"Real Housewives" star has new book that advocates marital rape

[Kerr]

No one needs give excuses to be angry.

The emotion in itself is completely useless to begin with. If excuses were necessary none would be good enough.

The bare minimum right we can have is the right to feel however we feel.

I can think of good reasons to be angry . Not getting sex isnt one of them. And its not about rights, btw. Everyone has the right to be jealous all the time, but that wouldnt make it a good thing.

 

[Me Myself]

I can think of good reasons to be angry . Not getting sex isnt one of them. And its not about rights, btw. Everyone has the right to be jealous all the time, but that wouldnt make it a good thing.

Being angry is never a good thing.

There is no moment were being angry helps doing anything that wouldnt be done better if you werent angry, maybe very rare exceptions may exist, but in general, is useles, thus, there is no good reason to be angry.

Yu are thinking on things that would make most people angry or reactions to clearly unjust or unfair treatments, but all of those can be dealt with without anger and be dealt with in a much better fashion anyways. (This doesn not necessarily mean passive fashion btw)

 

[Kerr]

Being angry is never a good thing.

There is no moment were being angry helps doing anything that wouldnt be done better if you werent angry, maybe very rare exceptions may exist, but in general, is useles, thus, there is no good reason to be angry.

Yu are thinking on things that would make most people angry or reactions to clearly unjust or unfair treatments, but all of those can be dealt with without anger and be dealt with in a much better fashion anyways. (This doesn not necessarily mean passive fashion btw)

Anger is just a part of being human. It can be a good thing. It can be a bad thing. Everything depends on the person and the context. Whats not a good thing is letting anger control you. It is kind of like fire in that it can warm you, but also burn down your house.

And I didnt mistake it for passive. Perhaps your words sounded a little... apathic, though. But that might just be me misunderstanding you.

 

[Me Myself]

Anger is just a part of being human. It can be a good thing. It can be a bad thing. Everything depends on the person and the context. Whats not a good thing is letting anger control you. It is kind of like fire in that it can warm you, but also burn down your house.

And I didnt mistake it for passive. Perhaps your words sounded a little... apathic, though. But that might just be me misunderstanding you.

Oh, I definetely get anger btw. Its just yhat anger in itself is always undesirable. It clouds your reasoning, its never good for a relaitonship. It can be a poor man's choice of good sense for yourself if you didnt have it without such anger, but it's still a poor man's choice for it.

Letting anger control you is worst than just having it but getting anger repressed is a recipe for unpredictable expression of it and disaster. That's why I dont like e line lf thought of "you dont have the right to be angry about x"

Thats a very stupid move for discussing feelings on a relationship IMHO.

To deal emotions in a mature way you need to recognise you and your partner WILL HAVE unreasonable emotions, and deal with them as a couple with as much nurturing and understandable attitudes as you can.

Thats my take on it.

 

[DallasApple]

Well, each person is different. I would expect people to care at least not to damage the other person which already means they care, what I am saying is that there is nothing wrong with having sex and not caring a lot (in a specific encounter, not on all of them) about whether the other one is feeling aroused by it or not, which is very VERY different than not caring at all on what they feel. If you are in a loving relationship, you care how your partner feels.

I'm talking about not caring that the person(in this case a woman) does not want sex at all.Wishing to not engage her body in sexual activity period.Not just not being aroused.

.Speaking of its easy (easier) for a guy to say its not a big deal for a woman to have sex without any arousal let alone pleasure.Its not very often or typical or as wide spread anyway that men are expected or even can do that especially regularly.Even your example of her wanting "sex" and him not wanting it but giving her a 'hand job" #1 that's not "sex" and its is a whole lot different than a woman engaging in intercourse or even oral sex when she is mentally and physically not desiring sex.Just because there is a hole available to stick it in doesn't mean its not UNPLEASANT. 2nd of all I actually kind of laughed a little ..because If my husband gave me a hand job he WOULD become aroused and we would end up having sex.Foreplay doesn't just turn a woman on.And that's what that is.And guys are typically much easier to arouse.Including just seeing a woman's naked body.

He was trying to be "nice" one time like be on my end of the stick and do a "just for me" thing (his idea)..just giving..in this case oral..it was pitiful I could not let him walk off in that condition after i 'finished".It would have been "mean" IMHO..

Anyway my point was though when I say no to sex its not just because I'm not 'horny" . Mentally and emotionally and physically I just wish to not engage in sexual activity at all.I don't want to be touched sexually .And being expected to do it anyway and every day or else ?That is what I mean by not caring how I feel.

 

[Kerr]

Oh, Oh I definetely get anger btw. Its just yhat anger in itself is always undesirable. It clouds your reasoning, its never good for a relaitonship. It can be a poor man's choice of good sense for yourself if you didnt have it without such anger, but it's still a poor man's choice for it.

Letting anger control you is worst than just having it but getting anger repressed is a recipe for unpredictable expression of it and disaster. That's why I dont like e line lf thought of "you dont have the right to be angry about x"

Thats a very stupid move for discussing feelings on a relationship IMHO.

To deal emotions in a mature way you need to recognise you and your partner WILL HAVE unreasonable emotions, and deal with them as a couple with as much nurturing and understandable attitudes as you can.

Thats my take on it.

I never said what people have the right to feel and not to feel, I just said not getting sex is a bad reason for anger. As you said, anger is not good for relationships. So getting angry over not getting sex, which is very likely to happen at some point in a relationship, isnt a good thing.

Regarding anger itself, I think we should just agree to disagree about it. Doesnt seem relevant to the debate at hand.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Did anyone else even notice the gender role thing? The rape part was bad enough, but she seems to think there is going to be some mass confusion in bed if her husband changes a babies diaper or helps with the housework.

 

[DallasApple]

I never said what people have the right to feel and not to feel, I just said not getting sex is a bad reason for anger.

I agree but especially his anger is directed at HER. That is misdirected anger."Appropriate" anger for me is when someone has done you dirty or wronged you and you feel angry at them because of it.Hes angry at HER for not GIVING HIM what he wants.The logical conclusion is that he feels entitled and that its his "right' to have sex with her whenever he wants regardless of her wishes. .Saying no to sex because you aren't in the mood for whatever reason is not doing them "wrong'.Unless you believe they are not giving you what you believe is "yours ".

 

[Me Myself]

I'm talking about not caring that the person(in this case a woman) does not want sex at all.Wishing to not engage her body in sexual activity period.Not just not being aroused.

.Speaking of its easy (easier) for a guy to say its not a big deal for a woman to have sex without any arousal let alone pleasure.Its not very often or typical or as wide spread anyway that men are expected or even can do that especially regularly.Even your example of her wanting "sex" and him not wanting it but giving her a 'hand job" #1 that's not "sex" and its is a whole lot different than a woman engaging in intercourse or even oral sex when she is mentally and physically not desiring sex.Just because there is a hole available to stick it in doesn't mean its not UNPLEASANT. 2nd of all I actually kind of laughed a little ..because If my husband gave me a hand job he WOULD become aroused and we would end up having sex.Foreplay doesn't just turn a woman on.And that's what that is.And guys are typically much easier to arouse.Including just seeing a woman's naked body.

He was trying to be "nice" one time like be on my end of the stick and do a "just for me" thing (his idea)..just giving..in this case oral..it was pitiful I could not let him walk off in that condition after i 'finished".It would have been "mean" IMHO..

Anyway my point was though when I say no to sex its not just because I'm not 'horny" . Mentally and emotionally and physically I just wish to not engage in sexual activity at all.I don't want to be touched sexually .And being expected to do it anyway and every day or else ?That is what I mean by not caring how I feel.

Well, as I said, that changes from person to person. To you it would be a big deal and it would hurt you because thats how you are, its okay.

The first time I had sex I really didnt want to, but it wasnt s big deal to me. Thats why it wasnt a big deal. If it had been a big problem to me, I would just not have had it, and that's that.

The example was just an example, the man can very well do her an oral or whatever they want. If she goes off quickly he could go missionary or any position she wants quickly and be done with it even when he wasnt in the mood, so to satisfy her. Its just an example.

And being aroused in the end could sound like her "winning" and it is socially acceptable for a woman to say things like that "oh i ll convince him" etc. In the end e imprtant part is both are okay with it.

I am not saying its for everyone, but I would assume a lot of people have done it with no problem. I have, and there was no biggie at all.

For some its really of little difference than a massage. Its not wrong to ask for a massage even when the other is not into it if you are very stressed out. If she TRULY DOESNT WANT TO and would feel emotionally wrong about it, then its out of e question. If it is just like doing the dishes when she doesnt want to (say its her turn ) then it aint biggie.

Each couple and person is different, thats it.

 

[DallasApple]

Did anyone else even notice the gender role thing? The rape part was bad enough, but she seems to think there is going to be some mass confusion in bed if her husband changes a babies diaper or helps with the housework.

Exactly ...and females do not have bowel movements either.If he found out she did that he might be so confused and not even be able to get erection because only men do that.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Did anyone else even notice the gender role thing? The rape part was bad enough, but she seems to think there is going to be some mass confusion in bed if her husband changes a babies diaper or helps with the housework.

If he helps with the housework he might as well get his wife to use a strap on on him and be her little bi**h

 

[Me Myself]

I agree but especially his anger is directed at HER. That is misdirected anger."Appropriate" anger for me is when someone has done you dirty or wronged you and you feel angry at them because of it.Hes angry at HER for not GIVING HIM what he wants.The logical conclusion is that he feels entitled and that its his "right' to have sex with her whenever he wants regardless of her wishes. .Saying no to sex because you aren't in the mood for whatever reason is not doing them "wrong'.Unless you believe they are not giving you what you believe is "yours ".

Well, they are on a sexually esclusive relationship. She is the only person he will have sex with (provided he is not adulterous) . Its understandable that he is angry at her if she gives him less sex than what he wants, even if it is not her duty to do so. Of course, it is equally understandable she can have sex as little or as much she wants.

Its a simple case of he wants something she wants something else.

If a woman wants sex and the man isnt providing it would be completely understandable that the woman felt hurt/angry about it.

 

[Me Myself]

I never said what people have the right to feel and not to feel, I just said not getting sex is a bad reason for anger. As you said, anger is not good for relationships. So getting angry over not getting sex, which is very likely to happen at some point in a relationship, isnt a good thing.

Regarding anger itself, I think we should just agree to disagree about it. Doesnt seem relevant to the debate at hand.

We seem to agree on a lot. Anger is bad for relationships.

You seem to imply there is good anger though, but I havent heard a mention of it yet.

So yeah getting angry over not having sex is not a good thing, because getting angry is not a good thing. Its not useful and it is damaging, and when it is not it is by pure happenstance.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Well, they are on a sexually esclusive relationship. She is the only person he will have sex with (provided he is not adulterous) . Its understandable that he is angry at her if she gives him less sex than what he wants, even if it is not her duty to do so. Of course, it is equally understandable she can have sex as little or as much she wants.

Its a simple case of he wants something she wants something else.

If a woman wants sex and the man isnt providing it would be completely understandable that the woman felt hurt/angry about it.

Nope I don't find it understandable

 

[Me Myself]

Nope I don't find it understandable

How would you feel if you were in a romantic sexually esclusive relationship and your partner never wanted to have sex with you?

Indiferent?

 

[DallasApple]

The rape part was bad enough, but she seems to think there is going to be some mass confusion in bed if her husband changes a babies diaper or helps with the housework.

Who's supposed to be the one to "throw down" in the bedroom if he does the dishes.Her or him....I have no idea..It explains though why whenever my husband does the dishes he suddenly has the urge to put on a pink shirt and I feel sudden desire to go hammer something .It doesn't end there. Later on I take him by surprise tear his clothes off and rip his hair out while pounding him real good as he yells...NO!!!!

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

How would you feel if you were in a romantic sexually esclusive relationship and your partner never wanted to have sex with you?

Indiferent?

This is not a case of never wanting to have sex with your partner is it?

I have been in a exclusive relationship for almost 8 years now, sometimes my partner doesn't want to have sex when I do, I don't get angry at him.

If he was no longer attracted to me and never wanted to have sex with me I would be hurt but then it's time to talk and possibly end the relationship.

 

[DallasApple]

How would you feel if you were in a romantic sexually esclusive relationship and your partner never wanted to have sex with you?

Indiferent?

No one said the word "never".Its 'understandable" to have an expectation that in marriage you will have sex sometimes.You saying 'never" is a gross exaggeration of what we are talking about.The man is 'angry' if its been 36 hours.

 

[Me Myself]

No one said the word "never".Its 'understandable" to have an expectation that in marriage you will have sex sometimes.You saying 'never" is a gross exaggeration of what we are talking about.The man is 'angry' if its been 36 hours.

I didnt say it was that man's case. I made a question.

Anything is nderstandable depending on who is doing the understanding. Of course anything being understandable doesnt mean anything is permissible, but partenrs are supposed to try to understand each other and decide what they do from then on from a place of love. (For both the other and oneself)

Its understandable to be angry for not having sex in a certain frequency, her frequency was obviously different from his. Then on you are deciding that his frequency is wrong because it is very different form yours.

In reality, however "understandable" the expected frquency is or not, they have to deal with it. If you marry an asexual and he never wants to have sex, well, you shouuld have thought about thatefore marrying and you probably should have arranged something both were fine with before marrying. Its not normal but it doesnt mean it is wrong to be angry withh yoru asecual partner. It is just human.

Ange ris never helpful, but it is how you deal with it what should be taken into consideration on this cases.

All of us non asexuals want sex. Thats not major "entitlement" issue. He just wants it more often. The problems are the stupid advices he gives others and probably a number of other things.

Being angry or upset forot having as much sex as one wants, its just... Well, human.

 

[DallasApple]

I have been in a exclusive relationship for almost 8 years now, sometimes my partner doesn't want to have sex when I do, I don't get angry at him.

I've been married 25 years and I have been on the receiving end of this anger.(we have worked it out now) but that entitlement and anger he had turned our sex life into a nightmare..he turned our "differences" into complete dysfunction with that attitude.

Me Myself you said it ..its a difference in wants.That is why its not something to get "angry" at the person over.You can be dissapointed that is one thing.But angry?

You shouldn't get angry at someone ..or lets say its not productive or fair that they don't want the exact same thing you do.

If I wanted my husband to wear a wedding ring but it makes him uncomfortable physically he does not like wearing any jewelry. Should I be "angry" at him for not wearing it because he didn't do what I wanted? No.. but it seems according to some it would be "understandable" if I was moody and we got into "huge fights" every single day because he still wasn't doing what i wanted.