Assertive and dominant females

I'm not really submissive, but it is clear that my play partners are in charge. This is probably because they have more experience than I do, and they seduced me into the lifestyle (not that I mind a bit, LOL.) But I can see that in future relationships, I may be more dominant, especially if I get more experience -- and more toys. It almost seems that whoever has the most toys is in command. I wonder if I am the only one who sees it this way. 😃

The boundary between physical abuse for real life issues and physical discipline for play is not hard and fast, but exists, I believe. Police don't see it. Nor do courts, often. But it's there (in my view of course). I've known dommes who act like dommes before and after a scene and it's a turn off since there is no space for negotiation or aftercare between partners/equals. But in a scene, a domme or dom can do as they wish, based on the limits that are negotiated. Agreeing to be abused outside scenes, as an integral part of a relationship in general, seems a wee bit more problematic even though I'm sure it feels like it works for some. Power is a key element of erotic play but it's also a risky even dangerous one...

Married a long time ago and our marriage was different but equal. Now she rules the roost and sex is no longer part of our marriage.

Married a long time ago and our marriage was different but equal. Now she rules the roost and sex is no longer part of our marriage.

Why no longer any sex? Did she lose interest? Performance issue? What happened for her to take over "the roost"?

@douche said

Married a long time ago and our marriage was different but equal. Now she rules the roost and sex is no longer part of our marriage.

Your situation sounds exactly like the problems created by the BITCH WOMEN in the sexless/reduced sex marriage thread. Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex? There is something very very wrong.

The partner who doesn't want sex should at least care enough about their partner to spread their legs for five or ten minutes a couple of times a week to make their partner happy.

Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex? There is something very very wrong.

Because anything else is politically incorrect.

Because anything else is politically incorrect.

Even though I am trying my very best not to be snarky, you should realize that politics as such, has nothing to do with such questions.

What is really being discussed are cultural norms, customs, mores and expectations. In short, how one is expected to act in specific situations. How people are expected to act in specific situations has little to do with politics and much much more with culture, sociologically defined culture that is. All the myriad, complicated and often inscrutable ways in which society is organized and what is expected of members of society.

Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex?

.

This probably because in our various types of Western cultures, forcing, cajoling, browbeating etc. individuals to do something is usually considered more onerous than leaving individuals alone to make their own choices.

It would analogous to forcing someone to eat a meal even when not hungry or already full or nauseous. It would be like forcing a (grown-up) person to read a particular novel for 'pleasure' even though it has no interest for them at all (poor school kids don't get that same protection sadly enough, the stuff they are forced to read ... ha ha).

It would be like forcing someone to watch a movie they don't care for ... and so on and on ...

Western cultures make a virtue out of not forcing individuals to partake in personal activities they have no wish to partake in or which they consider for any valid (or invalid) reason to be abhorrent to them.

That is simply how Western societies are organised for the most part. It is the whole individual 'freedom of choice' thing that is made so much of.

Other cultures approach things differently. In some, beating a wife who refuses to provide sex is thought acceptable.

Of course, refusal to engage in activities one spouse ardently wishes, can be a valid reason for incompatibility in marriage and then the consequences will have to be borne. That is the flip side of having an individual repugnance to providing sex. One can be called out on the matter.

Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex? There is something very very wrong.

This probably because in our various types of Western cultures, forcing individuals to do something is usually considered more onerous than leaving individuals alone to make their own choices.

@agracier Maybe I am missing something - nobody is advocating forcing a reluctant partner to have sex. Just that they should accommodate. I used to hate giving my wife foot rubs, but she adored them and I accommodated. I also had some pretty good sex afterwards!! 😉

@agracier Maybe I am missing something - nobody is advocating forcing a reluctant partner to have sex. Just that they should accommodate. I used to hate giving my wife foot rubs, but she adored them and I accommodated. I also had some pretty good sex afterwards!! 😉

If someone doesn't wish to do something, you can, I suppose, try and reason with them or announce some kind of 'retaliation' (you won't do this? OK, then I won't do that unless ...)

Reasoning isn't forcing, unless perhaps it has be done every time. But the latter must certainly be considered forcing. Maybe not by physical force, but still a pressuring.

In any case, all of this is rather theoretical as far as I am concerned anyway: if I had to reason and argue or plead with my spouse or someone to accommodate my sexual desires, then honestly I'd prefer to go without. I have more self-respect than that.

If the desire is not at least, in some basic manner mutual, then forget it. It would be more honest and easier to go to a professional and pay.

Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex? There is something very very wrong.

Because it is a partnership and as such each does have a say in the matter. Each should consider the others feeling and opinion in the very personal matter in their own relationship. How it is handled in that relationship is what matters. There is not just one way to go about a sexual relationship.

...nobody is advocating forcing a reluctant partner to have sex. Just that they should accommodate.

Some the posts sure are skirting the idea of forcing oneself on an unwilling or unable to perform partner. Just because one partner feels they deserve sex, even if only for 10 minutes.

If the other person is into the cucking thing, they should say that with their post, so we know it's mutually agreeable.

Painful. I have a relationship with a dominant women, it started with a playful spanking years ago. It just gets better everyday.

@SwitchableSusie said

Why the fuck does the person who doesn't want sex always override the equally valid desire of their partner TO HAVE sex? There is something very very wrong.

@MissStress said

Because it is a partnership and as such each does have a say in the matter. Each should consider the others feeling and opinion in the very personal matter in their own relationship. How it is handled in that relationship is what matters. There is not just one way to go about a sexual relationship.

OBVIOUSLY when the person who does NOT want sex always gets their way, IT ISN'T AN EQUAL PARTNERSHIP and some sort of restitution or redemption needs to be made---YES, I am talking about punishment of some sort. There MUST be consequences for failure to provide sexual services or company in a marriage.

.

@agracier said

If someone doesn't wish to do something, you can, I suppose, try and reason with them or announce some kind of 'retaliation' (you won't do this? OK, then I won't do that unless ...)

It should be a requirement of marriage to have sex (at least most of the time) when your partner wants it if you aren't physically incapacitated. There are vowes where you foreseake all others, etc, etc, so your spouse should be required to supply the necessary genitalia.

@gwhap said

Maybe I am missing something - nobody is advocating forcing a reluctant partner to have sex. Just that they should accommodate. I used to hate giving my wife foot rubs, but she adored them and I accommodated. I also had some pretty good sex afterwards!!

WHOA, let me tell you if my husband wasn't stronger than I am and I wanted sex and he didn't, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE GETTING SEX any way I wanted it. I would get a caverject and inject him myself if I had to.

@agracier said

Even though I am trying my very best not to be snarky, you should realize that politics as such, has nothing to do with such questions.

What is really being discussed are cultural norms, customs, mores and expectations. In short, how one is expected to act in specific situations. How people are expected to act in specific situations has little to do with politics and much much more with culture, sociologically defined culture that is. All the myriad, complicated and often inscrutable ways in which society is organized and what is expected of members of society.

Political correectness goes FAR BEYOND politics. It refers to just about anything that offends or goes against the grain of a group of people.

Political correctness - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

Political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is a term used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society.

Political correectness .

I was answering as someone who has been part of American society and am now outside of it looking back in. Not to make a big thing about it, but it gives a double perspective.

It would seem that the term has evolved far beyond simply not trying to give offense. It seems rather that it has become a blanket term, an insult that is leveled against almost anything someone doesn't like. It is calling others wimps for their views, snowflakes is I believe a commonly used term nowadays, implying a lack of aggressive-assertiveness that is not considered comely in certain social groups.

In more childish, schoolyard terms, it is like one kid calling another a fraidy-cat and the other replies with 'am not' and so it goes back and forth.

It is also a term that heightens tensions and does little to promote polite conversation. Once someone levels a charge or accusation of PC at something, the rest of the exchange is sure to escalate into mutual misunderstanding and one-upmanship.

Better not to use the term at all.

@MissStress said

Some the posts sure are skirting the idea of forcing oneself on an unwilling or unable to perform partner. Just because one partner feels they deserve sex, even if only for 10 minutes.

I am NOT skirting the idea of forcing oneself (or myself) on an unwilling but perfectly capable partner to have sex.

I can't help but be reminded that you have a personal connection with this topic topic, and as such are unhappy with that idea.

@agracier said

Better not to use the term at all.

I believe it is impossible NOT to use the term PC, politically correct or politically incorrect here, especially when being politically correct and inoffensive is so very important on zity.

god forbid anyone gets offended by something someone said.

I believe it is impossible NOT to use the term PC, politically correct or politically incorrect here, especially when being politically correct and inoffensive is so very important on zity.

.

Perhaps people should cultivate the use of the term 'polite' and practice it as well.

I am NOT skirting the idea of forcing oneself (or myself) on an unwilling but perfectly capable partner to have sex.

I can't help but be reminded that you have a personal connection with this topic, and as such are unhappy with that idea.

And you Switchable have never been anywhere near the situation that some are finding themselves in currently. It is not always as simple as you and others are making it out to be.

Perhaps people should cultivate the use of the term 'polite' and practice it as well.

Polite shmolite.

People who take things personally will think anything is impolite, politically incorrect, abusive or not construcive.

Those people know who they are but will never admit it.

@MissStress said

And you Switchable have never been anywhere near the situation that some are finding themselves in currently. It is not always as simple as you and others are making it out to be.

Yes, it really is that simple.

For the vast majority of couples, the WOMEN are causing the problem and the men are suffering for it.

No ones life is perfect or without some difficulty.

If the person is able and in reasonable health, NOT incapacitated, it really is very simple.

SPREAD YOU LEGS.

JUST DO IT.

SwitchableSuzie I loved Caverject

For the vast majority of couples, the WOMEN are causing the problem and the men are suffering for it.

Men are also part of the problem of women withholding sex. I don’t feel sorry for men who aren’t getting it. Have they discussed it with their wife, have their careers become more important to the point they have neglected their wife, have they hurt her by taking her for granted and lost the spark, have they done anything physically or emotionally to turn off their wife? Usually there are other issues in the relationship that lead to loss of interest in sex. Men can sit back, be hurt and unsatisfied and accept it. Or proactively try to fix it. Hate to say this, but most men are pussies (am I allowed to say that?) when it comes to interpersonal communication and addressing their feelings.

Question for the women: what would your husband do if you seemed to lose interest in sex?

maybe this should be in the sexless marriage thread but it follows the recent posts.

gwhap said

Question for the women: what would your husband do if you seemed to lose interest in sex?

Not having sex is NOT in our lifestyle, but for this hypothetical situation, and NOT in any particular order, I assume he would start by asking why I lost interest in sex, ask if it was boring, it it was not feeling as good as before, if I was ill, if I was seeing someone else, if I just didn't like it any more, if I didn't love him anymore, if I had some emotional reason why I didn't want to do it, if it was painful, if there were other problems in our marriage that were manifesting themselves in my denying sex, if he did something to anger me, he would ask if he let me down in some way and I was rebelling. Those are all the kind, fair-fighting ways of dealing with it.

If the discussions on the above topics didn't bring positive results for him, he would put on his business negotiating hat.....and the sparks.....would begin.....to emerge. Laying on guilt is always good when one person is generous and giving. He would start listing all the things he has done for me. Nice house, fast cars, expensive toys, easy life, nice clothes, jewelry, vacations, help in the home, musical instruments, great family life, being well taken care of emotionally and financially, telling how he loves me, having great daughters (in actual discussions he has stated that he supplied very high quality genetic material which I will not deny), and giving me just about anything I ever wanted.

One way or another, my husband would beat me into submission. He's bigger, stronger and faster with a retort than I am. Why should I ever deny him sex?

One way or another, my husband would beat me into submission. He's bigger, stronger and faster with a retort than I am. Why should I ever deny him sex?

You would seem to be a handful but I am liking this guy more all the time.

You would seem to be a handful but I am liking this guy more all the time.

Hey, my husband is a great guy. I picked him out when we were 11 years old. I'm not letting him go.

Trust me, he can be a handful, too.

We're pretty evenly matched.

Hey, my husband is a great guy. I picked him out when we were 11 years old. I'm not letting him go.

Did the Dali Lama marry you at 11?

@SwitchableSusie said:

.....but for this hypothetical situation, and NOT in any particular order, I assume he would start by asking why I lost interest in sex, ask if it was boring, it it was not feeling as good as before, if I was ill, if I was seeing someone else, if I just didn't like it any more, if I didn't love him anymore, if I had some emotional reason why I didn't want to do it, if it was painful, if there were other problems in our marriage that were manifesting themselves in my denying sex, if he did something to anger me, he would ask if he let me down in some way and I was rebelling. Those are all the kind, fair-fighting ways of dealing with it.

You should give a class on how sexually deprived men should approach their significant other!!! Might add trying to create a little romance. We used to go out for dinner a lot - now it's occasional takeout. Still, we dim the lights, put a white tablecloth on the table, some nice soft music, couple of candles and a good bottle of wine.

If the discussions on the above topics didn't bring positive results for him, he would put on his business negotiating hat.....and the sparks.....would begin.....to emerge. Laying on guilt is always good when one person is generous and giving.

I would take "laying on guilt" out of the course curriculum. My boat anchor would dig her heals in and become defiant if I used that approach on her!!! Even now if I complain about her being too needy and everything I do for her I get "the look".... so I don't go there anymore!