Using sex to control

I always see this in tv and movies, and in real life too. Women use sex to control their boyfriends/husbands. It's seen as humorous in movies but I really don't think it is. I'm a woman and have never used sex as a weapon to control. It seems some women have men wrapped around their fingers and if they're angry, all they have to do is withhold sex to get their way and the man will give in. I think this is really messed up and if I had a partner ever do that to me, I would say fuck that and I'd be out of the relationship. Partners should give to each other willingly and not selfishly. What do you guys think about it?

 

I dont see how they come out the winner there..
cant say Ive ever experienced this either. once we become close and intimate, all the guns are dropped.

if sex was a refusal it would probably mean the relationship is over anyways..

 

If my guy held out on me I would be ok about it because I too can do without, I would out last him. But if he did it twice or more, I would move on, not a game I play in either direction.
Now if he did something that day to make me mad I could hold out on him, not just to do it but when we (men and women) aren't in the mood it isn't worth doing at that time. This wouldn't be a game on my part or last long, it would be about the mood I was in so if this isn't supposed to happen often then neither is verbal attacks or such by my partner that would put me in such a mood.
I have had a day where something happened and he wanted sex not long after and it was a shut down. Apologies are always accepted but if this was a continual thing then again I would move on, long before I got in a habit of "holding out". Thing is I too need to be in a good mood for sex and yet I have heard some couples kinda fight to make up with sex, fun yes, it could be but not as a daily thing by one or the other.
I see it too on TV and I find it kind of annoying to see them promote it as a good thing to do. Sex should not be a head game. It should be a big part of an honest relationship. But a man needs also to know if he did something that could set me in a bad mood he ain't getting none till my mood is right for it. Mind you I can't say that's happened often in my life time, my relationships have usually been pretty good and if they weren't I'd be a runner.

 

Television is a tool of social engineering. People act on what they see -- monkey see, monkey do. Could explain the dysfunction seen in so many relationships today.

 

yeah, that's what I was thinking

 

I've never done this or known anyone who has (other than in the media). Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Similar to what you mentioned, I'm not sure if it is really that common or the media makes it seem so.

Also, what would you say? I won't have sex with you until...what?

 

With great power comes great responsibility.

 

What can I say? Bad people do bad things.

 

In the case given in the OP who knows what one would say,,,
In the case of just not being in the mood, I just say later or not now or something similar because it's not about holding out but about needing to feel right about it at the time. I rarely am not in the mood but none of us has an on and off switch for this, it takes two to tangle and both must want it or one might just lay there and not even participate and that could make a real mess out of the whole event.
Dunno about the rest of you but I won't have sex if I am ill or in a bad mood that won't shake off just because my partner wants it now. It's so rare that it shouldn't be challenged either. What's your take on that?

 

Yeah. What annoys me about relationships on most tv shows, the good ones anyway, is that they're like an example of how people should live their relationships. Like Romeo and Juliette being the basis for a "romantic relationship" some partners seem to think if their relationship isn't as strong, or one partner doesn't like public affection traits then there's something wrong with the person or relationship. If that makes sense?

I actually argued about this on a year 10 oral presentation on romance and true love. The basis was Romeo and Juliette. At this stage of my life I was engaged in sex already and my relationship with that girl (same as today) was that far from what Romeo and Juliette were experiencing. I argued that everyone is different and there is just as much love and devotion in a relationship that seems broken on the outside that you can't take it for face value. Anyway I directly put down my schools idea of "romance" to the point I even admitted to the teacher and class how I was in a BDSM cultured relationship and I'd hold us much higher than Romeo and Juliette. I got 17/20 for that argument. ^.^

 

"Witholding sex". Does that mean saying "no", when objective standards say that a woman is supposed to agree to have sex.

For example, if a woman has been hinting that she wants a diamond necklace for Valentines Day. Feb 14. rolls around and her beau gives her a CD of a love song that he wrote for her.

Its defiantly "withholding" if she thinks to herself, "I have to teach him to do what I say, no sex tonight."

But is it "withholding" if she is so angry that she didn't get her way that she isn't horny?

I guess I'm concerned that the concept of "withholding" implies that there are times when a woman's desire isn't one of the inputs when determining whether there should be intercourse. The notion that, in a relationship, she has to have (and explain if asked) a good reason if she is to be allowed to say "no". ("Good reason" defined and determined by people other than her.)

 

That's sad if a woman holds out over items. It means she is selfish and feels her man is her money pit. I have always worked hard enough to get what I need or want in material things. I depend on no man for my fun things and if they bought me something it's because they wanted to, never been asked or told to or had anything ordered.
I have known women to do this and they discuss me. In this day we shouldn't be a cost but more of a partner.

 

In Norway this wouldn't happen. I'm pretty sure it's quite legal to rape your wife there. =p

 

it doesn't work. everyone withholds sex from me, and i'm pretty sure i'm not under anyone's control.

 

Norway? Really? My grandmother was from there, she didn't seem like the type raised in such a situation. She stood her ground pretty good and was a strong willed lady as if raised to be respected, not abused.

 

what was proposed was not she withheld because not enought money had been spent or the proper thing bought but that she had gotten upset that he did not care or listen

lets try - she asks for a picnic out for the special day VS he buys her an iron then - still works - does she owe him sex merely because a gift was given or is she allowed to be upset that he obviously does not listen or seem to care and therefore is "allowed" to not be interested that night

I don't think anyone is EVER obligated to put out - I am in favor of enthusiastic consent, not even just informed consent

 

Maybe Sweden or Denmark. One of them, at least up until a few years ago, still had that law. I remember an article on the NYTIMES about it. And I don't think it was a well known law, like you get married and your vowels state you can now rape your wife, just if you do and she goes to the police.. not much happens.

 

So am I. I don't think either side should try to own and control the other, it should be like you said, enthusiastic consent on both sides.

 

I don't.

 

What does that mean? ("Objective standards that a woman is SUPPOSED TO AGREE to have sex?) The only way that statement makes sense is if it's a prostitute and you give her money.

I won't speak for anyone else, since I can't. But I will say that if I'm upset/angry, I'm not in the mood then we won't have sex.

Since a woman's orgasm is tied to her emotions, if she is angry or upset, she won't get one, so why bother? I can't believe someone would be that clueless to ask for sex when the other spouse is angry with them. When we are arguing, sex is the last thing on our minds. We usually resolve it within a day or two. (I think because we both would go insane if we didn't resolve the issue so we could then have sex.)

That being said, I've never "withheld" sex from my husband (I have never said "NO" to punish him for something.) I have said "NO" a handful of times when I couldn't- painful cramps or severe headache. He has turned me down a couple of times as well (he's tired or not feeling well).

Since we both enjoy sex, we know if the other says "NO" it's because of a valid reason. Actually, we don't need to explain, but now that I think back, we both give a reason for "No."