to figure out a way to tell them about us."
So shes 28 now and was 24 when she started dating the guy whos almost 30 years older?? Gee, I wonder why the parents would "freak"?? Sounds borderline "to catch a preditor" to me... but then, this goes down to society saying "age is just a number" and other crap that allows old farts to date college kids. Ick.
PS. I dont mean to call 57 year olds old farts for all who I offend. But compared to the 20s, its a far cry.
Comment: #19
Posted by: julie
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:19 AM
|
|
|
|
***OFF TOPIC ALERT***
@Sarah Morrow - If you are reading, thanks for the tip regarding fish oil! One of my children has recently started behaving in a manner that is consistent with ADHD behaviors. While he is still being evaluated by medical professionals to determine a treatment plan, I remembered you mentioned that fish oil can help people with mood disorders and depression. I started researching and found anecdotal evidence that fish oil has positive affects on kids with ADHD, so I gave it to him. I expected the change to be gradual but after only one supplement I am seeing a vast change in my childs demeanor and his ability to focus! I will still work with the doctors and follow their advice, but I am really glad you mentioned this alternative - so far I am very encouraged by it!
Comment: #20
Posted by: sharnee
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:22 AM
|
|
|
|
Just because a man can't physically complete a sexual act doesn't mean that sexual intimacy should be avoided. "That did not stop him from wanting to play with all the bells and whistles, push all the buttons and then say, "Oops, that's all." Meanwhile, I was hot and bothered with no relief."
Then do something about it! Do his hands still work? Do yours? My husband is considerable older than I am, and while sometimes things don't work like they used to, I would never dream of denying him affection because of his physical capabilities. There are plenty of things a couple can do together to work around sexual difficulties, IF they love each other enough. Sadly, it seems like many older women just don't care about their husbands.
Comment: #21
Posted by: CV
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:36 AM
|
|
|
|
AgLee16 wrote: "Women are trained to NOT put sex at the forefront of their minds from the time they're small (and especially so with the older generations). It was a duty, and only "mature" women got orgasms. It was considered immature to have clitoral orgasms (the way most women do) and anything else was generally considered bad, not appropriate, etc. Sex was to please men."
I agree with this, especially with the older generations. My grandmother thought sex was a chore and also thought it was dirty and wrong. When her granddaughters became late teens/young adults, she became obsessed with whether or not we were still virgins. One day, after gram went on another one of her "sex is dirty and wrong" tirades, my aunt asked her how on earth she got 4 children. Gram admitted that when she wanted to get pregnant, she would hike her nightgown up to her stomach and tell my grandfather to "do what you have to do." I think that attitude for her generation wasn't all that uncommon.
I think my generation of women (Gen X) is much more lax and accepting of sex, but we still hear about the coldness of it from older generations. When my cousin's wife became pregnant with her 4th child, my aunt snapped, "Can't she keep her legs closed for more than a minute??" I have heard from other older women in my family about sex being only to please men. All I can think is that it's a shame they never enjoyed it because it's wonderful!!
Comment: #22
Posted by: Michelle
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:24 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1 - Dysfunction Junction, What's Your Function?
Good grief, man. I have to agree with others, including the Annies - she's too immature. She's in her 20s but she's acting like she's 16 - oh, if I tell my parents about you they're gonna kill me! Really? So then is she with you because she loves you or is she getting some sort of thrill in "rebelling" against a strict religious upbringing?
I think even if her parents weren't the uptight types (and are you SURE this is true? Have they told you their opinion about older man/younger woman relationships or did Carla tell you that?), they'd probably still have a problem with the age difference. Let's pretend you elope tomorrow and she gets pregnant right away. By the time your child is 17, you'll be 75. If things continue to drag out, there's a chance she could have your child so late that you'll die before your son or daughter's an adult. Are you prepared for that reality? Are you sure their bigger concern isn't that they'd end up with fatherless grandchildren?
BTW I have seen couples with large age differences like this work, and do so very well. I think to infer as julie has that it's somehow perverted is seriously overreaching (I mean come on julie - 24 is hardly 18, let alone a teenager). However, BOTH people in the relationship have to know what they're getting into, they have to have enough common interests and a willingness to grow, change, and be flexible as they both change and age in their respective places, and most of all they need to make sure if they're planning children to ensure all their provisions are considered.
Oh and both need to not only be chronological adults but emotionally and mentally as well. That goes for any relationship regardless of how old someone is. Carla definitely doesn't fit that bill and, sorry to be harsh, but I question whether you are too given you're willing to let yourself get suckered into this scenario.
LW2 - I think CV makes a good point. There's more than one way to skin a cat... or make one scream :-) I've said it before and I'll say it again because it's worth repeating - the biggest and best sex organ is the brain.
Be creative, use your imagination, communicate, and most important, remember that what goes on OUTSIDE the bedroom is the real aphrodisiac. If you're an ass by day and haven't made it right, don't be surprised if the bed is cold that night. Ohhh, that rhymes, cool!
Comment: #23
Posted by: PS
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:25 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1-
Well. You may want to re-read that Bible and find all the references about the May-December biblical couples in there... if that will help. But it may also be that Carla likes things exactly the way they presnetly are and that an engagement is commitment enough as far as she's concerned.
The Annies are right - at 26, Carla is not likely to have seen enough of the world to have the maturity to be with a man more than twice her age and technically old enough to be her grandfather. She may be all you ever wanted, but I doubt it is really reciprocated, even if she says so. Chances are she is not even mature enough to know what she "really" wants!
And also, what exactly do you so for her? It may be that the showering of attention and whatever services you provide are indeed what "she always wanted"... but that she wouldn't want to commit for life and start a family with you.
As the daughter of a minister, Carla no doubt knows the Bible quite well. There would be enough May-December preeminent couples in there, as there are in the history of any European king, all of them (officially) very religious people... She could find those references by herself if she were sufficently motivated, but there is obviously something else reining her in.
I suggest you accept things as they are or move on.
LW2-
"We wish more women would emulate your attitude"
I'm sorry, Annies, but there are a lot of men who feel that if they don't need it anymore, than the wife shouldn't either, as exhibit many letters printed in the past. It would have been nice if your answer had been a little more gender-neutral, seeing that what's good for the goose is supposed to be good for gander also... and many marriages would benefit from the husband emulating LW2's attitude.
As for women equalling not-in-the-mood sex with rape, they forget a trifle detail, I think: whether or not you're in the mood, CONSENT. From the moment the woman agrees, for whatever reason, it cannot be rape. It doesn't become rape because she didn't have any fun.
@happymom
All the reason you stated, a combination of such plus a few more. Menopause sometimes plays dirty tricks on women - makes them depressed and uninterested, tired to the point of exhaustion, so dry between the legs that intercourse is painful... not to mention that some women, not all of course, lose all sex drive once the reproduction apparatus has gone bankrupt. Yes, there is medication for all of that, but it's like everything else, it never works for everyone, and for some the side-effects are overwelmingly toxic.
And then, there is the headspace, still very present in 2011, that tells women that "good girls don't"... with the resulting plethora of men with a Whore & Madonna complex. I believe things are slowly changing, but there are still too many men out there, whining and complaining that their wives are cold fishes and that they live like a monk, but show them a woman who likes sex and they think she's a whore.
Comment: #24
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:26 AM
|
|
|
|
Dear Calif.,
I truly feel sorry for you if you think that the only way to get off or have a meaningful sexual encounter is to insert part A into part B. There are other ways to finish the job, but it requires (sometimes) direct communication with both partners, "Touch me there," "Do this," etc. You must have a very lonely life.
Comment: #25
Posted by: Shannon
Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:21 AM
|
|
|
|
Re Lise, #24,
If a woman is forced to consent through coercion, force, or blackmail, it is rape. Period. End of story. Anyone who is being coerced cannot legally or morally provide consent.
Comment: #26
Posted by: Shannon
Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:24 AM
|
|
|
|
@shannon, giving in reluctantly to a pleading husband that you have a long sexual history with is absolutely not the same thing as coercion, force, or blackmail. Negotiating and compromising on sexual activity with the man you married (said marriage including the promise of monogamous sexual commitment for life) is also not the same thing as being coerced, forced, or blackmailed.
Comment: #27
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:00 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1 is a selfish prick who's thinking about his own wants. This woman has not even lived her life at all and considering he was 53 and she was 24 when they met it was on him to be the mature party and do what was right. The reason she hasn't told her parents is because she has no plans to marry him and why would she? She is ready to settle and have a family and why the hell would she want to do that with someone his age? It wouldn't even be fair to any kids she brought into the world. LW, you have lived your life so let her live hers. Go find someone either a little closer to your age or who has at least live some of their life. I say this as someone married to someone 19 years older, but I can tell you that when we met we had both been divorced once and both had kids; I was 31 and he was 50 so I had at least lived some of my life as he had. We've been together for almost 7 years and have been married for 7 months, and we have plenty in common so clearly I have nothing against age differences by themselves. This scenario is ridiculous; LW needs to grow up.
Comment: #28
Posted by: Kim
Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:17 AM
|
|
|
|
In Shannon's defense
There is a line between coersion and compromise. This is why it's so hard to prove date rape. Coersion means you were unwilling to participate, but did so based on trickery, lies, promises (yes this can still happen in marriages), or just sheer exhaustion ("Oh just shut up and get it over with, Harry!")
Mike, your statement that " giving in reluctantly to a pleading husband that you have a long sexual history with is absolutely not the same thing as coercion, force, or blackmail" is archaic, sexist and incorrect. Rape DOES exist in marriage. it does NOT always involve violencec. It does involve tricking someone into sex by any means possible for your own selfish satisfaction.
Just as I wrote above that a woman should have a desire to please her partner, a MAN, a REAL MAN, would respect a woman who doesn't want to participate. If she consistently does this, then there is a problem in the marriage. It may be physical, or it may be the marriage is broken, or it may mean that that you both need HELP to bring you closer together.
But to say "giving in reluctantly to a pleading husband that you have a long sexual history with is absolutely not the same thing as coercion, force, or blackmail" is absolutely wrong. It is coersion, not COMPROMISE. and it is a form of rape.
Comment: #29
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:32 AM
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Nanchan. You said it a lot better than I would have.
Do I believe that a woman (or man. but, for the sake of this argument, I'll say woman) shouldn't *want* to be sexually active with her partner? No. But, I believe that a woman should do due dillegence to promote and maintain a healthy sex life, up to and including counseling and medical check ups. Are there times when a woman should "give in"? Sure, but, only if her motives are genuinely to make her partner happy, NOT to make him shut up or quit whining.
On the flip side of the coin, a man also has to accept that he's not going to get sex whenever he asks for it, on demand. He also has to do his part to maintain an active sex life.
If a woman routinely gives in to her partner, all that does is to teach the partner that if they whine hard enough, they'll get what they want. And that's not healthy *at all.*
Comment: #30
Posted by: Shannon
Wed Dec 7, 2011 9:46 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: nanchan
Very well said, nanchan. And it works both ways. If I try to interest husband and he is not in the mood, I happily settle for cuddling, because if not tonight, there is tomorrow night. People who love and respect each other can and do communicate about such intimate matters. And he treats intimacy the same way. Nice having the kids out of the house and having a good relationship still.
Comment: #31
Posted by: Carly O
Wed Dec 7, 2011 10:10 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: nanchan
Very well said, nanchan. And it works both ways. If I try to interest husband and he is not in the mood, I happily settle for cuddling, because if not tonight, there is tomorrow night. People who love and respect each other can and do communicate about such intimate matters. And he treats intimacy the same way. Nice having the kids out of the house and having a good relationship still.
Comment: #32
Posted by: Carly O
Wed Dec 7, 2011 10:12 AM
|
|
|
|
We need to take age and gender out of this discussion about sex. There are too many husbands AND wives of all ages who unilaterally decide no more sex. Those people should either allow their spouse extramarital activity or divorce. Part of the responsibility of marriage is to work on a sex life of some sort to the best of both partners' abilities. This means men need to learn to perform oral sex enthusiastically and proficiently and women should work on figuring out what makes them tick, and helping their partner work with them to make it happen. Many men need to be more forgiving of the extra 20lbs women often acquire between the wedding day and age 45. We all need to work harder and not just dismiss it because we don't want to. We lost that right when we got married. NO I am not condoning marital rape. I am affirming sex is a part of marriage and yes, you need to take responsibility for it and keep it good.
Comment: #33
Posted by: wkh
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:04 AM
|
|
|
|
RE: Marital Rape
Yes, there absolutely can be rape between a married couple. I think what we're losing sight of here is the difference between "I'm not in the mood, but s/he is, so what the hell," (which very obviously is NOT rape), and someone who "consents" to sex because of any sort of physical/psychological/emotional abuse (which IS rape, even if there is "consent" because the person has been coerced, or the person's ability to give consent is long gone due to long-term abuse, etc.).
I missed the Dec. 1 thread on all of this, and maybe I'll go back and read it at some point. But from what the Annies offered today, it really did sort of sound like there were people out there suggesting that having sex when you're not in the mood is rape, period. For all that I am a big believer in "no means no" -- even if you're married -- when it comes to marriage, there are very few things that are truly that black and white. Where there is physical/psychological/emotional abuse, yes, that's rape. But millions of people out there have had sex when they weren't really in the mood because they wanted to please their partner and it was done out of love, not "to make him/her stop complaining."
TMI ALERT * TMI ALERT * TMI ALERT
Having just given birth to our first child and still breastfeeding, my hormones are all out of whack right now -- in fact, I would suggest my hormones are way more out of whack now than they ever were during pregnancy, so go figure. The result: intercourse HURTS right now. My husband understands this, and if anything, I think he's sort of avoiding making any moves, as it were. And of course, as you might imagine, I am hardly in the mood, knowing as I do, that at least some of it is likely to be less-than-pleasant right now. But I also know that things will get better (and if they don't once my hormones are back to normal, I will see a doctor -- in fact, as luck would have it, I have an appointment coming up soon anyway, so I'll bring it up then). Hubby doesn't know it, but I've already planned to do some initiating myself this weekend, whether I'm in the mood or not. Why? Because the only way I'm going to know if things are getting better is if I try. And I know that once things are better, I'll want it again. But more importantly, I know my husband misses ME as much as he misses the sex. That is reason enough for me to be more than willing to have sex when I'm not in the mood.
Comment: #34
Posted by: Lisa
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:07 AM
|
|
|
|
LW1: So... why do you insist on marrying Carla? The large age difference will probably tear you apart eventually. Why not just enjoy the relationship that you have without forcing it into a legal committment that will be difficult to dissolve?
LW2: OK, I just have to stick up for us mature women. I am a post-menopausal woman and I have *not* lost my sex drive. If anything, it is even stronger now. <blush> I am on bio-identical hormone replacement therapy; don't know if that has anything to do with it. Whether you are male or female, if you have problems with intimacy, just SEE YOUR DOCTOR. If he/she blows you off, get another doctor.
Comment: #35
Posted by: PuaHone
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:07 AM
|
|
|
|
@wkh -- hear, hear! I'm going to take your first sentence, however, and apply it to the rest of what you had to say, too. It's not just men who need to learn about oral sex (and other, non-intercourse modes of pleasure), and it's not just women who put on some additional weight as they age. I'm not giving you a hard time about this, because I do think that the genders you called out for different things are the ones that are most common.
Comment: #36
Posted by: Lisa
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:14 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Miss Pasko
THANK YOU, DEAR!
Comment: #37
Posted by: Joyce/MN
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:54 AM
|
|
|
|
@nanchan, no, it's not, because it's just as true if the genders are reversed, or if we are talking about a gay couple. It's not outdated, and I never said that a spouse could never be raped by another spouse. I was very careful to not suggest any such thing, actually.
But it IS a bad idea to use the word "rape" in a situation that clearly isn't rape -- to suggest that one spouse, in a long-term, committed relationship, when expecting a continuation of that sexual relationship is automatically using coercion is *false*. And it diminishes the word rape to use it so casually.
Going back to the original issue, a couple's sex life has to be mutual, communicative, and cooperative. And that sometimes means that partners aren't "at the same level of mood" but understand that there are things they can do to get in the mood, or compromises that should be made in both directions to continue the relationship -- or else perhaps realize the relationship should be over.
That's completely and utterly different from one spouse threatening or blackmailing or coercing another, and to stretch the semantics to make those equivalent is stretching the words beyond the breaking point. A husband or wife who is unhappy about their spouse withdrawing sex, and trying to engage their spouse in sex, trying to initiate a conversation to convince their spouse to continue their sex life, is NOT automatically the same thing as "coercion" or "blackmail" or "force".
That's all I was pointing out.
The LWs did not mention coercion, force, blackmail. They mention one spouse losing interest and unilaterally shutting the door on physical intimacy. To suggest that having sex with your spouse when you aren't in the mood is *the same* as being coerced is false.
And again, the genders of the spouses don't matter.
Of course, if there is some form of abuse, we are talking about a COMPLETELY different scenario. But that wasn't the case being discussed. And bringing the idea of coercion into this discussion is a red herring to the issues of the LWs.
Comment: #38
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 12:51 PM
|
|
|
|
@Lisa, thank you so much for acknowledging the difference, as that was what I was trying to do myself earlier.
I should have been more gender-neutral in my pronouns, but because the original LW was a man complaining about his wife, I simply used the same genders. In retrospect that distracted from the point I was trying to make, but I'm glad you could put it so succinctly.
Comment: #39
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 1:09 PM
|
|
|
|
Wow, the definitions of rape certainly are becoming all-encompassing. I recently read that a man was charged with rape after his girlfriend willingly had sex with him, because he had poked holes in her condom in the hopes that she would become pregnant. Since she said she never would have consented to sex if she had known the birth control was tampered with, he was convicted of rape. Which I thought was interesting--does this mean that all the women who have secretly gone off the pill in the hopes of getting pregnant are guilty of raping their men? It would be interesting to see a woman get charged with that.
Comment: #40
Posted by: Jane
Wed Dec 7, 2011 1:49 PM
|
|
|
|
@Jane -- while I think it is despicable for either person to try to trick the other one into having a child s/he doesn't want, I don't think that should be called "rape." But I might not have a problem with turning it into some sort of crime. I'd have to think about the potential unintended consequences of making that a punishable crime. There's a reason that there are a number of differentiated sex crimes that aren't all lumped into one "rape" category, which also gives judges and juries more options for verdict and punishment.
One of the problems, of course, is that where pregnancy is concerned, there is no gender-neutral, "fair" way to approach this. Regulars have heard me rant about this before, so I'll try to keep it short and just say that the "invasive" consequences of a woman being tricked into having a child are FAR greater than the consequences a man faces. So, while it is despicable regardless of which gender does the tricking, there is still a difference to be acknowledged.
Comment: #41
Posted by: Lisa
Wed Dec 7, 2011 3:34 PM
|
|
|
|
Just got through reading the blogs on the sex subject, (just got off from work) and everyone had excellent points. The "older generation" thinks of sex as a chore (my mom included) and some resent it entirely. But I have to point out that when there is a trusting, long term relationship, whether by marriage or whatever, that men and women have to give a little to please the other. Rape? Hardly, unless the relationship is sick and perverted, but for the average person, the whole point of love is to show the other person how much they are loved, either through cuddles or sex. I read the blogs from other sources and it stymies me. I am 40-ish with 2 prepubescent children, but I want to make sure my husband knows how loved/sexy/manly he is, and if that means "doing it" when I'm dead tired, so be it. We actually discussed this after an "interlude" and he admitted he had hearts coming out of his head for at least a week after we had "fun". That is the reason I think wives/partners should "give them a piece". It's more than sex. It's love and snuggles that last. Just sayin....
Comment: #42
Posted by: happymom
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:22 PM
|
|
|
|
Gotta go... :)
Comment: #43
Posted by: happymom
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:29 PM
|
|
|
|
@happymom, nicely put!
Comment: #44
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:04 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Chris
It worked out for Celine Dion
Comment: #45
Posted by: Misha
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:07 PM
|
|
|
|
happymom:
Hope you had a great day at work!
I think it's an interesting thread, all the way around. Shannon brought up the issue of rape, and in some ways, it does belong in this discussion. When one partner is adamantly against sex for any reason, it's not ok for the other partner to keep going. Mike H's comment "giving in reluctantly to a pleading husband " to me is pretty borderline. His EXCUSING this because it's a long term relationship is just ridiculous. Since when does a long term relationship mean that you have to put out when you just can't/don't want to/feel angry etc? Do we marry or get into long term relationships ONLY to be a sex partner?
NOW, that being SAID, please go back and read the original posts on this thread before rape came up. I think most of us agree that a marriage means compromises. Yes that means doing things you don't want to do all the time. Do we really LIKE going to our in laws homes and putting up with the MIL who whines about the price of her meds? No, but we do it because we love our spouses. Do we like doing the laundry? Probably not, but we also appreciate that our spouses do (fill in the blank: in my house it's taking care of the car). Do we sometimes feel like falling asleep and not making love but make love anyway because we know our spouses need the love? OF COURSE! And it's not RAPE if it's a COMPROMISE.
What I'm describing, and what you are describing in your last posts, are a happy and healthy marriage. rape is NEVER healthy and yes, it does exist in marriages. I stand by my posts that if lack of sexual desire is there consistently then you need to get help. But for one partner or another to "plead" or whine, or beg KNOWING that the spouse is tired, angry, whatever... at that point, the PLEADER needs to shut it down for the night and respect his/her spouse enough to give it a rest.
Comment: #46
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:28 PM
|
|
|
|
@Shannon
I agree with you, but a man physically forcing himself on a woman after she said no is clearly defined legally speaking. The establishment of what would legally constitute "coercion" and "blackmail", especially among people living maritally, is more difficult and full of murky zones. As Lisa rightly pointed out, "there are very few things that are truly that black and white".
Even though we're all speaking English here, different people will have different meanings and connotations for the same word, and different names for the same action. For instance, when nanchan talks about "tricking someone into sex by any means possible for your own selfish satisfaction", she and others would call that 'coercion' and 'rape', but *I* would call that 'dirty manipulation' (marital) or 'seducing' (non-marital). But that's me.
Not that it makes it any more acceptable no matter WHAT you call it.
Because frankly, if a man and a woman living maritally are at the point of needing to define what constitutes rape in between the two of them, methinks the woman is sleeping with the enemy.
@Jane
If a man was once convicted of rape because he stabbed holes in his condom to impregnate his girlfriend without her consent, then I believe this is called a precedent in jurisprudence and that the same could (and should) be applied to a woman pulling the same dirty trick on a man - even though the consequences of pregnancy ARE more far-reaching for a woman than for a man.
And, personally, yes, I would call that rape, because while there was consent to sex, there was no consent to pregnancy and the effective means to prevent it were deliberately sabotaged. He DID force himself on her - he forced his baby on her. That is a form of rape, because not only the consent to pregnancy was absent, but the consent to sex was tampered with.
@happymom
You're just sayin', but you're sayin' it well... You sound like a happy wife as well as a happy mom!
Comment: #47
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Wed Dec 7, 2011 6:32 PM
|
|
|
|
It does diminish the word "rape" to use it casually. It also diminishes the word "rape" and those who have been raped to not call what happened to them exactly what it is, which is being forced to have or consent to sex against one's will.
Comment: #48
Posted by: Shannon
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:17 PM
|
|
|
|
My two cents on the marital rape subject.
I have seen women express opinions about this in other columns, and the fact that so many women see having sexual relations with their husbands when they are not in the mood as a form of marital rape is troubling. I believe that this has a lot to do with the traditional view of marital sex: that it's a woman's duty, and that a husband has ownership rights over a woman's body simply by virtue of being her husband. That certainly sounds like an arrangement where the woman has no right to say no. And if she feels that way, it is a form of coercion, whether physical force is used or not. I know a lot of people would say that this view of marital sex is outdated, and it certainly is. But it has been in place for centuries, and old prejudices die hard. Instead of belittling and ridiculing women who have such feelings, people should try to understand them.
Frankly, I think that any discussion about how a man needs his wife to meet his needs should be accompanied by a discussion of how he can meet her needs, and vice versa. If the focus is on only one of them, the other party is bound to feel resentful. I do think that when a couple has a truly loving marriage, they will automatically make concessions when needed and take care of each other's needs. When it gets down to a discussion of who owes what to whom, that's a symptom of deeper issues in the marriage, which need to be addressed.
Comment: #49
Posted by: JMG
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:04 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Mike H But the discussion was about men who were no longer capable of performing, but kept bugging their wives for sex anyway. And leaving the wife frustrated after a long period of stimulating her. This is what I was referring to when I suggested that a younger woman would not suddenly make him virile.
Comment: #50
Posted by: sarah stravinska
Thu Dec 8, 2011 8:44 AM
|
|
|
|
@sarah, that's a good point, although I think it really depends on why the man was no longer capable. Sometimes a younger partner -- or a more willing partner -- may indeed be enough to resolve the problem, if it was primarily psychological. That's not exactly a happy thing to say, but it happens. If it's primarily a physical issue, then nowadays a visit to the doctor could resolve the problem, but you're right, a younger woman wouldn't matter in that scenario.
Comment: #51
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:10 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Lise Brouillette
I agree that the relationship in LW1 is going nowhere. But you state that there are plenty of biblical references to May-December romances. I'd like to know exactly what those citations are, and how YOU interpret them.
My guess is, unless LW1 is reading these same biblical verses through his own glasses (i.e., reading it the way he wants to read it and interpret it), there is nothing in there that specifically says, in essence, "When you're 40 years old, thou shall not date anyone 20 years younger than you, for that makes you a cradle robber." (I agree there are plenty of romantic/sexual relationships where one partner is significantly older than the other.)
Comment: #52
Posted by: Bobaloo
Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:38 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
