There’s a big difference the coercive “Do this sex act or I’ll dump you” and the non-coercive decision to end a relationship because of lack of sexual compatibility.  Anyone who doesn’t understand this difference is probably being willfully ignorant.

thanks to the magic of teh Google I can share with you all the immortal “allergic to grilled cheese” column from the Boston Globe’s Love Letters:  http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/relationships/blog/2009/06/allergic_to_grilled_cheese.html

More to the point, enthusiastic consent is just that. If people are fundamentally incompatible sexually (Party A needs something in their sexual relationship and Party B does not want to perform that act) and are unable or undesiring of working around it (say by exploring non-monogamy in having alternative sexual partners to meet those needs), then the end result should be a hearty handshake and a sayonara.

If there is a fundamental incompatibility in the relationship, then that’s just it. Forcing it one way or another so that you can “stay together” just ends up with someone having to suffer something they view as punishment, either one person performing an action outside their consent or one person going without something they feel is critical for a relationship.

I can get that people are thinking of “do this sex act or you don’t love me” and other attempts at non-consent, but an honest breakup over sexual incompatability is not that and is in fact its opposite. One is a tool that is trying to force back a consent barrier and the other is an acknowledgment that a consent barrier makes a further sexual relationship impossible.

Acknowledging reality even though it might suck is where we want to get. Where people might have to accept a sucky decision, but will be able to make those decisions and doesn’t feel pressured and forced into unwanted behaviors because otherwise “they’re at fault for the breakup” or the emotional fallout or prove a social pressure that they are unlovable bitches who can never win at love.

It allows people to lessen the impact of a breakup, allows it to be mutual before the bad blood starts to seep in and make it a painful ugly breakup, and thus preserves the greatest chance that the people might still remain friends.

So yeah, we want that society. It aids consent rather than works against it and defangs the assumed “punishment” of breakups that passive-aggressive non-consent methods rely on rather than strengthening them.

A world where a woman can dump a guy for not being what she’s looking for sexually, is also one where the answer to “give head or I’ll dump you” can be “well, if you love me that little maybe you should grab your pants and your toothbrush, because I don’t think you’re coming back anymore”.

And if he doesn’t want to give head for non-douchebag reasons (say being gay or asexual), then he’s going to be much happier in a relationship that doesn’t prioritize sexual needs or otherwise better fits their sexual needs or lack thereof.

I’d much rather someone just dump me because I didn’t want to do something with them than have them passive-aggressively stick around and put “subtle” pressure on me, hoping I’ll change when I’ve already made my intentions and desires clear.

Oral sex wouldn’t necessarily be a deal-breaker for everyone, but the truth is you’re entitled to end any relationship you want, platonic or romantic, for whatever reason you want.

Addendum to self.

I’ll never understand why so many in our society seem to view relationships as an organism in and of themselves that the people inside have to sacrifice to for the sake of sacrificing.

The goal of a relationship, it has always seemed to me, is a mutual affair between two people that they enter into with the goal of making themselves and each other happy.

If it’s making both parties miserable or there is a genuine important incompatibility, then you shouldn’t remain in a relationship.

“Keeping the relationship going” after that, just because you feel you should is just paying blood into a heartless imaginary system that doesn’t care so that you can look more “socially pious”. Actually, now that I phrase it that way, it makes perfect sense why this system thrives so well in our Puritan-soaked society.

To be fair, bananacat, it’s really hard to convey that you are going to dump someone over an issue without saying just that.  It’s complicated, but, “A relationship without X sex act isn’t a relationship for me” is only subtly different than “do X or I’ll dump you”.  Content-wise, it’s very similar, but obviously the difference is that the first person is just being honest and hopefully won’t settle for someone who is like, crying through sex act X.

I’ll add that sex acts aren’t an either/or thing.  A lot of people are adventurous and take a “try it you might like it” attitude.  Indeed, one of the benefits of a relationship can be horizon-broadening.  If someone views a relationship as horizon-broadening and another as trying to get someone nailed down as quickly as possible so they can give up trying, well that’s an incompatibility.  A lot of times, it’s not the specific act that’s a problem but the unwillingness to be adventurous.

Guys may not like the taste of the pussy, but it’s not like a penis tastes like chocolate and yet learning to give a passing BJ is downright demanded of straight women. As Dan Savage put it, cock is an acquired taste, and there’s no reason a man who learned to like the taste of beer can’t also learn to like the taste of vulva.

And it’s super-common for women to find cunnilingus so anxiety producing (because omg he probably isn’t enjoying it and I wonder if it’s damaging out relationship that he’s even down there) that it’s not really a pleasurable act.

And those women are totally within their rights to not explore the oral arts and get over that. If he really wants to go down on you and you’re crossing your legs at the idea, he might be within his rights to find someone else who will enjoy what he enjoys. But otherwise, I’m not sure there’s a plank on the feminist agenda that All Women Everywhere Must Enjoy Cunnilingus.

But we should accept that the fear of cunnilingus is a big ol’ patriarchal turd and not heap a bunch of shit on other women for enjoying oral sex.

I’ll never understand why so many in our society seem to view relationships as an organism in and of themselves that the people inside have to sacrifice to for the sake of sacrificing.

Very well put. In terms of social norms, of course, our society is still unfortunately saddled with the baggage of a monogamous relationship as an institution that’s vital to the social fabric and that transcends the actual happiness of its participants. We’re growing out of that, but sadly the “relationships take work” model is still pushed pretty hard by the old-guard moralists of society. I mean, relationships do take work, but there’s no sense in staying in the relationship if working towards its survival makes you unhappy.

It’s complicated, but, “A relationship without X sex act isn’t a relationship for me” is only subtly different than “do X or I’ll dump you”.  Content-wise, it’s very similar, but obviously the difference is that the first person is just being honest and hopefully won’t settle for someone who is like, crying through sex act X.

Yeah, that is the key difference. Wielding the threat of break-up to deliberately coerce someone is awful. But if you’ve gotten to the point where you just want to leave, and you tell your partner it’s because you need [grilled cheese], then obviously you have a responsibility to turn them down if they desperately offer to provide it in an attempt to keep you from leaving.

Guys may not like the taste of the pussy

I know this is totally and 100% a YMMV thing, but I have never had a problem with the taste of vagina.

I’ll never understand why so many in our society seem to view relationships as an organism in and of themselves that the people inside have to sacrifice to for the sake of sacrificing.

The goal of a relationship, it has always seemed to me, is a mutual affair between two people that they enter into with the goal of making themselves and each other happy.

If it’s making both parties miserable or there is a genuine important incompatibility, then you shouldn’t remain in a relationship.

“Keeping the relationship going” after that, just because you feel you should is just paying blood into a heartless imaginary system that doesn’t care so that you can look more “socially pious”. Actually, now that I phrase it that way, it makes perfect sense why this system thrives so well in our Puritan-soaked society.
Comment #5: Cerberus on 08/08 at 08:15 PM

Totally agreed.

A relationship is like a career or a calling.  You put time and energy into it because you want to, because you want it to last, because, on balance, you believe it will give more to you than you give to it.  Yes, sometimes you don’t feel like giving to it, but you should never feel like you’ll never be repaid or like your feelings don’t matter or your contribution is required, not voluntary.

Bad relationships and religion have that in common as you have noted.

Actually, you see this in non-sexual contexts as well.  People are told by friends or advice columnists that they shouldn’t break up with their SO “just because” he or she is overweight or flirts with others or is a cheapskate or whatever, and you often see people wondering if X bad behavior constitutes “abuse” or not, as if it would be okay to break up with the SO if he were abusive, but not if he just had a terrible sense of humor.  But the fact is that while some reasons for breaking up with someone are less admirable than others, you can break up with someone for any reason at all, and breaking up with someone because you are incompatible in some fundamental way is often a good idea. 

Some of this, I think, is relationship inertia.  Breaking up is unpleasant, and people often go to amazing lengths to avoid breaking up with someone, because being the dumper has a certain stigma attached to it, and some people either think it’s morally preferable to be the victim or simply lack the courage to dump someone. 

I think that sometimes sacrifice and compromise are part of a relationship, because when there are two people there will inevitably be different goals, desires, and preferences to be balanced, and some of those goals, desires, and preferences will not be seen by the parties involved to be worth breaking up over, given the overall state of the relationship.  But sacrifice and compromise are not the *purpose* of a relationship.  I think people confuse the idea that relationships sometimes require effort to maintain with the idea that relationships are supposed to be work.

Actually, you see this in non-sexual contexts as well.  People are told by friends or advice columnists that they shouldn’t break up with their SO “just because” he or she is overweight or flirts with others or is a cheapskate or whatever….
Comment #12: Kit-Kat on 08/08 at 11:57 PM

One of these things is not like the others.

Guys may not like the taste of the pussy, but it’s not like a penis tastes like chocolate and yet learning to give a passing BJ is downright demanded of straight women.

You made me think—I’ve heard of chocolate condoms (you are practicing safe sex, I hope!) but hadn’t heard of flavored dental dams.  So I did a quick google:

http://www.beecourse.com/chocolate-flavoured-dental-dams.html

How it tastes is no excuse when you can flavor it how you like.

Actually, oldfeminist, I think they are all alike.  There is an idea floating around that you have to have a “good” reason for breaking up with someone, when in fact you don’t.  If you’re married or have a child with someone or otherwise have mutually entered into a heightened level of commitment, perhaps this holds true, but it gets applied to ordinary dating relationships.  It leads to this hairsplitting about what reason is good enough, when the only reason you need to stop dating someone is “I no longer want to date you.”  Like I said, some reasons are less admirable than others, and some may indicate a less-then-stellar character, but “if you’re not doing it for someone, they don’t have to be with you.”

You need a triple like button for this post.

If he really wants to go down on you and you’re crossing your legs at the idea, he might be within his rights to find someone else who will enjoy what he enjoys.

“Might”?  If a guy is uncomfortable with the idea of receiving a blowjob from his girlfriend, is she justified in dumping him?

If a guy is uncomfortable with the idea of receiving a blowjob from his girlfriend, is she justified in dumping him?

If she really wants to give blowjobs, then yes. I’m not really sure what rhetorical point you were going for, though. I mean, I love going down on women, and I sure as hell can’t see myself in a monogamous relationship with a woman who wouldn’t want me to.

It’s not like women (or men) are obligated to like it, but we all have a right to be in a relationship with someone who wants what we want, sexually or otherwise.

Bananacat

There’s a big difference the coercive “Do this sex act or I’ll dump you” and the non-coercive decision to end a relationship because of lack of sexual compatibility.  Anyone who doesn’t understand this difference is probably being willfully ignorant.

Exactly. And this reminds me of that same tendency when we talk about rape and consent and someone goes right to exploring what might be the legal limit of still getting away with something nonconsensual. there’s a willfull ignorance going on there that’s a bit creepy.

In case anyone is wondering what is so damn hard about resolving to dump some loser who’s repulsed by your genitals but won’t admit it, I can say that it is hard.  No personal experience, but a close female friend was involved for almost three years with a man who wouldn’t go down on her and a close male friend was married to a woman who refused all sexual contact with him, not just PIV, after the birth of their child.  Corrosive for both of my friends. 

Your partner doesn’t wake up one morning and bellow, “Eww, you stink, you make me puke.”  There’s ambiguous rejection, then things start looking better, then more rejection.  My friends found themselves in the middle of a shitpile before they knew it was building.

So I sympathize with people at the receiving end of this treatment.  It looks simple from the outside.  Inside it’s a complicated mess.

Always makes me wonder when I meet a guy who doesn’t really like eating pussy. Come on dude, you’re kneeling before the holy of holies. If you’re into chicks how could you not try to do your best with pleasure?

It’s the same thing with body shaming. I’ve heard guys dis women I found quite hot because they’re too fat or too old. WTF? aren’t yall really into women’s bodies? I think some guys are more into woman as a status symbol rather than as a sex object. I can assure you that low-key sex objectification with discrete glances and by the rules interaction as if a guy had ever really interacted with real women is way better than status based slut shaming, body shaming, and catcalls.

I have found that eating pussy is often a reliable and simple means to a woman’s orgasm. Plus it’s a “holy of holies” turn on for me. What’s not to love.

Dude is reluctant to eat pussy. DTMFA.

this is an eminently reasonable approach. frankly, there would probably be a lot fewer divorces if people would just man up before they got married, and accept that the relationship is ultimately doomed to failure, because eventually someone is going to get tired of compromising all the time. realistically, this is true of all relationships, personal and business; you will, at some point, feel cheated, and decide to terminate it. better to do it before there are children/clients/community property.

part of the problem here is that we, as a society, have been trained that compromise is a sacred trait. that’s fine, up to a point. when you start having to compromise on things that are very important to you, i question the value of continuing on, because in the long-run you will feel cheated, and end up hating the other party. this is unfair to both of you.

btw, i love pussy, and can’t imagine being in a long-term relationship with a woman who wouldn’t want my tongue down there. guys who don’t haven’t a clue what they’re missing.

@Kit-Kat

I don’t think oldfeminist was disagreeing that you’re within your rights to dump someone for whatever reason you like. But some reasons are dumber than others.

To give another example, if a racist found out their partner had black ancestry and they dumped them over it, it would be a stupid and assholish of them, but they would still be “within their rights”. They wouldn’t get the sympathy that someone who dumped over cheating or abuse would, but there’s no reason they shouldn’t be able to terminate the relationship (to the benefit of their partner as well, in the long term).

We can agree that people can withdraw consent for any reason without claiming all reasons are equally rational.

First of all, heck yeah to @bananacat #1: “There’s a big difference the coercive “Do this sex act or I’ll dump you” and the non-coercive decision to end a relationship because of lack of sexual compatibility.”

I don’t necessarily agree they’re being willfully ignorant, because there’s a heck of a lot of myth and narrative about any relationship you’re in having to be “the one” and therefore worth any amount of sacrifice, blah, blah, blah.  That said, even if it’s not willful it’s still ignorance.  (And the difference between ignorant and stupid is that ignorant is curable.  And sometimes self-healing.)

Second of all, heck yeah to Mighty Ponygirl #8!

Neither penises nor vulvas are made of chocolate.  But many people still find them delicious.  Enough so that if you really want to be eaten, or to eat your partner, you’re not obliged to soldier on without for their sake.

That said, I seem to be a lot more sanguine than a lot of people about everyone getting a pass on something—“sex positive,” contrary to popular opinion, is about tolerance as much as it’s about openness.  The real question is if oral or some other very popular item isn’t on the menu the important question is what else have you got to offer instead?  And is it enough?  If not then maybe it’s not going to work.

Which is fine.  Some people don’t like to eat, others don’t like to be eaten.  And as any number of folks will tell you, it’s not universally true that oral is an automatic key to the erogenous kingdom.  And so for every man or woman who’d rather not do it there’s probably a perfectly presentable partner who simply doesn’t care.

Question everyone needs to ask themselves: is it the sensation or the symbolism you’re insisting on?  It’s ok to answer either way or both, but it’s important to think about your answer.

figleaf

Oh, and for the record, zany as it sounds, some perfectly wonderful people don’t like chocolate either.  Fortunately many more perfectly wonderful people do.  Same with fellatio and cunnilingus.

figleaf

And I just love how every perfectly reasonable statement that Jill makes about women DTMFA-ing someone they are incompatible with devolves into bouts of “but what about…?!” butthurt and outrage. Like, that OP has nothing to do with asexuals. Nothing. But apparently women’s sexualities aren’t sufficiently “marginalized” to deserve discussion without derailing over there.

cpnva:

... man up….

Excuse me?!?

Many women prefer manual stimulation to oral.  Ditto men.  I’m not sure how much of it you can attribute to social anxiety.

Treefinger @ 25 - since you agreed with what Kit-Kat said here, why are you scolding her?

I have to agree with Kit-Kat @15: I suppose it’s not noble to dump someone for gaining a lot of weight, but who is really benefitting when someone is gritting their teeth and sticking with someone they don’t find sexually attractive any longer because their body changed drastically in a short period of time?  If you’re really attracted to fat people and your partner loses a bunch of weight, that could also have the same effect.  Is that person equally “shallow”?  I guess so.  But I fail to understand how it benefits the potential dump-ee to be in a relationship with someone who isn’t there because they want to be there, but because they’ve been told they have to continue a sexual relationship out of social duty.

I’ve honestly never really understood why so many people hold up compromise as the end all, be all, of relationships.  To me, compromise is what you get when you can get what you want (I have a suspicion that this may be a famous quote, but I’m not sure).  There are plenty of important principles in a relationship, honesty, fairness, consent, etc., but compromise isn’t one of them.  It may be necessary, but you shouldn’t be having to do it all the time on important things (in the grand scheme of things compromising on “Italian or Chinese for Dinner?” isn’t that important, but compromising on whether to get married or have kids?  Way bigger deal).  So from that angle, I certainly believe that people have the right to exit a relationship for ANY reason they see fit.  And if they keep ending relationships for shitty reasons they’ll have to learn to be more accepting of minor differences/flaws if they want to have a fulfilling relationship, or they’ll have to accept a more solitary existence.

Wait a minute. The world doesn’t owe anyone a relationship? People have the right to leave a relationship if sexual incompatibilities are making them miserable?

Holy crap Amanda, are you competing with Dan Savage for the title of History’s Greatest Monster?

This common sense observation was met mostly with amen-sisters in the comments, but there was the inevitable showing of people who live to make sure no feminist blogging thread can be free of the kind of hand-wringing that makes outsiders think we’re all fucking nuts.

Are they unionized?  The It’s-All-About-ME derailers are so effective and constant.  They have to be organized.

But I fail to understand how it benefits the potential dump-ee to be in a relationship with someone who isn’t there because they want to be there, but because they’ve been told they have to continue a sexual relationship out of social duty.

Privileged selfish slut bigot! How dare you say we’re not obligated to stay with someone just because they want us too.  What, do you think women have the right to self-determination?!?  They don’t!  They have to stay, or they’re a bigot!

There’s a big difference the coercive “Do this sex act or I’ll dump you” and the non-coercive decision to end a relationship because of lack of sexual compatibility.  Anyone who doesn’t understand this difference is probably being willfully ignorant.

The only difference is how you assign moral culpability.  People are smart enough to connect the dots themselves.  Connecting them for them is just helpful for everyone.  Whether you own the coercion or try to pretend it comes from happenstances makes no difference.  Either you know it’s something they need, and the relationship is implicitly on the line (might as well make it explicit), or they haven’t told you how much is matters.  And it’s bullshit to prevent a partner from meeting your needs by not telling them what those are.

And frankly, I’d much rather know something was a big enough deal that I’d be dumped over it, then not be told I’d get left over it until it happens - “Do it, or I’ll leave you” makes for an informed decision.  If we’re watching a TV show together, and she starts watching ahead, I should tell her how much it upsets me, not just show up with divorce papers because I don’t want to be coercive.

An ex of mine had something of a love-hate relationship with blowjobs. At one point she stopped giving them yet pleaded me to finger her. I made it clear as daylight that I wouldn’t please her if she wouldn’t please me. That didn’t go well. She was almost sobbing while nagging me about how much she wanted it. It was very a puzzling situation. Granted, we were both in our late teens. I do hope people grow out of this immaturity.

#26 - Thank you, Figleaf. You nailed it with the “sensation or the symbolism” question. Don’t get me wrong, I agree that there is a segment of “vaginas are icky” people and I wouldn’t want to be with one. But the focus on “men give oral or they’re mean/bad” seems reductive and unfair to both parties. Some people just don’t like giving/getting, or have abuse baggage. It’s not always grounded in a bad attitude toward women. (I also am sick of the idea that oral is key to a woman’s orgasm. Seriously, if that’s your one surefire trick, you need to expand your skill set.) Other people have sexual tastes that may feel just as urgent to them, but don’t receive the same kind of legitimacy because they’ve been classified as kinky or juvenile.

I also think the more diverse and unusual your personal sexual menu, the more you accept the unlikelihood of finding one partner who’s into every single act you are, and dealing with minor incompatibilities becomes less of an issue. But if you only have two or three acts that do it for you, then perfect compatibility probably becomes more critical.

@35 Brian,

If your only two options are an ultimatum or staying completely silent until you show up with papers / leave a Dear John/Jill note, perhaps you are doing relationships wrong.

What is it with people wanting to pretend that two extremes are the only options, especially in relationships where so much is shades of grey? You presumably spend a lot of time with the other person, so there’s lots of time and opportunities to discuss what’s important to you, what would be a dealbreaker, feedback loops, etc.

I know this is totally and 100% a YMMV thing, but I have never had a problem with the taste of vagina.
Comment #10: Triplanetary on 08/08 at 09:22 PM

I’m only working with a sample size of two, but part of the mileage variation is variation among individual women.  People have different tastes.

“I’ll add that sex acts aren’t an either/or thing.  A lot of people are adventurous and take a “try it you might like it” attitude.  Indeed, one of the benefits of a relationship can be horizon-broadening.  If someone views a relationship as horizon-broadening and another as trying to get someone nailed down as quickly as possible so they can give up trying, well that’s an incompatibility.  A lot of times, it’s not the specific act that’s a problem but the unwillingness to be adventurous.”

Amen. This can be quite the minefield. A woman was once upset at me for asking her to spice up our sexual activities. She saw it as an indictment of her and her bed skills. As if I would be happy with PG-13 sex if I truly cared for her or was more attracted to her or whatever (I’m not even talking about threesomes or bondage or anything particularly kinky here). I wonder how prevalent this attitude is. It’s not a perfect analogy, but I think this is similar to how some men have hangups about vibrators.

... man up….

Excuse me?!?

I think he was referring to a dude in this case, but obviously there needs to be a non-gender-specific term for “accept an unpleasant truth and do what needs doing.”  Because man/woman up and cowboy/cowgirl up just don’t work.  And “grow up” has different connotations.

Listening to the Dan Savage podcast, so many of his callers break down to “Can I dump this person for reason X and still be a good person?” The real answer tends to be “fucks’ sake, try to figure out what will make you happy and do that” but it’s said more politely.

To give another example, if a racist found out their partner had black ancestry and they dumped them over it, it would be a stupid and assholish of them, but they would still be “within their rights”. They wouldn’t get the sympathy that someone who dumped over cheating or abuse would, but there’s no reason they shouldn’t be able to terminate the relationship (to the benefit of their partner as well, in the long term).

Wouldn’t the real answer to this by, why were you dating that total racist? Or is the dumped in this case Clayton Bigsby?

I think the real problem with a lot of this is the idea that sympathy is conditional. That’s what drives all the hand-waving about whether X is a reason to dump someone. People don’t want to be thought of as the bad person or have other people think of them as the bad person. Being unhappy with someone is a reason to dump someone and the fact that their relationship ended is a reason to feel sympathetic toward someone. If we could only leave it at that, we’d be better off.

@22
I think some guys are more into woman as a status symbol rather than as a sex object.

That’s a good point. I haven’t yet decided if a significant number of men are stupid enough to judge “normal” women by porn star standards, but I’m thinking at least a few are.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that porn stars are inherently hotter than non-porn-stars. By and large I can’t stand them. But the point is, if you use them as a standard by which to judge all women, most women are going to fail (which is a common point among misogynist standards), if only because most people can’t afford that much silicon and cellulite.

And if you find most women unattractive, while you are entitled to your standards and your opinion, that is your problem and not women’s.

@lijakaca - Maybe I punched up the language a little bit, but the underlying point is fundamentally correct. Ending a significant relationship exerts an equally significant amount of coercion if you do it for a reason that could be fixed.  If my wife makes it clear that it can only work if I watch “Gene Simmons’ Family Jewels” with her, I can either watch it, or get left; it’s coercive, regardless.  If she doesn’t, then she’ll just surprise leave while I sat around thinking it’s no big deal.  Nothing else will work, and trying to hold several contradictory positions is rubbish.

Best practice is to lay everything out early, so the coercion is less, but it doesn’t always go that way (and people change).

some men have hangups about vibrators.

Vibrators need electricity, not thinking about baseball stats, to keep going, that’s the only difference. 

I’m only working with a sample size of two, but part of the mileage variation is variation among individual women.  People have different tastes - Cris (without an H)

Heck, even the same person has different tastes depending on diet, current bathing habits, time of month, etc.  With the same sample size, I would say that the variation in flavor with a given women can be much greater than the difference between the “typical” flavors of two women.

Not to mention willingness to perform oral sex can vary depending on how you feel.  If you are having allergy issues and are stuffy, you may very well enjoy sexual activity but felating your partner may very well be impossible.  Similarly, if you have a post-nasal drip the last thing you may want to do is give cunilingus and have more secretions in your mouth.

I certainly am not in the “vaginas are icky” camp (I’m with cpivna @ 24), but sometimes body parts—especially those which secrete stuff such as penises, vaginas, mouths, noses, ears, ...—are icky.  Bodies are like that sometimes.  While I can’t imagine never having (giving or receiving) oral sex (and I can’t imagine my partner could either) and that would be a deal breaker in a relationship (and I think that’s fair enough), it would be unfair, IMHO, to have an expectation that every sexual encounter would involve cunnilingus (or felatio, for that matter).  Of course, I’m sure some people will differ ... but that is part of what you have to work out with your partner, is it not?

@Triplanetary

“That’s a good point. I haven’t yet decided if a significant number of men are stupid enough to judge “normal” women by porn star standards, but I’m thinking at least a few are.”

The same way men are judged by Robert Pattinson standards or Goerge Clooney standards, and will always fall short. Fantasy always trumps reality.  I’d like to think that men and women on the whole are pretty adept at negotiating real world options.

“And if you find most women unattractive, while you are entitled to your standards and your opinion, that is your problem and not women’s.”

There’s an OKCupid study showing that women (on that site at least) think 80% of men look below average. For comparison’s sake, men rated women along a normal distribution. I never read a feminist critique as to why that’s the case, but I’ll be glad to see any takers (or put differently, what would men have to do to gain the same looks distribution as women. Or maybe we need to change perceptions?).

And I just love how every perfectly reasonable statement that Jill makes about women DTMFA-ing someone they are incompatible with devolves into bouts of “but what about…?!” butthurt and outrage. Like, that OP has nothing to do with asexuals. Nothing. But apparently women’s sexualities aren’t sufficiently “marginalized” to deserve discussion without derailing over there.

Yeah, I looked at that thread and I really don’t get that (I’ve seen it happen here as well.) I don’t like, to choose an example right from the OP, punk rock. It would never occur to me to jump into a discussion about punk rock and try to hijack it into being about Mahler. Why would anybody think it’s OK to do that just because the topic under discussion happens to be sex?

“Coercion” is a strong term for telling someone that you need X in a relationship and that, if they can’t or won’t do X, you will end the relationship.  I think the word should be reserved for the use of force or intimidation to gain compliance, rather than the expression of one’s wants and needs.  It’s not coercive to ask for what you want and make it clear that it’s a deal breaker.  It allows the other person to make a fully informed choice—would they rather do X or break up?—or propose an alternative solution—I can’t do X, but I can do Y; I won’t do X, but I have no problem if you do X with someone else. 

The “threat” of breaking up is not like the threat of force, of losing your job, of being financially ruined, becoming homeless, losing custody of your kids, having your reputation damaged, etc.  It might be a jerk move in some situations (depending on what you’re asking for and the manner in which you ask for it), but telling someone you’ll break up with them if they can’t/won’t do or refrain from X isn’t inherently coercive, absent some reason why breaking up with that person will hurt them in some way other than the usual pain of a breakup.

Like, that OP has nothing to do with asexuals. Nothing. But apparently women’s sexualities aren’t sufficiently “marginalized” to deserve discussion without derailing over there.

Or maybe people could answer a simple question without it turning into the strawperson fiction writers’ club.

It was unjust, but I apologized to the more privileged people for causing them pain and I meant it. Is there more that you want or are you going to complain about invisible people when one just had a question that could have been straightforwardly answered and everyone could have moved on without the dog-piles, attacks, and degradation.

And I just love how every perfectly reasonable statement that Jill makes about women DTMFA-ing someone they are incompatible with devolves into bouts of “but what about…?!” butthurt and outrage. Like, that OP has nothing to do with asexuals. Nothing.

There is a certain contingent of asexuals that feels entitled to relationships with sexuals and feels that the asexuals should be accommodated by the sexuals. And even though I don’t agree, I kind of get it—asexuals are very uncommon, and they can’t necessarily find a compatible asexual to have a relationship with, so they’d like to have a relationship with a sexual person who is willing to work around the needs and feelings of the asexuals. It also falls into their need to be acknowledged as normal by others—and what could be more validating of your sexuality than by having a mainstream (“sexual”) person be willing to put aside his/her expectations in order to accommodate yours? To say that someone should be allowed to dump a partner because sexual needs/expectations aren’t being met is an affront to the relationship fantasy of certain asexuals who are hoping for a relationship where the sexual is supposed to be expected to put aside his/her sexual expectations for the asexual’s.

PM @ 41 - the correct phrase is “be an adult” or stop acting like a dumb ass”.  I am perfectly aware of the phrase used and it’s meaning, thank you very much.
ArielNYC - continuing to show that he is an idiot on gender relations, still.  Even if you were talking stupid teen equivalents, it would be a hand job for a hand job, asshole, not let me make you bow down over me/kgo down on your knees and kiss my dick for me rubbing you a little.

@Kit-Kat - you want to posit that the emotional pain of a breakup is somehow special among all types of pain in that it’s not coercive.  I find that really, really uncompelling.  Coercive is a word that means what it means.  If you’re going to take steps that will cause another person pain, unless they do something, it’s coercive.  It doesn’t mean it’s bad, or that you’re not entitled to it, but we can’t just wish it wasn’t coercive because we don’t like dealing with the reality that sometimes we do coercive things but it’s okay or even right.

If they don’t do what you want, you’re going to do something that’ll cause them pain.  It’s coercive.  That’s just what those words mean.

For clarity - the description I gave is one often held by uninformed teens, not my own.

I think R.T just set a new record for the amount of insincerity that can be packed into one passive-aggressive pseudo-apology.

Not all kinds of pain are coercive.  I agree that words have meaning: Coercion refers to “the use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.”  To coerce is “to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, especially without regard for individual desire or volition.”  To offer someone a choice is not coercion if you do it respectfully and honor their decision.  Negative consequences are not inherently coercive.  “I will publish these naked photos I have of you if you don’t perform the sex act I want” is coercion; “I will take the kids” is coercion.  Breaking up with someone because they are unwilling or unable to do something that is important to you in a relationship is not coercion.

@helen w. h.
“would be a hand job for a hand job, asshole, not let me make you bow down over me/kgo down on your knees and kiss my dick for me rubbing you a little.”

Still at your top game I see. Fine, I’ll bite. One partner’s is no more entitled to be fingered than another is entitled to get a blowjob. And you seem to presume that I wasn’t willng to give oral, based on zero evidence (quite the story with you). Maybe I don’t like getting stroked and my partner doesn’t like oral (or not as much as fingering). The point is that you should make your partner happy within reason rather than whine about how you want something while refusing to accomodate your partner.

There is a certain contingent of asexuals that feels entitled to relationships with sexuals and feels that the asexuals should be accommodated by the sexuals.

Well, social norms about sex tend to accommodate that, in the sense that if two people have widely different sex drives, the one with the greater sex drive is sometimes viewed as a pervert who just needs to get over his or her high desire for sex. This is especially true (for obvious reasons) in evangelical circles and such.

That said, most of the asexual people I know aren’t like that at all, but then, I do make a point of hanging out with awesome liberal people. Asexuals are just as capable as anyone of understanding that no level of desire for consensual sex should be shamed.

Ugh…this is another of those occasional things that I read about on feminist blogs that make me cringe about how I used to be. I used to have an aversion to going down on women that I could never really understand. One of my infrequent partners in college called me on it, and after that I realized that it was in part because my first lover made it clear that she didn’t want me to go down on her because she was extremely self-conscious about it, which I guess I somehow internalized as being something I should generally avoid.

I wasn’t one of those guys who demanded to receive oral sex, though. But that could have just been because I had never gotten off that way (and still haven’t, for some odd reason.) But the first time I slept with my current long-time girlfriend, she asked for it and I just went ahead and did it and I’ve enjoyed it thoroughly ever since. Looking back now, I can’t help but laugh at how silly I was, and how much mutual enjoyment both my partners and I missed out on.

Comment #55: Steve LaBonne

Thanks for being an asshole. I meant what I said. I still mean it because I don’t like to cause nor want to cause pain, though it was unfair that people who demanded I apologize have more privilege, made up shit about me (and the part about reading between the lines as they claim to have done means they can read anything they want), erased me, trashed me and I’m still being trashed for exactly the things I they said I shouldn’t do and told them I wouldn’t do.

What’s the fucking point of extracting an apology out of a person then? They’ve shown now that they’re operating on bad faith and you’d bet I’m bitter about it.

Nothing I do is good enough. I try to navigate a world a don’t fit in. Bzzt not good enough. I apologize for stepping on toes. Bzzt not good enough. I guess I’m only good as the community punching bag but you fuckers aren’t even grateful for that.

Thanks for being an asshole.

Add projection to the passive aggression. But I don’t play these games. You initiated a threadjacking in a most assholish way, continued it enthusiastically, and are trying to do the same here. Expect to be called out for such things, and don’t expect sensible people to treat your self-pity as a get out of jail free card.

How ‘bout this: don’t want to hear from me, don’t bring me up?

How ‘bout this: on a public forum I reserve the right to respond to any commenter if I so choose. You have quite the authoritarian personality, don’t you. And a very inflated sense of your own importance, since you seem to think I was somehow distressed by “hearing from you”.

OK, Brian, we get it. Nobody should ever be allowed to dump anyone, ever. Seriously, you are either suggesting that nobody ever be allowed to break up for any non-life-threatening reason, or you are suggesting that anyone who ever explains their reasons for a breakup is a coercive asshat. Moreover, you are veering dangerously toward classifying ANY complaint, suggestion, or request in a relationship as fundamentally coercive—after all, how is one to know which suggestions are dealbreakers or not? Certainly his or her partner can’t SAY which ones, because that’s coercive.

That’s not even walking on eggshells, that is like trying to live in a house made of eggshells and dewdrops.

How about I let you be and y’all can get your digs in unimpeded, and then we can talk about better things.

Hey, calling bullshit on ArielNYC’s citation of an “OkCupid” study regarding women rating men as not “attractive.” Women were not rating the men based on their physical attractiveness, but rather on their overall profile’s appeal. OKCupid’s ratings isn’t like “Hot or Not?” And believe me, considering how many mens’ profiles on OKCupid start out with “I hate talking about myself, dunno, my friends call me laid back?” and then continue on to talk about how much they hate “games” and that they are really really “nice guys” (all with an amazing variety of misspellings and grammatical errors), that low rating probably has less to do with the quality of OKCupid’s and more with how male privilege and entitlement thinking has seriously handicapped dudes in communicating their interests, needs and wants.

@Thealogian

“Women were not rating the men based on their physical attractiveness, but rather on their overall profile’s appeal.”

The analysis focused on looks, not profile quality. From the actual study:

“women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium.”
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/

See any profile quality here? I don’t.
And trust me, there’s no shortage of garbage profiles of either gender. I actually haven’t seen any gender-based analysis of overall profile quality, and I don’t see any evidence for the assumptions you make.

@ ArielNYC

Thanks for the link, the study I saw was on Gawker. Duly corrected!

I thought that this was interesting:
One interesting thing seems to be going on here: when the best-looking men write the worst-looking women, their message success rate takes a big hit. The knee-jerk response would be to somehow chalk it up to hunky spammers, but we very carefully control for that in these articles, and in any event why would better-looking girls be drastically more susceptible to it? It seems to be some kind of self-confidence thing.

that low rating probably has less to do with the quality of OKCupid’s and more with how male privilege and entitlement thinking has seriously handicapped dudes in communicating their interests, needs and wants.

Such a good point. I’ve been on OKC, and I like it, but a large percentage of the men there are just entitled asshats. Just check out Annals of Online Dating to get an idea.

So I can see why the opinion of women on OKC would be kind of skewed.

@Triplanetary

What makes you believe that women write more thoughtful and engaging profiles than men? If you got a study to share, please so. I haven’t seen any particularly obnoxious female profiles, so I have no problem believing this is a male problem.

ArielNYC @ 57 - performing one of those acts is often seen as being submissive while the other has little to no power connotations, even among others besides uninformed teens. I’m basing my comment on both your ignoring/being utterly oblivious to that and your past posting history here.

I made it clear as daylight that I wouldn’t please her if she wouldn’t please me.

um, sure.  I don’t doubt that this was done in a clear but non-threatening and caring manner because you are so very good at expressing yourself.  Right.

It was very a puzzling situation. Granted, we were both in our late teens. I do hope people grow out of this immaturity.

You have no idea why she would have felt this way.  Did you ask her why?  Clearly not very well or you wouldn’t still be wondering and maybe yo would have had a better resolution.  Whose immaturity are you talking about, hers or yours?

ArielNYC - continuing to show that he is an idiot on gender relations, still.  Even if you were talking stupid teen equivalents, it would be a hand job for a hand job, asshole, not let me make you bow down over me/kgo down on your knees and kiss my dick for me rubbing you a little.
Comment #52: helen w. h.  on 08/09 at 01:59 PM

And the fact that women are much less likely to get off on PIV sex than men couldn’t possibly be relevant here.

Oh, and I wasn’t saying someone being fat was not a valid reason to break up with them.  It seemed like the list was of things that are generally disliked, cheating on you or being a cheapskate, things that seem passive-aggressive towards the other partner.  Getting fat usually isn’t targeted at someone else. 

“Ha ha, I’ll gain 40 pounds, that’ll show him!” really isn’t that common a sentiment.

I’m also wondering why men take this douchebag approach online. Dating is not street harassment. Presumably these men actually hope to get some rather than just unload their entitlement on women. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So either this approach works on some women, or men need a serious wakeup call. Probably both.

Brian, you’re trying to redefine coercive as meaning “anything that causes pain”. That’s wrong, and how would people even know what causes pain to their partner, in advance of even mentioning their likes and dislikes to a partner, unless that partner has somehow indicated that, in which case isn’t the partner being coercive? Basically it’s a stupid way of looking at a relationship which just dramatizes everything. Perhaps you’re very anxious about causing pain, which, ok, sounds nice. But once you get so worried about it you’re afraid to express preferences, you’re into mind game territory.

Men don’t focus on their appearance as much as women, because they are less often criticized publicly for it.  When women don’t have to worry about being called a bitch or hit in the face for it, they are honest about the way men look, which is on average less attractive than women.  Because they don’t have to worry about what their “inferiors” think of their dress until they get married and they can bitch about how “the wife” wants them to get “all gussied up” just to go to a restaurant!

Look at couples on the street.  A common sight is her wearing a dress or skirt, heels or wedges, full makeup, jewelry on and hair done, him wearing an untucked tee shirt or polo and baggy shorts.  This is way more common than her wearing shorts and a tee shirt and him in nice khakis or dress pants, shirt and tie.

I’m also wondering why men take this douchebag approach online. Dating is not street harassment.

Men who street harass believe they’re entitled to any piece of ass they want, so they don’t feel that they should have a responsibility to actually be charming or likable. And when that fails they just get pissed at the woman for not realizing that her job is to just shut up and suck some dick.

So yes, it’s certainly a degree of cluelessness enabled by entitlement. That said, the approach may or may not work on some women. I dunno.

Regarding the “waxing, scrubbing and wearing fancy panties” bit, those first two could actually make a difference (in general, they obviously didn’t in this case). Most people are turned off by someone who hasn’t had a shower in a few days, and I personally *HATE* getting hair on my tongue, and would therefore be much more likely to go down on a woman who shaves/waxes/trims/whatever.

@oldfeminist

“And the fact that women are much less likely to get off on PIV sex than men couldn’t possibly be relevant here.”

Incidentally, that was before we started engaging in intercourse. So bjs were the main course at that point in the relationship. But I still reject the idea that your anatomy entitles you to a free pass on oral sex. If you care about your partner, you care about all his her sexual desires (again, within reason). It takes more effort to make you cum? Super, ask your partner to please you the way you want. But that partner is likely to then observe the amount of effort it takes to please you and expect full reciprocation. Just because men have it relatively easy when it comes to orgasms doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy the effort that gets us there, and it doesn’t mean we’re cool with being treated as sexaully low maintenance. I think that was your insinuation.

“cluelessness enabled by entitlement”

Amen, to that! Plus, I’d like to add that often men do engage online as if they were harassing you on the street. As a chick with a profile currently online, there is not a week that goes by without at least one “wanna fu@k?” message or simply some sort of catcall transliterated into something resembling text. Its dumb & rude, but its also clearly clueless and born of entitlement.

“But that partner is likely to then observe the amount of effort it takes to please you and expect full reciprocation.”

So, are you saying that if it takes her 20 minutes to get off, but it only takes you five minutes—in this sex as effort equation—you are entitled to four five minute blow jobs per one orgasm of her’s? That’s what it sounds like you’re saying. Clarification, please.

Steve LaBonne   - it gets a little better than that.  I twice told R.T. (et al) that the slut-shaming horseshit they’re peddaling is triggering.  Notice how that became a whole laundry list of what the mean nasty “sexuals” did to her, which, of course, never fucking happened.   

And believe me, considering how many mens’ profiles on OKCupid start out with “I hate talking about myself, dunno, my friends call me laid back?” and then continue on to talk about how much they hate “games” and that they are really really “nice guys” (all with an amazing variety of misspellings and grammatical errors), that low rating probably has less to do with the quality of OKCupid’s and more with how male privilege and entitlement thinking has seriously handicapped dudes in communicating their interests, needs and wants.

LOL OMG this is 100% accurate and the main reason I deleted my account.  They do this “quick match” thing that is supposedly designed to match you on some basic crap in your profile. I lost count of the number of guys who wrote “I hate filling out these things, e-mail me if you want to know more”.

Why the fuck would I bother if you can’t be bothered to in the minimum effort? Why the fuck did you join the site if you can’t be bothered to do even the most basic things with it?

The best one was this dude who messaged me.  He was cute, so I responded with a few questions trying to start up a convo.  he responded by saying its too much trouble to log onto the site and then gave me his phone number.

I imagine stupid, lazy shit like this is why they get “voted down”.

Amen, to that! Plus, I’d like to add that often men do engage online as if they were harassing you on the street. As a chick with a profile currently online, there is not a week that goes by without at least one “wanna fu@k?” message or simply some sort of catcall transliterated into something resembling text. Its dumb & rude, but its also clearly clueless and born of entitlement.

In addition, having met many feminist women over OKC, I get to hear stories about how women who advertise their feminism on OKC (which is a good practice, needless to say) tend to attract asshats who feel the need to mansplain to them why feminism is a bunch of BS.

I suppose said mansplainers are expecting the woman in question to fall down on her knees in awe of his genius and immediately suck his dick. Whether or not that’s the case, misogynist men sure as hell can’t keep quiet when they see a woman call herself a feminist.

@Thealogian

I don’t want to couch this in terms of what each partner is entitled to. The point is that if one partner puts a lot of effort into pleasing the other, and doesn’t get reciprocation in effort, it’s fair to say it’s likely to foment resentment, at least in our hypotherical, equitable feminsit relationship. And if the partner communicates that resentment, and the other partner dismisses it because, hey, it’s so easy to please you so don’t expect to me put effort into it, I’d say DTMFA.

So, are you saying that if it takes her 20 minutes to get off, but it only takes you five minutes—in this sex as effort equation—you are entitled to four five minute blow jobs per one orgasm of her’s?

Can I just say (and Thealogian, I’m on your side more or less in this discussion) how much I hate that any discussion of reciprocity and sex, or even reciprocity in relationships, quickly devolves into a game of How-Much-Am-I-Allowed-to-Nickel-And-Dime-My-Partner?

@Oldfeminist

“Men don’t focus on their appearance as much as women, because they are less often criticized publicly for it”

But why would men not want to showcase their best physical self online? Do men not know that their picture plays a huge role in their messaging success on sites like OKcupid?

I have to agree with Kit-Kat @15: I suppose it’s not noble to dump someone for gaining a lot of weight, but who is really benefitting when someone is gritting their teeth and sticking with someone they don’t find sexually attractive any longer because their body changed drastically in a short period of time?  If you’re really attracted to fat people and your partner loses a bunch of weight, that could also have the same effect.  Is that person equally “shallow”?  I guess so.  But I fail to understand how it benefits the potential dump-ee to be in a relationship with someone who isn’t there because they want to be there, but because they’ve been told they have to continue a sexual relationship out of social duty.

I thought Amanda’s post, and this comment, were great.

I think what needs to be separated are (1) a person’s absolute right to not continue in a relationship with someone else, even if we don’t like the reasons, and (2) whether a person is a good person for ending a relationship for that particular reason.

We can certainly say that a guy who dumps his girlfriend because she puts on some pounds is an asshole, while also saying that he has a right to do it and that some sort of standard that would force him to stay in that relationship would be bad for him and bad for her too.

And this also answers the issue of putting pressure on your mate to do things he or she doesn’t want to do, raised above. People have the right to do many things they shouldn’t do. And even though it’s a really shitty thing to use the threat of ending a relationship as pressure to get someone to do something they don’t want to do, it’s not like staying together after that occurs really solves that problem.

@Well, what?

” I hate that any discussion of reciprocity and sex, or even reciprocity in relationships, quickly devolves into a game of How-Much-Am-I-Allowed-to-Nickel-And-Dime-My-Partner?”

I totally agree.

Plus, this obsession with orgasms…alright before I get pelted with rotten tomatoes, yes, orgasms are awesome, you should do whatever is in your power to help your partner orgasm, make this world wonderfully orgasmic, orgasm your orgasmic energies into the orgasmverse. Orgasms, good stuff.

But sex is so much more. A nice back masasge is awesome. sexual pleasuring that doesn’t lead to orgasms is also awesome. It’s so odd to see this reductivist approach of I give you PIV and you give me oral so I can cum, and no don’t ask for reciprocation because I need it for my orgasm and you don’t. I pray nobody has sex this way.

Of course there are many lovely aspects of sex that don’t involve orgasm. Nobody disputes that, and that’s not the issue. Getting sexual satisfaction from someone, getting them near the point of orgasm, and then not caring if you’ve left them high and dry is not OK, regardless of the genders on either end.

@Steve LaBonne

No bone to pick here.  This was in reaction to the implicit argument made here that if one partner has harder time cumming, then he or she is owed more unreciprocated attention.

I feel like the whole thing where Ariel just really wanted to type “orgasm” a lot might have missed my point a bit. It’s more like, in discussions like this people get all bound up in making things equal, as in identical, rather than fair.

To my mind it always reads like they are pretending that pleasure—and any pleasure, really, not just in bed—doesn’t work the way it does in real life.

I mean really. If you are lying there feeling totally satisfied, are you really going to start toting up the minutes and say, damn it all, that was 5 minutes less than I spent! Clearly the pleasure I felt is meaningless now!

OK, R.T., I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, one last time. If you wanted your question to be taken in good faith, you could have worded it differently, but you probably would’ve had to out yourself. Maybe something like “As a non-NT asexual, I’m wondering if sex is as important to everyone as this thread seems to indicate? I’m asking because I’m concerned that it might be difficult for me to find a romantic partner who would accept my asexuality.” And then people would’ve been like, “Sex is very important to some people, less so to others. And in any case, this post is really about this woman’s right to DTMFA a dude who isn’t asexual,  just an asshole.”

But instead you jumped in with a “shouldn’t you base relationships on personal traits, not sex?” which is a very loaded question in light of erasure and marginalization of women’s desire and pleasure. Women aren’t expected to have desire or to feel entitled to pleasure. Women are trained to base relationships on “personality” and not sex and if we deviate from that in even a tiniest way, then we are slut-shamed, often using language that is very similar to how you worded your question. This is sort of feminism 101, so if you’re going to hand out in feminist spaces, you should be prepared for people to not have a lot of patience around lack of knowledge in these areas.

I, for one, appreciate your apology over there, but all the subsequent “what more do you want?!” flailing is really pushing into passive-aggressive territory at this point. 

This was in reaction to the implicit argument made here that if one partner has harder time cumming, then he or she is owed more unreciprocated attention.

Why is that not true, on the principle that I enunciated and that you appeared to agree with before taking it back this way? Good lovers want to do things in whatever way will leave them both satisfied. And people all work differently, even within a gender let alone between them, so there’s no guarantee that will require an equal amount of “attention” however defined, and no reason to be keeping score.

And by the way, if pleasing your partner seems like work rather than pleasure to you, you’re doing it wrong.

@Steve LaBonne

“And by the way, if pleasing your partner seems like work rather than pleasure to you, you’re doing it wrong.”

I think that’s a slightly aspirational statement. It’s not a cosmic law that whatever pleases me the most is pleasing to my partner as well. Some women dig a certain position, whereas for others that position gives them no stimulation. Sometimes I’m in the mood to finger my partner, and sometimes I’m not. But we please each other all the same because we know it gets us off. Ultimately we should strive to be equitable and generous. I don’t see that as excluding a little bit work on occasions. Obviously, if pleasuring your partner=work is your norm, then it’s an issue.

@Thealogian at #68

“I thought that this was interesting:
One interesting thing seems to be going on here: when the best-looking men write the worst-looking women, their message success rate takes a big hit. The knee-jerk response would be to somehow chalk it up to hunky spammers, but we very carefully control for that in these articles, and in any event why would better-looking girls be drastically more susceptible to it? It seems to be some kind of self-confidence thing.”

Sorry, I always fuck up block quotes, so I thought I’d try to keep this readable.

Because “worst-looking” women (fat, or whatever else you can think of) are conditioned to believe that the only reason people want them is because they think they’d be desperate and hence easy.  This is the message many fat girls get, or at least girls of my generation or older.  Add to that the tendency for relatively hot middle school boys to “prank” the ugly girls by pretending to be interested in them…  Yeah, I am not the least surprised that when the best looking dudes hit on the “worst-looking” women, they get shot down. 

It’s a pre-emptive strike. 

@Steve LaBonne

“Good lovers want to do things in whatever way will leave them both satisfied…there’s no guarantee that will require an equal amount of “attention” however defined, and no reason to be keeping score.”

It’s not about keeping a stopwatch and tallying how much time each partner spends on the other.  Maybe I can orgasm easily from PIV and I also love giving oral, but not for 10 minutes straight, and that’s what my partner needs to get off. Fine. That requires a little bit of effort on my part. So if I do that, the reaction I would hope for is not “good, I got my orgasm too, now we’re even” but “awesome, let me do something special for you as well.” A good partner doesn’t dismiss the effort of a lover on account that he or she is owed an orgasm.  Effort is effort.

Put differently, suppose I love caviar, and my partner loves a good simple burger. Suppose we get similar satisfaction from each, respectively. If my partner treats me to beluga caviar, do I treat her to a simple burger, because she gets equal satisfaction?  Probably not. I’ll likely have to satisfy her in a different way. Maybe a fancy sex toy or whatever. Because while she gets equal satisfaction from the burger, she would probably have to put a lot more effort into fetching me that caviar. So that’s how I see orgasms. You want that difficult-to-get orgasm? No prob. But be ready to show generosity in return.

@GeekGirlsRule on

I would hope that at least some of those highly-rated men who contact conventionally unattractive women are those Dan Savage readers who bitch and moan about how they like one type in private but need to project a certain image in public.  Because otherwise I’m reminded of the movie In The Company of Men and I despair for humanity.

Could you pont me to the comment in which somebody advocated dismissing a partner’s effort?

I truly hope I’m never in a relationship with someone who thinks the way Ariel does.

Man, now I want a hamburger.

@vSteve LaBonne

“I truly hope I’m never in a relationship with someone who thinks the way Ariel does.”

Mutual generosity and reciprocation? I certainly wouldn’t curse it on you or on my worst enemies. But seriously speaking, either we’re misunderstanding each other or you have an intersting conception of what an equal relationship entails (i.e.  who has more demanding needs is owed more).

“Could you pont me to the comment in which somebody advocated dismissing a partner’s effort?”
Sure, here’s what you said:
“And people all work differently… so there’s no guarantee that will require an equal amount of “attention” however defined, and no reason to be keeping score.”
My reading of it was pleasure=pleasure, so the amount of effort required is irrelevant.
Again, it’s not me getting off in 5 minutes and you getting off in 6. It’s one partner making an extra effort to get another off. I’m still not sure whether we’re disagreeing or not.

And again, there shouldn’t be any scorekeeping. There should be a mutual desire to satisfy. Scorekeeping only comes into play when one partner feels used.

My reading of it was pleasure=pleasure, so the amount of effort required is irrelevant.

They have courses in reading comprehension, you know. You might want to consider signing up.

But yes, if you’re lying in bed calculating the amount of “effort” each parter gave, you (and they) have a problem.  And if you find it SO hard to get your partner off that it’s a burden, either you’re with the wrong person, or you need to improve your technique.

@ GeekGirlsRule

“Add to that the tendency for relatively hot middle school boys to “prank” the ugly girls by pretending to be interested in them…  Yeah, I am not the least surprised that when the best looking dudes hit on the “worst-looking” women, they get shot down.”

You are so right! The OKC interpretation that this is “low self-confidence” rather than wise choices made by women who have experiences with prank-oriented hot guys/boys makes total sense! 

@RareVos

“LOL OMG this is 100% accurate and the main reason I deleted my account.  They do this “quick match” thing that is supposedly designed to match you on some basic crap in your profile.”

With the matching thing, besides the lazy idiots with no interest in actually attempting to write a paragraph since High School, there’s also the depressing reality of what “your matches” might actually be. For example, I went out with a guy based primarily on the fact that we were a 99% match—crazy, high match. He turned out to be a motherfucking NICE GUY (TM)!!! My 99% match was, I repeat, A NICE GUY, the most odious of the gamma male subset. He talked about how whenever he told his female friends that he was in love with them, they’d get mad! How if he tried to talk to a strange woman, especially an American woman when traveling abroad, she’d get mad! But boy gee, he’s such a NICE GUY!!! Ugh. His insecurity, dripping with indignation was fairly mind-blowing. And he, again, was a 99% match (so, depressing, although it does look as though he misrepresented himself in various ways online, so maybe the OKC math isn’t THAT bad, but still—depressing). Oh, one last thing, although this doesn’t add to the thread, its just funny. When he first met me, he commented how pretty I was…and then he said a bit later when I checked my phone for the time, that I must have double-booked the evening, when would my next date show up? Then he made that joke in one incarnation or another two more times (like, when he left to use the restroom and he said, “if when I return, there’s another guy at our table, I’ll know that my time with you is up”—like I"m an hourly rate hooker…and then the third time, it was practically openly hostile. Like this imaginary “other date” was real and was about to get laid whereas he, obviously, was not). I wish OKC or similar would somehow label “Nice Guys”—like a parental advisory warning. Tipper Gore could help design it.

My matches on OKC were often reasonably accurate, although occasionally they’d match me up with a homophobe (I’m bi) for some weird reason.

“there’s also the depressing reality of what “your matches” might actually be.”

I can to the conclusion years ago that dating websites are the online equivalent of bars. That was reinforced when I was reading an article pointing out that Match.com’s statistic of bringing about ~10 000 marriages is pathetic compared to it’s millions of users.

I’ve had two good relationships via OKC, including the very promising relationship I’m in now (which I hope will keep me off OKC forever!), so I guess I’ve been lucky. I don’t pay much attention to OKC’s (or anybody’s) matching algorithm; I look at what and how people write, for evidence of a brain and some real intellectual and cultural substance, including common interests. I think OKC’s profile format has well-chosen prompts and provides the space to do something genuinely revealing with them if the person is capable of doing so and wishes to. (I tried to take advantage of that opportunity when writing my responses, which seemed to be well received.) Even some (not too many though) of the user-generated questions are not completely stupid.

But maybe for some reason it works better for old farts like me than for you young whippersnappers?

I can to the conclusion years ago that dating websites are the online equivalent of bars. That was reinforced when I was reading an article pointing out that Match.com’s statistic of bringing about ~10 000 marriages is pathetic compared to it’s millions of users.

So what? My own success ratio on OKC was 10% at most, but that’s how dating works. You have to be prepared to fail a lot before you succeed.

Aaarg! Why do so many people (who aren’t, you know, 19 years old and still exploring) have hang-ups about the very normal functions of the human body?

Hygiene aside, people are going to sweat and secrete things during sex, and there’s something wonderful about that fact: like no matter how streamlined and minimalist and dignified we pretend to be, there is a grunting animalistic side of us, and it comes out at our most intimate moments, and that part of us is going to have smells and sounds and tastes that aren’t polite and are kind of ridiculous. And what kind of curmudgeon can’t see the joy in that?

I want to be objective about things and say “to each his/her own,” and I wish everyone well in whatever they make work for them, but c’mon: if you don’t give in and embrace the “dirtiness” of sex, are you really fully enjoying it? Or are you kind of being an idiot and a coward? Like people who eat pizza with a knife and fork, I definitely think the “ew gross” crowd is missing out on some fun.

This definitely applies to guys who won’t try the South Beach diet, but it goes both ways: I was rather horrified to read in last week’s thread about male birth control how many women are flat-out disgusted by semen, to the point where they’d prefer to put latex in their bodies for the duration of a decades-long relationship rather than have semen touch them and get its gross smells on them. Really? I would be miserable dating someone who found a very basic part of my sexual being to be horrific and gross. Luckily, as the Ramones say, I don’t have to “walk around with them.”

I do know that my spouse’s enthusiasm made oral sex with her somewhat hazardous before practice…

I don’t get the ‘dirtiness’ of sex.  If it’s dirty, why is that supposed to be interesting?  Dirty, smelly skin isn’t a turn on for me.  So we have alot more sex after or during showers/baths than before.

I want to be objective about things and say “to each his/her own,” and I wish everyone well in whatever they make work for them, but c’mon: if you don’t give in and embrace the “dirtiness” of sex, are you really fully enjoying it? Or are you kind of being an idiot and a coward? Like people who eat pizza with a knife and fork, I definitely think the “ew gross” crowd is missing out on some fun.
Comment #109: Dan Collins on 08/10 at 12:06 AM

No one here cares what your penis thinks.

It takes more effort to make you cum? Super, ask your partner to please you the way you want. But that partner is likely to then observe the amount of effort it takes to please you and expect full reciprocation. Just because men have it relatively easy when it comes to orgasms doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy the effort that gets us there, and it doesn’t mean we’re cool with being treated as sexaully low maintenance. I think that was your insinuation.
Comment #79: ArielNYC on 08/09 at 04:55 PM

Interesting that you expect the scorekeeping and resultant additional work to be done on you should all be sexual in nature.

Do you typically eat more than the women you go out with?  Do you then give them extra food to take home, or pay them a little something, when it’s your turn to pay for dinner, because otherwise that would be cheating?  Or do you figure that if they’re satisfied with less food, you don’t have to give them more, because they’re SATISFIED?

Is it possible that someone who does more of one thing in a relationship maybe benefits from something else the other person does more of?  A kind of organic give and take?

Is it possible that you might one day be in a long term relationship, maybe a marriage, and you get sick and need the other person to help you, and you aren’t the bigger breadwinner and can’t reciprocate just by having made a hunk of money, and maybe you’re sick enough you’re going to die and never be able to help her in that same way.  Should your partner or wife bail because she’d end up on the short end of the stick?  If she did what you expected, she already gave you two extra orgasms for her one since you’re so “easy,” and now you’re even, right?

See, in my world, in a loving or friendly relationship, we give each other what we need.  Not just exactly as much as we think we’re getting. 

And finally, your insinuation that women who don’t get off on five minutes of PIV are “high maintenance” (as if they are holding out for the Benz when you’re offering them a Cadillac) is duly noted.  Most women who take a long time to get off would probably love for it to be easier and quicker for them.  They’re generally not withholding their orgasms just for fun or to see you work to prove your dedication.

@oldfeminist, don’t be a goober. All I’m saying is, if people claim to like vaginas, they should really LIKE vaginas, and if they claim to like penises, they should like penises. Trying to half-enjoy them while at the same time trying desperately to avoid their natural functions and flavors just seems silly, prudish, and like a bunch of hassle, e.g. the nay-saying boyfriend in the article who spawned this whole thread. I’d like to think that advocating for sexual fulfillment free of body shame is a non-gendered, non-penile-specific quest, though I do see how you could call it “hippie.”

@Crissa, I misspoke a bit. I don’t advocate unwashed “dirty” sex in the literal sense of the word of, like, being covered in grime and not bathing properly. I just think people shouldn’t freak out that their partners’ sex organs function as designed, which means a little bit of a mess and a little bit of totally normal (some would say ‘desirable’), you know, smells and tastes. In and out of the bedroom, the need for people to sterilize our humanness seems a bit “Germfree Adolescents” to me.

(so, depressing, although it does look as though he misrepresented himself in various ways online, so maybe the OKC math isn’t THAT bad, but still—depressing).

And this is how, I think, dating sites ultimately fail.  Of course people put on their best face when trying to meet someone or chat them up.  But online, one’s bullshit detector is stymied.  I’m sure he thought his profile was totally accurate, and it may well have been, but there usually isn’t a way to gauge how much of an asshole he is regardless of his claimed attributes.

The ones who mentioned past girlfriends in their profile - easy to avoid.  The ones who can’t be arsed to fill out the profile - easy to avoid.  But the ones who are better at hiding it slip too easily through because, I think, you can’t gauge subtext, tone, etc. online.

@oldfeminist

“Interesting that you expect the scorekeeping and resultant additional work to be done on you should all be sexual in nature.”

It’s not about scorekeeping. It’s about appreciating your partner and wanting to be as generous as he or she is to you. It’s the spirit of it. And hey, if one partner wants to be reciprocated with cucumber sandwiches or belly tickles or getting the garbage taken out or whatever, fantastic. Whatever works.

“See, in my world, in a loving or friendly relationship, we give each other what we need.  Not just exactly as much as we think we’re getting.”

The argument I was taking exception to was that cunninlingus is this priviliged activity because women need orgasms, so if a guy wants oral reciprocation it’s not really a “need” so holding out cunninlingus because a woman won’t go down on me is somehow foul play. Which is the impression I got from your words (“And the fact that women are much less likely to get off on PIV sex than men couldn’t possibly be relevant here). So no, I don’t think orgasms are a constitutional right. If you say that your orgasm is a need, and I say that blowjobs are my need, I can’t see any objective standard by which one is more important than the other. Each person is different and each couple has to communicate and neogotiate these issues.

Ariel @84 - since you now have 3 of us, no at least 4, telling you that you are not at all saying what you think you are unless you are in actuality trying to be an asshole, could you try listening for a change?  Your communication skills are horrible.
Also - the real asshole bit from your first post on this thread is that you seemed to take pride in how she was down to begging and crying, but you wouldn’t give in.  Though your finding it puzzling she acted this way instead of wondering why she would give you some before and stopped being willing sure adds to it. 
If you are doing tit-for-tat nickle and diming, why base it on effort instead of on output? I don’t care if it takes you 3 hours to wash a dish and me five minutes.  The goal is the clean dish - or in this case an orgasm.

And you missed way off with what you quote from oldfeminist as well - since at that point the discussion was mostly fingering vs bjs and a passing mention of piv.  It was a reference to unexamined POV on your part (or I’m pretty sure so).

@helen w. h

“If you are doing tit-for-tat nickle and diming”
You’re begging to the question. Did you even read Amada’s piece?
If I say “I won’t go down on you/finger you if you don’t go down on me”, that’s not keeping a score. That’s stating my desires are important too and I’m not going to accept sexual selfishness. If you want to be in a relationswhip where your desires are disregarded and where you are expected to always relent because your partner nags you, be my guest.  If you then want to impose this model on others, you’re an asshole.

“why base it on effort instead of on output?”
Because effort is energy and time. You don’t get a medal for being difficult to please. Nobody owes you an orgasm. And again, the original dispute was about the idea that my ex was more deserving of fingering than I was deserving of oral sex. Which is a dumb argument to make.  Nobody’s needs count more or less.

” I don’t care if it takes you 3 hours to wash a dish and me five minutes.  The goal is the clean dish - or in this case an orgasm.”

Look, maybe in your world spending 3 hours to please a guy and getting 5 minutes of pleasure in return is hunky dory because you both get off. Maybe some couples work this way. Bully for all of you. Just don’t be so presumptuous to think it works like that for everyone.

@helen w. h.

“And you missed way off with what you quote from oldfeminist as well - since at that point the discussion was mostly fingering vs bjs and a passing mention of piv.  It was a reference to unexamined POV on your part (or I’m pretty sure so).”

I’ve already made the point that we weren’t engaging in PIV at the time, so bjs were my mainstay. And sure, let’s examine my point of view. I don’t like handjobs. Does nothing for me. If anything, saying that fingering should only be exchanged for a handjob is a lot closer to the tit-for-tat nickle and diming you misleadingly accused me of. And besides, I didn’t say I wasn’t willing to go down on her (again with your presumptions).  She just happened to get more pleasure from fingering.

When even the douchewads are arguing for parity, that’s some kind of progress.

@ junk science

Hmm playing lobing stink bombs? You can go on playing with yourself

Nope, just at the point where I need a little encouragement that the world is worth fighting for. My own little masturbatory fantasy.

@oldfeminist, don’t be a goober. All I’m saying is, if people claim to like vaginas, they should really LIKE vaginas, and if they claim to like penises, they should like penises. Trying to half-enjoy them while at the same time trying desperately to avoid their natural functions and flavors just seems silly, prudish, and like a bunch of hassle, e.g. the nay-saying boyfriend in the article who spawned this whole thread. I’d like to think that advocating for sexual fulfillment free of body shame is a non-gendered, non-penile-specific quest, though I do see how you could call it “hippie.”
Comment #114: Dan Collins on 08/10 at 05:49 AM

Wow, I didn’t call you a hippie. 

I said some people like it and some people don’t and I don’t agree with characterizing one taste as right and rational and wholesome and the other as wrong and avoidant and squeamish.  I characterized you and asked how you liked it.  You apparently disliked it enough to try insulting me back.  My point is stop the insults and holier (dirtier?) than thou posturing about it.

If you want to go all natural on me then people who don’t want to have babies shouldn’t have sex because that’s one of those messy natural outcomes of sex.  Unless you want to use those horrible reality-denying awful plastic-y condoms and stuff.

I like to smell good for my partner and I like her to smell good for me. (Good simply meaning clean.) Damned if I see anything wrong with that!

The argument I was taking exception to was that cunninlingus is this priviliged activity because women need orgasms, so if a guy wants oral reciprocation it’s not really a “need” so holding out cunninlingus because a woman won’t go down on me is somehow foul play. Which is the impression I got from your words (“And the fact that women are much less likely to get off on PIV sex than men couldn’t possibly be relevant here). So no, I don’t think orgasms are a constitutional right. If you say that your orgasm is a need, and I say that blowjobs are my need, I can’t see any objective standard by which one is more important than the other. Each person is different and each couple has to communicate and neogotiate these issues.
Comment #117: ArielNYC on 08/10 at 10:17 AM

I consider blowjob versus orgasm to be unequal, yes. 

Your requirements aren’t “equal” to anyone else’s by default based on only one parameter, the amount of time it takes to perform a sexual act for the other person.  How about measuring it by calories expended?  Or mental anguish for someone who was orally raped?  Or how much they hate the taste or something else about it, physically, psychologically, emotionally?

That you super super super love blowjobs would actually militate towards making it “cost” more, so that an hour of fingering which eventually works but isn’t amazingly great would equal a five minute blowjob.  If you got better at the fingering then it would ‘cost’ you less.  Two minutes on a hot stove is not equal to two minutes on a shady bench.

Bottom line:  if you are unwilling to do what she needs to get off, and she’s willing to do what you need to get off, then the relationship is unfair sexually.  Take what you want from that.  Within the relationship the people can agree for it to be unfair sexually, but that doesn’t change the unfairness.

Having been in relationships where my orgasm was unimportant to the other person I will tell you it is extremely frustrating, not just “oh I really miss that” frustrating but “I hate that asshole” frustrating.

This is separate from whether you’re allowed to leave a relationship for any reason.  You are.  Be any way you want.  Just don’t expect all of us to agree that your expectations are fair.

@dancollins many of us weren’t complaining about the actual moment of semen, but the aftermath (in many cases days worth of aftermath and occasional bacteriosis).  So you more than likely as a man will never ever have to deal with that aspect of sex. Just wash off and no residual effect.  I enjoy the moment, but not the aftermath and in many cases yes, I’d prefer latex for the PIV.

I don’t think it’s an insult to your sexual being if I don’t want my sexual being winding up smelling bad all the next day.  There’s a balance there, yanno?

“Treefinger @ 25 - since you agreed with what Kit-Kat said here, why are you scolding her?”

I thought of that comment of defending oldfeminist to Kit-Kat while agreeing with her, not scolding the latter for disagreeing with the former. YMMV.

Another false equivalence:  that the five or ten or however minutes of PIV sex from blowjob guy is sex for both of them, but cunnilingus is for just her.  If she’s not enjoying the PIV much, it doesn’t count for much.  But this is what we get when we privilege the male experience and PIV sex.

@oldfeminist

“I consider blowjob versus orgasm to be unequal, yes.”
You’re free to negotiate your relationship however you want

“Your requirements aren’t “equal” to anyone else’s by default based on only one parameter, the amount of time it takes to perform a sexual act for the other person. “

I’ve already said that effort is energy and time.

“How about measuring it by calories expended?  Or mental anguish for someone who was orally raped?  Or how much they hate the taste or something else about it, physically, psychologically, emotionally?”

You’re touching on some very sensitive issues. Ultimately it depends on the couple and the specifics. If one partner is so anguished by sex that he or she can’t engage in sexual activities, the other partner should sympathize. But it may also mean renegotiating the type of relationship involved, and yes, it may lead to a breakup. Nobody should pressure you into anything that causes you pain and suffering. And likewise, not everyone is sexually compatible with everyone. 

“Having been in relationships where my orgasm was unimportant to the other person I will tell you it is extremely frustrating, not just “oh I really miss that” frustrating but “I hate that asshole” frustrating.”
I definitely believe you. I would hate that too.

“Just don’t expect all of us to agree that your expectations are fair.”
I love blowjobs. I want a relationship that includes blowjobs. You love orgasms. You want a relationship that includes orgasms. We’re both free to pursue what we want and dump people who doesn’t satisfy us.

@oldfeminist

“Another false equivalence:  that the five or ten or however minutes of PIV sex from blowjob guy is sex for both of them, but cunnilingus is for just her.  If she’s not enjoying the PIV much, it doesn’t count for much.  But this is what we get when we privilege the male experience and PIV sex.”

All my partners have enjoyed PIV sex with me. I probably wouldn’t be compatible with one who wasn’t anyways. It would be like human-induced masturbation. People who don’t like PIV should match up with each other.

Either way, a good, healthy lover doesn’t look for rationalizations as to why he or she shouldn’t reciprocate.

Either way, a good, healthy lover doesn’t look for rationalizations as to why he or she shouldn’t reciprocate.
Comment #132: ArielNYC on 08/10 at 02:43 PM

A good, healthy lover doesn’t look for rationalizations as to why what s/he’s doing isn’t really reciprocating.

@oldfeminist

“A good, healthy lover doesn’t look for rationalizations as to why what s/he’s doing isn’t really reciprocating.”

Part of being a good lover is believing someone when he or she tells you what turns them on and what their desires are. So if your partner says that bjs are important to him,  and you retort that they’re not because he gets PIV, and you then try to shame him for wanting reciprocated oral sex, that’s not being a good lover. If you have issues precluding you from your pleasing your partner, you should communicate them. And if these issues make you incompatible with your partner, you should be honest about it rather than trying to guilt him or her for wanting reciprocation.

Probably time to let Ariel have the last word, since that’s what he really seems to want. Yawn.

@Steve LaBonne

Your studied indifference is noted

Treefinger @ 129: ah, yep, I see; misread.  My bad.

Damn, Ariel, you just wont give up and admit you are an idiot or an ass.

You’re touching on some very sensitive issues. Ultimately it depends on the couple and the specifics. If one partner is so anguished by sex that he or she can’t engage in sexual activities, the other partner should sympathize. But it may also mean renegotiating the type of relationship involved, and yes, it may lead to a breakup. Nobody should pressure you into anything that causes you pain and suffering. And likewise, not everyone is sexually compatible with everyone. 
...
I love blowjobs. I want a relationship that includes blowjobs. You love orgasms. You want a relationship that includes orgasms. We’re both free to pursue what we want and dump people who doesn’t satisfy us.

A BJ and manual stimulation are not equivalents in anyone’s book, no matter which you prefer.
And someone who would give you blow jobs and now wont?  Either they didn’t want to give you them to start with and you somehow got them to do so or something changed.  And clearly you didn’t care, you just wanted your BJ. Either that, or once again, your communication skills are utter fail.

I love blowjobs. I want a relationship that includes blowjobs. You love orgasms. You want a relationship that includes orgasms. We’re both free to pursue what we want and dump people who doesn’t satisfy us.

And after she no longer would give them to you, you stayed with her why?  You got her to nagging and almost crying for what?  You still think she is the one who was being an ass I don’t doubt.

@helen w. h

You’re welcome

Wow this whole this is confusing or confounding or something. She liked orgasms and you liked blowjobs. Which presumable lead to orgasms for you. So then neither one of you got orgasms? Or did you still get orgasms from hand jobs and she got none?
Did you cry and plead for your blowjobs is what I want to know….or did you just threaten her with no hand jobs until she got upset?  sounds like the breakup was a good thing for both of you.

sounds like the breakup was a good thing for HER.

I can’t imagine why some women don’t like oral sex, I love to go down on a woman, but I did have a girlfriend who was from Wisconsin back when I was in the Marine Corps who didn’t like it if I went down on her. If you’re with someone, this may be somewhat out in the left field, but you should be willing to lick them from head to toe. I know I am with my girlfriend, even her little pink rosebud. I think too many people are still hung up on the ideas presented by their parents and the Victorian Era. Parents are taught to shield their children from their lovemaking, and the children in turn view their mothers and fathers having sex as something icky and gross. This is what needs to be squelched, that whole idea that mom and dad can’t go rip off a piece without the kids condemning them for it. These mistaken ideas bleed down into all sorts of strange fetishes, and taboos about sex for some people.
Knowing what I know about the similarities between the male and female genitalia, it doesn’t bother me at all to go down on a woman, I enjoy the challenge of making a woman cum as hard as possible, the kind that leaves her gasping and disoriented. I once went down on a woman who proceeded to cum so vigorously that I could feel her pubococcygeus muscle thumping and thwipping against my upper lip. Needless to say, she enjoyed it immensely, and we used to spend long hours on Sunday afternoon naked in bed with my face glued to her privates. Anyone with an understanding of orgasm in general will know that when you start plucking one string, the others become attuned to that sound. I have this technique of kissing a woman while simultaneously stimulating her G-spot, clitoris, labia lips, and anus with one hand, and gently tweaking a nipple with the other hand. It always renders them with one of the most powerful orgasms they’ve ever experienced, and makes them inevitably want more.
I myself like to have my twisty bits gently fondled and manipulated while I am having sex and experiencing orgasm. It makes it more powerful, satisfying, and long-lasting. I know I’ve had a good nut when the head of my penis tingles for about four hours, even with no direct stimulation, I know it is the nerves in the tip that are adjusting to the contraction of the soft, erectile tissue as the blood leaks out completely, and it’s a very pleasant sensation. All of the erectile tissue in your body is connected, by virtue of it all being plumbed into the circulatory system of your heart, which beats faster and faster as you approach the point of no return. This has the effect of pushign blood into all those areas making them more sensitive. I even experience a great drain of the congestion in my sinuses and nasal cavities after I orgasm, and prior to it because of this mechanism.
The upshot is, if you’re involved with someone, you should do what makes them happy, within reason, if you want them to make you happy. I don’t understand the scat-lovers and the urine fetishists, but the human body is a wonderful thing, and regardless of the sexual orientation, you should be willing to try to please your partner. Otherwise it’s time to find your grilled cheese sandwiches elsewhere.

Wow. That’s some TMI there, stentor.  You might want to find a site that features erotic lit for those efforts.

“Dear Pandagon:

                    I never thought your letters were true, until last weekend….......”

Bwahahahahahahahahahah!

And then she asked if I minded if her friend joined us.  Boy, was a suprised when that guy showed up!

I once went down on a woman who proceeded to cum so vigorously that I could feel her pubococcygeus muscle thumping and thwipping against my upper lip.

That is one of the greatest sentences of all time.

I’m using this thread as inspiration for a new band called “Pubo-ROCK-a-geus!” and our new album, “Keepin’ a Thwip Upper Lip.” Needless to say, the fans will enjoy it immensely, especially when we finish gently tweaking our new tunes, like “Mom and Dad (Ripping Off a Piece)” and “Little Pink Rosebud.” The box set will include a handkerchief, since the guitarist’s unique style (plucking one string, then letting the others become attuned to that sound) is bound to drain your sinuses. Expect to spend long hours on Sunday with your ears glued to the speaker, rendering the most powerful ear-gasms you’ve ever experienced!

“.........................................and then she unexpectedly grabbed me by the shoulders…............................”

I even experience a great drain of the congestion in my sinuses and nasal cavities after I orgasm, and prior to it because of this mechanism.

I’d have to strike this one off the Penthouse letter. More thwipping, less snot.

Makes me wish as a teen that I’d had a more experimental, liberated allergist.

“................................................and then she whipped out a gelcap of Sudafed, and I knew there was no turning back now…....................................”

But after all, men and women both are free to experience the various flavors of liberalism for themselves, so I guess it’s all good….  Though that really blew my mind.

It beats the hell out of jalapeño nose spray.

“........................she blew my nose, and then she blew my…................................................”