The "No-Sex" Class: Appetites
Donald Zimmer of AskMen.com manifests the foolishness of the "no-sex" class paradigm in "sex health advisor" column
sexual surplus
My husband and I have sexual problems. I am a freak; ready and willing to please him in any way, shape or form (with the exception of him being with somebody else). I will let him watch me as I do another female or let him do me while I do another female, but I don't like to share at all! The question is: How to I spark his interest in sex and keep it?
At one point he couldn't keep his hands off me. Now I can barely get him to put them on. I would just like to keep him interested, and was wondering if y'all had any advice? I'm not an ugly woman; I have put on some weight but my breasts went from a 36B to a 42DD. When they were smaller I had no feeling in them at all; now it's a whole different story! Plus I like the benefits that they bring to the bedroom.
Alexandra
Alexandra,
I think the source of your problem can be best summarized as follows: You can have too much of a good thing. In other words, your husband's current lack of interest may be the consequence of his having enjoyed free rein in the bedroom for so long. There's a lot to be said for keeping some forbidden fruit in a relationship; in the absence of taboos, every sexual act can become commonplace.
I'm no therapist, Alexandra, and you may eventually conclude that a therapist is required. But in the meantime, try doing a little withholding. You'll be surprised at how much more we want what we can't have.
Donald Zimmer
Read the quote in context here.
What's the name of that website Amanda Marcotte used to reference? The one that reverses genders in any English text you paste into it? (I think as well as handling gendered pronouns and body parts it may have also been able to substitute first names, as in "John" for "Jane" or "Donna" for "Donald.") Anyway I ask because I'm... pretty sure Zimmer would have had different advise if his correspondent had been named "Alexander" instead of "Alexandra."
I mean, don't you think? Although actually our narratives about gender are such that *if* a man bothered to write in with such a complaint I'm not sure many advice columnists would have bothered answering.
I *am* sure, however, that a man wouldn't be advised that "... your problem can be best summarized as follows: You can have too much of a good thing. In other words, your [wife's] current lack of interest may be the consequence of [her] having enjoyed free rein in the bedroom for so long."
Funny thing, of course, is that it's actually excellent relationship advice for *any* partner who's sexual appetite is larger than his or her partner's! What makes it funny though, again, is that no one ever offers that solution to men even though we're far more likely to express the complaint.
See what I mean? The "natural" answer for a high-libido woman is "play hard to get." It's not the "natural" answer for high-libido men (which by convention is usually abbreviated as "men") because most people recognize that while it's possible it's neither fun nor easy...
Nor is "have less sex" exactly the most consistent advice for someone who's request was...
...how to have *more* sex.
Double-bind much?
[Hat tip to AAG. --fl]
---
Quick semi-digression: I chose the word "appetite" carefully, by the way, because that same disparity shows up in a lot of places. A few years ago some enterprising young economists studied phone dynamics of couples in long-term relationships. Their finding was that if one member needs to check in every two days and another every three then the first member will do nearly all the calling... with resulting resentment and irritation about "clinginess" and/or "aloofness"... even though given just a little more time the second member would want to check in *just as badly as the first!* And might even be the "clingy" member with a different partner who needed to check in every four days. The point being that "I'm not lonely *yet*" isn't the same as "I don't get lonely" or, more significantly, "I'm indifferent to you." In food the analogy would be "No thanks, I'm still full from our last meal," not "I never get hungry." And in sex the analogy would be "I'm not horny *yet,* not "I have a low or no libido."
---
P.S. I was so startled by Zimmer's advice I nearly forgot about Alexandra's trapped-in-the-paradigm self-introduction: "My husband and I have sexual problems. I am a freak; ready and willing to please him in any way"
Unpacking all the different layers in those two sentences could take all day. Let's just say in order to be a freak she'd have to
*Laughing at the absurdity*
As a woman in a non-sex-balanced marriage where my drive is higher...
I have to say, if I took that silly advice, I would never have sex at ALL with my husband.
Why don't they try examining the lack of desire as the problem instead of just a lack of the "right" actions (or inactions, as they so blunderously assume). I mean, who's to say if the woman in question stopped trying, her husband wouldn't just say, "Thank goodness! She's finally given up!" instead of pouncing on her again?
Okay, no. I have no clue what kind of advice I'd give because it's way outside my experience, but that definitely would not be it. Apparently there's no logic to that response because trying to find any is making my brain explode.
...wow, that's some ridiculous advice right there. not only is it rife with no-sex bull, but it lays the blame solely at the wife's door. what about environmental factors--she's put on some weight, what about her husband (assuming they share a similar diet)? has he put on any weight, too? that can have an effect, for a variety of reasons. has there been an increase in stresses in his life, such as economic difficulties, a rough time at work or home, illness in the family, illness within himself? hell, maybe a nuclear plant opened up next door and they're both dealing with thyroid hormone imbalances. you don't have to be a therapist or counselor to know that a lot of things can impact someone's mental or physical well-being and libido...