Getting Married Does Not Necessarily Guarantee Frequent Hot Satisfying Sexy Sex (articles)
There are several different fairy tales conservative Christians hand out to Christian pre- teens and young adults to encourage them to refrain from fornicating: tell them to just hold on until they get married to have sex, or, that thought combined with the twist, “just wait until you get married, and the sex will be mind blowing!”
What happens when one partner in marriage, due to low libido, past sexual abuse, being physically exhausted, or just plain old disinterested in sex doesn’t “put out” as often as the other partner would prefer? Why, you wind up with a sex-less (or a non-plentiful sex life, at least possibly from the perspective of one spouse).
Here are some articles that discuss the situation where married couples are not having sex at all, or only very infrequently:
How Often Should Married Couples Have Sex? (The Wall Street Journal)
The URL to that is:
That WSJ article was in turned discussed on Slate:
The Wall Street Journal’s Solution to Sexless Marriages: Stereotype All Men and Women (Slate)
- By Amanda Hess | Posted Wednesday, April 24, 2013, at 12:38 PM
Meet Chris and Afton Mower. For the first six months of their marriage, the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday, the couple was in wedded bliss.
But soon, “Mower developed a rather significant concern: They weren’t having enough sex—and the situation was getting worse by the week. When Mr. Mower attempted to talk to his wife about the problem, she changed the subject.
He tried whispering in her ear. She ignored him.
After reading online that women are turned on by men who do housework, he washed the dishes and vacuumed more often.” As the months marched on, “Mr. Mower tracked their sex life in a notebook he kept in his nightstand.
He drew a chart and filled in different-shaped dots to represent various scenarios,” [Christian Pundit: He kept a chart? Seriously?] and concluded that he was “rebuffed 95% of the time.” But despite the statistical legwork, Chris Mower still wasn’t getting laid.
Typical male-female dynamic, am I right? That’s the WSJ’s take. The story is called “How Often Should Married Couples Have Sex?” and is subtitled “What Happens When He Says ‘More’ and She Says ‘No.’”
Reporter Elizabeth Bernstein calls in psychologists and sex therapists to flesh out the gender divide in the Mower family’s bedroom expectations. “Increasingly, experts believe sex is a more emotional experience for men than for women,” she writes. “Men, much more than women, relate to a partner through sex … as evidenced by their fear of rejection, concerns about performance and desire to please.”
But Chris and Afton Mower aren’t exactly universal stand-ins for Man and Woman. Later in the piece, we get more information about their particular circumstances. Both raised in the Mormon Church, the couple waited to have sex until their wedding night. Neither was satisfied. (“We expected sparks and it didn’t happen,” Chris says).
And that dry spell early on? It started when, “early in the marriage, Ms. Mower became pregnant and lost the baby. Her libido was diminished, and she was uncomfortable discussing sex with her husband.”
The Mower’s sexual incompatibility can’t be explained away by gender stereotypes like masculine sexual needs and feminine frigidity. This couple married before they even figured out whether they were sexually compatible. In a culture that prioritizes the childbearing potential of marital intimacy, it’s understandable that a woman would be uneager to jump into another risky pregnancy.
And in a world where women are expected to see their sexuality as a way to please their man as opposed to themselves, glorious charts detailing their failure to do so are probably not helpful (says Afton, “all the pressure I felt made me want it less”). Frankly, it’s insulting to tell any woman who’s just lost a child that sex is “more emotional” for men.
(Please click the “read more” link to read the rest of this post)