@103

I'm a teen holiday, and it sucks!
I'm a teen holiday, and it sucks!

M? Chimera - I register my obligatory protest against Prudie being deemed fairly liberal. Perhaps on some issues she might qualify, but that estimation strikes me as potentially emanating from Fox News.

Ms Driasis - It made me feel especially sorry for Mr DeMartino that the backlash against Presidents' Day reinforced an anti-history prejudice.

You give us your age but not your girlfriend's. I'll assume she's roughly the same age as you, at which point I'd like to point out that someone who, in their early 20s has not been motivated to try PIV sex yet and only wants to mess around once a month or so has very little sex drive at all and it's likely to get worse, not better. She may very well be pretty much asexual and just doing the little she is willing to do for you. With a more conventional sex drive, you will be miserable with this person in a relationship. Dan's right - you should move on.

And I wish a wonderful Thanksgiving to you as well, Auntie Griz. Stay warm and healthy.

P.S.

Shout out to Ophian, wherever you are. Happy Holidays, friend.

@90&91, Undead Ayn Rand: You're reading a lot into what I wrote that isn't there. He has every right to dump her over differences of libido. I only said that if their relationship is otherwise good, he might consider trying to help her get over her hang-ups. I never suggested that sex is too unimportant to break up over. That idea was mentioned by Dan and commented on by others.

@109: "I only said that if their relationship is otherwise good, he might consider trying to help her get over her hang-ups."

People do not enjoy being patronized in such a manner so others can get into their pants more often. It's a stupid and insensitive idea.

Re: Suzy & SilverChimera's monogamy discussion:

Some people's need for monogamy to be able to fully enjoy sex may be the result of cultural conditioning. I doubt that anybody is born needing "trust, freedom, and depth of connection" to fully enjoy sex. Dig into your feelings a bit, Suzy. Don't you need those things only because they let you overcome the shame and fear you've been taught to feel about sex?

@107: Eh, it's also likely that she's younger, but she's not necessarily "asexual", she could just be insecure or not happy with the guy and situation she's in.

I would like to add to the stories of long sad relationships resulting from mismatched libidos. I met my husband 18 years ago. I was very sexually repressed because of bad experiences I had with men before. He was patient and kind, and I finally trusted him to have sex. He was passionate and experienced. But after 6-12 months, his libido dropped. It dropped even more after we got married, and more when we had kids. I on the other hand, my libido has increased the older I got. Most of our marriage consisted of me making the first move, not getting turned down necessarily, but never feeling very wanted. He did not like communication of any kind during sex, and acted very hurt if I suggested changes or expressed something didn't feel good, or could feel better. Eventually he felt that I never accepted him and that everything I say makes him feel like shit. I feel unloved and unwanted, and very sexually frustrated. I should have seen this coming 1-2 years into our relationship before we got married. But I loved him and was young and naive, and I also felt indebted to him for opening me up sexually. But I should have called it off then, I would have saved us both a lot of pain. But at the same time, we had many wonderful experiences together and two amazing kids, so I don't waste time on regret.

By the way, I should add, we are in the process of divorcing. I will definitely be seeking sexual compatibility in my next relationship! And good communications!

W/R/T LIBIDO,

At some point last week I came up with the consideration that opening a relationship should only be done if it makes the existing relationship better. I'd like to extend that kind of consideration to: If you have a good relationship started, have sex when it makes the relationship better.

I realize that people have relationships that seem to be based solely upon having sex, but A) That isn't the case for LIBIDO, and B) If you took a sideways look at those "sex only" relationships (the good, comfy ones), you'd probably find more there than just fluid exchange.

Human relationships are why we are interested in this site, and the more complex the better. I am a poster child candidate for "my family of origin is messed up, and I don't know how to fix (or even deal with) it" status in the Human Club. But, that doesn't mean I've stopped trying to fix myself; I hope to stop the propagation of disfunction to the next gen. Thanks for providing me insight to being GGG, and that includes outside the bedroom.

Peace

"Guys who are interested in sexing two women aren't that difficult to find, HARD, so trust that the right guy..."

How is a guy who is interested in sexing two women going to be any good to a lesbian (i.e., Letter Writer)?

Seems to me there is a fundamental problem here that this particular arrangement of threesome is never going to be a triangle, only a V. I would guess the guy isn't going to have any problems with the concept of being with two women, even if one of them isn't interested in him, but Letter Writer is in the unenviable position of not being interested in one third of the threesome, while the other two thirds are into exploring each other at least as much as they are interested in LW, who doesn't sound all that enthusiastic in the first place. Sounds like a recipe for LW to turn into the third wheel, even if they try their best to include her.

@Suzy

As far as I know, Dan is the more monogamically-oriented-one in his marriage. He knows how to speak to poly too, and it's fine. But he's hardly monogamy-adverse.

@Allen Gilliam

Why do you feel entitlement to patronize Suzy ?

@117: Sissoucat, how is it patronizing to ask Suzy to consider the origins of her feelings? I didn't tell her anything; I asked her. Must sensitivity and tolerance be applied so absolutely that we can't even ask questions? If she thinks I'm wrong, I'd be interested to hear why. She's also free to tell me to go fuck myself for asking personal questions.

I think Dan's advice is generally very good in this column, with one exception:

HARD said she was in therapy/medication for an anxiety disorder. While the lines drawn in psychology are always fuzzy, in my book, you should absolutely resolve all your psychological issues before you begin dating, and ESPECIALLY before you leap into a risky, frightening activity like the one described.

That's my 2 cents.

I wouldn't say that the emotional wounds are any less deep for a long-term committed couple when some attempted sexual adventure goes badly.

They might even be worse, in so far as there has been time for resentments and other problems to build up. For example: imagine a threesome done in order to try and spice up a sex life that has gotten routine and hardly ever happens. Now imagine the partner whose libido had fallen off a cliff within the closed relationship igniting like a rocket for the third. Think that isn't going to hurt like hell, to the other spouse who is already coping with their partner's desire for them having dwindled to nothing over several years? (No doubt accompanied by all manner of excuses-cum-reassurances, to the effect that "No, it's not you, it's me, I just don't know what has happened to my libido...")

It's more like a long-term couple has a lot more life entanglements (house, kids, 401K) that become an incentive to work through it when something goes wrong. But it's still every bit as risky. More so, in fact, because there is more to lose if the relationship blows up.

@120--I remember some Times article referenced on Slog awhile back about the single greatest predictor of a woman's loss of libido in a committed relationship being how long she's been in that relationship. Guys' libidos remain relatively constant over time, women's by and large taper off after several years. Couple that with the folks over at Sex at Dawn who found the only universal turn-on for women, across cultures, is variety, and you now have the problem at the heart of monogamy.

In other words, it's not you, it is her. Except it's you. Sort of.

@122: It's enough to cause serious problems for crying out loud. If it wasn't a "big difference", he wouldn't have needed to write the letter about their fights.

Am I the only one suspicious this every three weeks or so thing is some groping, french kissing, and LIBIDO getting a BJ? Especially with a girl paranoid of the pain?

@99 - yes there is!

Vegan tiramisu: http://mouthwateringvegan.com/2013/07/14… (and a whole host of other recipes)

@88 & @92 nocutename: Thanks so much! No hard feelings toward my older sibs---it's just that, as a neighbor friend in my building has aptly pointed out, my sisters and brother will always be ten and a half years, eight years, ten months and nine days, and seven years, nine months , and twelve days older than I am, regardless of our current ages. This evidently means that as long as they continue to stubbornly see me as a easily manipulatable little kid (and never an adult among them), I have to just let them go and live my life. This is okay, actually, and MUCH saner for me.
@95: EricaP: Happy holidays! Great to hear from you!
@99 Still Thinking: You're right! I forgot about Chanukah. My bust, and Happy Chanukah, too, to all. Menorrahs, when lit--especially at night, are so cool!
I can fortunately still have dairy as long as there's no sugar involved.
My local co-op makes a heavenly GF/SF tiramisu with dark chocolate shavings on top!!
@126 krissf: Thanks for passing on your vegan tiramisu recipe!

@103 vennominon and @104 mydriasis: Daria---WOW! That brings me back!

@108 lolorhone: Comin' right back atcha! Yeah----stay warm!! It's nippy out!

@117 Sissoucat: Happy Holidays! I hope all is well your way.

@111/118 I know the question wasn't directed at me, but since I won most insensitive person award last week I think we can give it a try without hurting any fee-fees. I prefer monogamy and the things that Suzy mentioned that can come with it, because it takes a lot of stress and perceived danger (both real and imagined) out of the equation. I prefer having a person I can discuss and tweak my sex life with in a joint team effort over a long period of time. I feel less embarrassment and don't feel the need to constantly monitor and correct myself as much with someone I know as I do with a stranger. I'm introverted, but definitely a pervert. Unabashedly perverted at that. Though I try to keep it down a bit during sex because I don't want it to be about any particular act versus sharing a good experience.

(For the record: I've had four partners, never had a hook up or one night stand. I have been in two non-monogamous situations within relationships, one which was a little awkward and my other downright disappointing (my first and only MFF threesome). I've always known my partners before hand and have never drank or done anything more hardcore than smoke a cigarette before, during or after sex. So I don't know how relevant or decisive my opinion on this topic is since my general experience seems to deviate so much from the perceived "norm". I wouldn't bore with the details, but I feel slightly deceitful considering how forward everyone here has been about their own experiences.)

So the boyfriend literally burns her face and then makes her feel like crap? DTMFA.

I'm slightly confused by LIBIDO's choice of the term "intimate" when discussing his sex life with a virgin girlfriend. His girlfriend only wants to give blowjobs once every three weeks? Does she make out with him and fondle him to completion in-between blowjobs/whatever intimate is? Also does she make any comment on his use of porn and/or masturbation? Has she ever tried them herself? It's just such an incomplete letter in some aspects.

If you know what to do with your hands, mouth, and non-penetrating dick, virgins girls can be plenty horny.

Bottom line, LIBIDO, is that you can easily do much better than once every 3 weeks, especially at your age. Maybe she's low libido, or maybe it's you, best to sidestep that deep rabbit hole vortex and ramble on.

LW1 mentions his own age but not the age of his "girlfriend." If she is not only a virgin but still afraid of intercourse, then she's probably too young--psychologically and, most likely, LEGALLY. He needs to give up on dating young girls and try dating women his own age.

Wow, krissf @ 126, that is a serious recipie. I need a weekend just to contemplate assembling the ingredients, and I must admit, sadly, to not owning a food processor. I have a top and a bottom part for my old-fashioned blender, but I made the mistake of boxing them separately, and now only find one or the other when looking, but not both.

Really Now @ 129 - I always appreciate your posts.

Auntie Griz & Mr. Ven - this year we can celebrate Thanksgivukkah, instead of the usual ChristmaKwanzaaKah. Mr. Ven, I can hear your skin crawl from here ;)

Happy Hols, Lolo!

While my actual experience with threesomes is limited, I do know there's a certain amount of logistical awkwardness involved, even when everyone's heart (or whatever) is fully in (or on). So it's hard for me to imagine a threesome working out well when one of the members is just not interested in one of the other members.

"Some people's need for monogamy to be able to fully enjoy sex may be the result of cultural conditioning. I doubt that anybody is born needing "trust, freedom, and depth of connection" to fully enjoy sex. Dig into your feelings a bit, Suzy. Don't you need those things only because they let you overcome the shame and fear you've been taught to feel about sex?"

Hai,

I don't need any of those things to enjoy sex. Heck, I don't even need to mildly like a person to enjoy sex with them, I've had sex with a few people who I've actually somewhat disliked as people and the sex was still good.

But my observation of other women* is quite the opposite. They think they can hang, but they can't.

*Before people get super weird about that turn of phrase, I mean "other women in my own personal life/experience" I'm sure there's lots of women out there in the world who are like me, I just haven't met them.

let me get this straight - your boyfriend is responsible for a burn injury to you and now he finds you unappealing because of it? And you have to ask Dan what you should do?

Get rid of the jerk and be careful with fire.

@137,

He could also be thinking something to the effect of "Oh God, I hurt her so badly, I'm so afraid I might screw up and do it again". Or do most people believe that setting someone you putatively love ON FIRE isn't going to be traumatic. And that the sight of the wounds won't keep reopening that trauma.

He might never forgive himself for what he's done, unless...

Peace

@138: Yeah, I'm voting guilt and the feeling of self-stupidity being a huge boner-killer.

Still Thinking @135: Happy Holidays to you as well.

@129, Really Now...: So at least part of what motivates you to be monogamous is negative and unfounded: fear of imagined danger, and embarrassment? That's the sexually repressive emotional programming of religion, and it's what I think people would benefit from getting over.

I'm not saying that there aren't any practical advantages to monogamy. But it doesn't seem like those advantages would lead to a rigid policy of having sex only in monogamous relationships.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone stupid enough to make a "volcano shot" and anyone stupid enough to try one deserve to take it further and win Darwin Awards. I don't want them around.

Dan in your advice to LIBIDO, I think you missed a key point. There is no way to know if their problem is just an issue of mismatched libido, because she's never had penetrative sex. Full-on intercourse can totally change a woman's understanding of sex and totally change her libido. Non-penetrative sex is not as much fun as the real thing, so of course she doesn't want to be intimate that often -- there's not much to do. If LIBIDO thinks she's amazing and worth sticking around for, he could find that their sexual dynamic shifts once she loses her virginity.

@142: Well, the difference between "I did a stupid thing" and "I'm a hopeless idiot", but awkwardly phrased.

@144 "Non-penetrative sex is not as much fun as the real thing"

For some people. For others, penetrative sex is not as much fun as some other things we can do to each other.

@135 Thanks!
@141 I don't think it's religion that makes me look for sex within the confines of relationships (both romantic and friendly). It's mostly a choice based on my own temperament and needs. It'd be easy to place the blame on society, but the fact is I just don't care for sex without all the benefits of knowing and caring for the partner I do it with. As for the monogamy; it's somewhat simple if not always easy when done thoughtfully with honest communication by two people who share that inclination. And I'm sure there's plenty of benefits to polygamy. However we can both agree that as adults it's a simple matter of judging needs, costs and desire to select one that most realistically fits us as an individual. Plus while I've only done a small amount of experimenting I don't think it's rigid to look for and communicate what I believe is the best choice for me so I can find a partner who's compatible and avoid situations or entanglements that would be painful for me and/or another person. Why make the obvious mistake of not communicating your needs when there's so many unforeseen problems waiting for you?

@143 LaSargenta,

Not as stupid as dropping a frozen turkey into a pot of boiling oil, where the cooking apparatus isn't situated to deal with a 30' column of flame. (So, for those turkey fryers out there, safety first!)

Drunkenness and open flames are just a bad mix. Ice luges are a lot safer.

Peace

If you are open-minded enough one could look into this: http://frixion.me you COULD solve libido issues between you and your partner. If you want sex more than once a week; have sex with your gf - record it- and the robot will playback the movements you had from the encounter at any time. So when you have hot sex, you can re-experience it whenever you want.

Of course it's less intimate than actual physical sex with your gf, but it may be better than nothing at all and possibly remove the pressure on it. No STD's, no unwanted pregnancy and it may be considered quite charming if your bf decides to have sex with your movements over and over again through a robot, rather than cheat behind your back. It's a shame that if you find someone who is compatible on all other bases, but just doesn't want as much sex as you is reason enough to close the door on them.

My issue is that a decent portion of the time, my bf finishes before I even got to the same level of arousal as he did. With this device, not only can I have sex with my "partner" whenever I want, it's also from wherever I want. While you're away from each other, you can still have a chance to feel intimate and maybe it could be used to spice up the relationship to build up a libido/longevity?

I read Mydriasis at 136 quoting someone upthread "I doubt that anybody is born needing "trust, freedom, and depth of connection" to fully enjoy sex. Dig into your feelings a bit, Suzy. Don't you need those things only because they let you overcome the shame and fear you've been taught to feel about sex?"

And immediately concluded "typed like someone who can't get pregnant." Scrolled up just to double-check that.

And, in my experience and risk of having a child result aside: Yes, some people do need a strong emotional connection to their partner to enjoy sex. It's called "intimacy" (or in the Bible, "knowing") for a reason. The requirement to emotionally detach so your feelings aren't as vulnerable to the strange person you don't trust does not strike some of us as the key to a sexy good time. Ymmv, but don't dismiss everyone else's mileage as urban legend.

Just because you like casual sex, or poly/mono, or Oscar the Grouch cosplay, does not mean that it is the one true model everyone else would follow if they just examined their feelings.

(And trying to argue aside from societal influence if silly: if someone were raised in a box with no contact, what sort of sex they want to have when released from the box would be the least of their problems.)

Allan Gilliam: Rot.

I’m moderately monogamous. I’ve had outside lovers since I was sexually active, but if I’m living in the same city as my primary partner and have access to them, I simply don’t want another partner. I just don’t. It’s not a question of guilt or shame — in other circumstances I’m completely fine taking lovers or having one-night-stands — just... I don’t feel like it. I want my primary partner to love and want me and that’s it. If I could have that all the time that’s all I would want.

And then there’s jealousy. It causes a great deal of suffering. Some people are temperamentally quite jealous, others aren’t. There’s no particular reason to assert that there is no inborn component to this trait since animal examples abound. If you are a very jealous person then monogamy is for you.

I’ve tried to be trendy and unjealous but there’s no benefit. If you’re jealous you should just admit it. I want to know unambiguously what my status is (primary, secondary, fling). Any uncertainty will throw me into a tizzy. The easiest way to not be uncertain about these things is a monogamous relationship.

I really resent the idea that because I prefer a monogamous relationship when I can have one, that I am somehow repressed and inhibited. It actually makes me angry that someone feels entitled to tell me how I really feel. I can believe that you have never experienced jealousy, or that you are endowed with a type of narcissism that allows no explanation for someone not wanting to have sex with you other than “they must be repressed,” or that my neighbour is freakishly jealous. I have no trouble believing EricaP to be fundamentally nonmonogamous or any other person to have the libidos and turn-ons they say they do even if they don’t match mine.

Your inability to imagine that my desires and motivations might be different from yours is a failing on your part, not mine.

“I doubt that anybody is born needing "trust, freedom, and depth of connection" to fully enjoy sex. Dig into your feelings a bit, Suzy. Don't you need those things only because they let you overcome the shame and fear you've been taught to feel about sex?”

That’s *hugely* disrespectful. And no, you aren’t “just asking.” The only reason you doubt that anyone is born needing trust, freedom and depth of connection to fully enjoy sex is that you weren’t and you lack empathy. You’re the kind of dangerous asshole who doesn’t understand that “I want to fuck you” doesn’t magically equate to “you want to fuck me” and is unable to take No seriously.

"the requirement to emotionally detach so your feelings aren't as vulnerable to the strange person you don't trust does not strike some of us as the key to a sexy good time."

That's based on the presumption that sex and emotion are attached to begin with, isn't it?

My argument is the opposite. If they're attached for you leave them that way, if they aren't attached don't contrive them to be.

I just dislike the idea that having sex and emotions be separate is the result of an active intentional process.

And as a side note: Trust isn't binary. You might trust someone not to axe murder you while not wanting them to go through your browser history. You might trust someone to keep anything you tell them in confidence but not trust them to show up on time when you ask them to. You might trust someone to perform surgery on you while still not wanting to them them your saddest childhood memory.

Lots of physical activities involve a level of trust. Anything with spotting for example. You can "trust" someone in a limited capacity to do the thing they're supposed to do and not do things they're not supposed to do (although from my perspective I rely less on "trust" and more on my ability to assess danger and personality) while not making some kind of profound cosmic connection with them or whatever.

@Auntie Grizelda Happy holidays ! I'm fine now, thanks for your kind concern !

@Alison Cummins #152 Nice take.

@Allen Gilliam #118

Patronize (wiktionary) : to assume a tone of unjustified superiority ; to talk down to ; to treat condescendingly. Your message to Suzy fits the bill : "Dig into ..." is giving her an order. "Don't you ... because you ..." is providing your own answer while pretending to ask her a question.

I did answer your question. Let me remind you mine : Why do you feel entitlement to patronize Suzy ?

When undead ayn rand #91 told you, before me, "don't be so patronizing", I note you didn't react. Why the different treatment ? Has it anything to do with undead ayn rand's very sharp tongue ?

Now who's the little fearling there : Suzy or Allen Gilliam ?

@155

Ugh, please.

Full-on intercourse can totally change a woman's understanding of sex and totally change her libido.

Uh. No. Unless you're Anastasia Steele and for some reason your sexuality has lived inside Christian Grey your whole life.

Finding out that intercourse with a particular guy is a lot of fun can certainly change your desire for that guy, but that's not the same thing as changing your libido. Penises can be very nice and all, but they're not magic.

WHERE'S THIS WEEK'S DAN SAVAGE, DAMNIT???!!!!

159 Doot-- Look for this week's column at:

sacurrent.com/arts/visualart/savage-love… ("I am a 21-year-old gay male who loves listening to the Savage Lovecast as I bike to school.")

I'm not sure what the delay is with finding it here.

THANKS! :D

Hmm, now the link above doesn't work. Try this:

www.straight.com/life/537006/can-relatio…

Fixing! Sorry!

@151, IPJ wrote: The requirement to emotionally detach so your feelings aren't as vulnerable to the strange person you don't trust does not strike some of us as the key to a sexy good time.

Exactly what emotions do you feel the need to shut down? Perhaps shame about enjoying the physical pleasure of sex?

As to pregnancy, of course that discourages casual sex, and not just for women. You have heard of paternity tests and child support? But I think it's obvious that many people have emotions that constrain their sexuality. The source of those emotions is what I'm interested in exposing.

@151, IPJ wrote: Just because you like casual sex, or poly/mono... does not mean that it is the one true model everyone else would follow if they just examined their feelings.

It's not about what I like. I'm encouraging you to consider the emotional effects of our sex-negative culture. Why does that upset you so much?

@152, Alison Cummins wrote: It’s not a question of guilt or shame — in other circumstances I’m completely fine taking lovers or having one-night-stands...

Okay, then it sounds like you aren't repressed. But lots of other people are.

I don't disagree with your description of jealously. But jealously doesn't stop someone from enjoying casual sex. It's not relevant to my point.

@152, Alison Cummins wrote: I really resent the idea that because I prefer a monogamous relationship when I can have one, that I am somehow repressed and inhibited. It actually makes me angry that someone feels entitled to tell me how I really feel.

I'm not telling you how you really feel. You are the only one who knows how you feel. I'm asking you to consider the true nature of those feelings and where they come from. And I never attacked a preference for monogamy. I suggested that an inability to enjoy casual sex indicates learned, sex-negative emotions.

@152, Alison Cummins wrote: I can believe that you ... are endowed with a type of narcissism that allows no explanation for someone not wanting to have sex with you other than “they must be repressed,”

That's unfair. I never even suggested that I think anyone who doesn't want to have sex with me is repressed. You're projecting oft-criticized, stereotypical male behavior onto me.

@152, Alison Cummins wrote: The only reason you doubt that anyone is born needing trust, freedom and depth of connection to fully enjoy sex is that you weren’t and you lack empathy. You’re the kind of dangerous asshole who doesn’t understand that “I want to fuck you” doesn’t magically equate to “you want to fuck me” and is unable to take No seriously.

So now I'm a rapist? Nice. You seem to have decided that you don't like me, so your goal now is to twist my words to make me look as bad as possible.

I don't doubt that many people need those things to enjoy sex. My point is that the emotions that make people unable to enjoy casual sex have been inflicted on them by others.

@156: Evidently looking up a definition doesn't grant one the ability to apply it accurately. I'm not patronizing anyone. I'm asking deep psychological questions. If my questions make you uncomfortable, you are free to ignore them. But don't invent unjustified criticisms to invalidate my questions so you don't have to think about them.

@156, Sissoucat wrote: When undead ayn rand #91 told you, before me, "don't be so patronizing", I note you didn't react. Why the different treatment?

Because I addressed that accusation in comment 81. You may benefit from reading it.

Allan Gilliam,

If you don’t think I am repressed, how can you suggest that my poor experiences with casual sex are the result of “learned, sex-negative emotions”? That’s completely incoherent.

If my preference for monogamy is not the result of repression, why are you so sure everyone else’s is? What makes me the Very Special Exception? How would you know?

Of course I don’t like you. You’re denying my experience and asserting that your *completely unfounded* view “that the emotions that make people unable to enjoy casual sex have been inflicted on them by others” takes precedence over my own experience and that of others that this is simply not the case, and takes precedence over what we know about sexual pairing in animals generally: that preferences vary.

I have experience with people telling me that my knowledge of myself is invalid, that my experience of life and other people means nothing, that my academic knowledge is irrelevant and wrong. I hate it and I dislike the self-serving people who try to pull it on me.

@168, Alison Cummins wrote: If you don’t think I am repressed, how can you suggest that my poor experiences with casual sex are the result of “learned, sex-negative emotions”? That’s completely incoherent.

I never suggested anything about you specifically. You have a tendency to assume everything is about you. You probably should not listen to Helter Skelter by The Beatles.

If my preference for monogamy is not the result of repression, why are you so sure everyone else’s is?

I'm not. Please consider working on your reading comprehension and stop jumping to conclusions.

What makes me the Very Special Exception? How would you know?

Because you said you had no problem with casual sex.

Of course I don’t like you. You’re denying my experience and asserting that your *completely unfounded* view “that the emotions that make people unable to enjoy casual sex have been inflicted on them by others” takes precedence over my own experience and that of others that this is simply not the case, and takes precedence over what we know about sexual pairing in animals generally: that preferences vary.

What is "completely unfounded" is your understanding of what I wrote.

I have experience with people telling me that my knowledge of myself is invalid, that my experience of life and other people means nothing, that my academic knowledge is irrelevant and wrong. I hate it and I dislike the self-serving people who try to pull it on me.

Oh, no. Does this mean you won't sleep with me?

But seriously, I didn't say any of that. Your experiences with others are making you misunderstand my words to fit those experiences. I'm very sorry you've encountered so many assholes in your life, but I'm not one of them.

I'm currently in a high-low mismatch and today our relationship hit a new "low". Today, after my failed attempt at intimacy with my partner, he attempted to try to get intimate with me later in the day. I was still feeling slightly dejected from the earlier no-go so I passed. Then the ugly moment happened, he told me that he was "just trying to give me what I wanted" and I asked him what that was, his response "willingness". He meant it sweetly but it stung. I love him, we've been married nearly seven years now but I don't know how I can make a relationship last when I want him but don't feel that my feelings are reciprocated.

"I suggested that an inability to enjoy casual sex indicates learned, sex-negative emotions."

What makes you think I can't enjoy casual sex? I surely could. That doesn't address the point: I can't derive from casual sex the deeper level of connection and understanding that arises after years of a monogamous relationship. Not because I'm inherently opposed to casual sex - I'm not - but because by definition I don't find that it reaches the level of intimacy reached after years of exclusive togetherness. Being able to have all this variety of sex with different partners might be a great thing, but weighed in the scales against the benefits of monogamy, I just prefer monogamy. I don't feel particularly repressed.

It's odd that you think religion has something to do with these emotions. Perhaps for some it does, but why would that be the obvious conclusion when someone prefers monogamy? I wasn't raised religious. I was raised to fear unplanned pregnancy, which seems pretty reasonable, and that's about it.

I find it really sad that LIBIDO's gf is afraid of the pain of having penetrative sex for the first time. So was I before I lost my virginity. Some book I'd read in my early teens had warned me that it felt something along the lines of a white-hot knife stabbing into your genitals, and that image stuck with me and made me super freaked out about the whole idea. Finally my sex drive got the better of me, and lo and behold, it didn't really hurt that much at all. There was none of the gushing blood or white-hot pain I thought there was going to be. I'm still resentful of all the anti-sex propaganda that had convinced me losing my virginity would be so darn painful.