Understanding men

[pam]

We need to be careful with this thread. It's starting to go into the too graphic category which is not appropriate for lds.net. Thanks.

[drham3rd]

Sorry everyone!

[Leah]

Because biologically speaking men are designed to view sex as incomplete without orgasm. (Ponder for a moment how the male reproductive system works compared to the female) Given that many men equate Sex with Love... Therefore incomplete sex = incomplete love. It is very instinctive math on the guys part.

And much like you have done in being baffled by why guys would act that way... we are just as baffled on why females don't view it that way. Both groups have a hard time understanding reactions they don't share. Neither is wrong in their position, and both would greatly benefit from working to understand the other side.

You're saying that orgasm = proof of love and I say that's not even logical. You are asking us to understand the biology of men, yet ignoring the biology of women.

All of those people having casual sex with mind-blowing orgasms, are those orgasms also proof of love? When a guy has an orgasm with a stranger he just met or a hooker he paid for.....that's proof of love, too?

People have orgasms all the time with no love whatsoever involved. It's not a requirement for that particular biological function.

[Dravin]

You're saying that orgasm = proof of love and I say that's not even logical. You are asking us to understand the biology of men, yet ignoring the biology of women.

It's important if you want mutual understanding sure, but it's irrelevant for understanding the man side of the equation.

All of those people having casual sex with mind-blowing orgasms, are those orgasms also proof of love? When a guy has an orgasm with a stranger he just met or a hooker he paid for.....that's proof of love, too?

You do realize he used a qualifier and not a universal when making his statement right?

[Guest]

Ahem

we need to be careful with this thread. It's starting to go into the too graphic category which is not appropriate for lds.net. Thanks.

[Gretchen]

If you ever figure men out, will you let me know, please?

Thanks!

[estradling75]

You're saying that orgasm = proof of love and I say that's not even logical. You are asking us to understand the biology of men, yet ignoring the biology of women.

All of those people having casual sex with mind-blowing orgasms, are those orgasms also proof of love? When a guy has an orgasm with a stranger he just met or a hooker he paid for.....that's proof of love, too?

People have orgasms all the time with no love whatsoever involved. It's not a requirement for that particular biological function.

Leah... You said you didn't understand the Guy position... I tried to explain the Guy position. I did not try to explain the Girl position because you did not ask and I assume that you probably understand it a lot better then I do.

And I also assumed that you would understand that when I talk about how in general men equate Sex with Love (opposite of the saying that women do Love for Sex) that it was understood that it was a process that builds over time and repetition and that I didn't need to further clarify.

Now you heard from several guys how they feel about it being... incomplete (Which shows a trend and an exception which is why I speak in generalities) Thus the Idea that the women we love might be experiencing the same thing, repeatedly, at our hands is down right alarming. This is our instinctive reaction to hearing it... This is us putting ourselves in her shoes and reacting to how we would react. The understanding that she is not and does not react the same way is a learned (and somewhat hard to believe giving our personal experience) response for a guy

Thus to Understand men (the topic of this thread) women need to grasp a very different biology and mindset. To understand women men need to do the same thing but that is not the topic of the thread nor has it really been asked on this thread.

[classylady]

Misshalfway, some questions on your original post : "1) In my practice , I hear frequently that men need their women to want them sexually. This seems reasonable enough on its face. But I also hear that she could be the best at lots of other non-sexual nurturing but if it doesn't translate into hot/erotic/passionate expressions in the bedroom, then it isn't enough. From the wife, I often hear "but I do want sex and I do want you! and we have sex all the time." But he can't receive that. It isn't enough and both end up frustrated."

Have you (the therapist) or the wife actually asked specifically what the husband wants? Has the husband viewed porn and expects similar behavior from his wife? Is the husband able to articulate exactly what he needs/wants? What were his expectations of sex prior to getting married? Are his perceived expectations unrealistic?

I'm thinking that even though my husband and I do a lot of communicating, I don't know as though I've ever asked him specifically, bedroom wise, what he would like from me. I'll ask him "do you like this?", and he'll almost always say "yes". But, I've never asked him what he would like me to do that perhaps I'm not doing. And the same goes for him, he has never specifically asked me what I want from him beyond if I happen to like what he's presently doing. Maybe more communication is in order? But, like I've told my husband, communication is also talking about feelings. For me, communication needs to be more than just superficial dissemination of facts, likes, or wants. I need the emotion of it--the whys, wherefores, and how it makes you feel.

[prisonchaplain]

I'm ignoring the entire string, and just reacting to the title. Asking women to understand men is like asking a CPA to understand the process of counting with one's fingers. We're so simple most women don't get us. They keep thinking there has to be more, when there really isn't.

One doctor understands us well though:

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4665830301896152&w=113&h=177&c=7&rs=1&pid=1.7

[Leah]

Leah... You said you didn't understand the Guy position... I tried to explain the Guy position. I did not try to explain the Girl position because you did not ask and I assume that you probably understand it a lot better then I do.

And I also assumed that you would understand that when I talk about how in general men equate Sex with Love (opposite of the saying that women do Love for Sex) that it was understood that it was a process that builds over time and repetition and that I didn't need to further clarify.

Now you heard from several guys how they feel about it being... incomplete (Which shows a trend and an exception which is why I speak in generalities) Thus the Idea that the women we love might be experiencing the same thing, repeatedly, at our hands is down right alarming. This is our instinctive reaction to hearing it... This is us putting ourselves in her shoes and reacting to how we would react. The understanding that she is not and does not react the same way is a learned (and somewhat hard to believe giving our personal experience) response for a guy

Thus to Understand men (the topic of this thread) women need to grasp a very different biology and mindset. To understand women men need to do the same thing but that is not the topic of the thread nor has it really been asked on this thread.

I am trying to understand the guy position. Or what some guys say their position is. But asking questions is not allowed? A different viewpoint is not allowed? Then that's enough of this thread for me.

MissHalfway....I sincerely wish you luck in trying to understand and learn in order to help your clients and in order to understand in your own life how to interact with certain men. It seems to be a daunting task and you're to be admired for what you are trying to accomplish.

[Lakumi]

Actually, I have to disagree, even though I don't climax, I feel satisfied! I guess its just me but that is my experience.

eh maybe because there is love involved

wasn't the case for me

[estradling75]

I am trying to understand the guy position. Or what some guys say their position is. But asking questions is not allowed? A different viewpoint is not allowed? Then that's enough of this thread for me.

Of course you can ask questions... But when you ask a question and it gets answered... It is expected that you would ask more questions if it is not clear. You didn't ask more questions you made an accusation of not covering the female side (which you did not ask, which was off topic, and which no guy is really qualified to answer) That is irrational.

Then you go off to say it the answer is irrational and you support it by by making a fundamental change to the underlying assumption of it being a long term relationship and converting it to basically one night stand. Such a fundamental change of the question of course make the answer to be nonsensical.

So if you really wish to learn then feel free to ask... But if you aren't really interested then feel free to ignore me and all other guys in this thread

[Lakumi]

If you ever figure men out, will you let me know, please?

Thanks!

I'm a man and I've not figured myself out:lol:

[Vort]

So...

Wading into very deep water here...

What, exactly, is wrong with telling a wife that she should be having regular, enthusiastic sex with her husband? Because she should. If she is not*, she is harming their marriage, just as surely as her husband would be harming their marriage with neglect or misdeeds. Yet it's considered bad form to state this most obvious of truths. Why?

*Assuming there is no underlying physical barrier to regular, enthusiastic sex, and assuming the husband has fulfilled his marital duties, including kindness and fidelity.

[Lakumi]

I get the impression a lot of people don't feel they should have to do anything, and feel things should work because they simply want them to and if the other person has any issue then they just aren't serious enough about the relationship

[SpiritDragon]

I have never been a man. This isn't news.

But I love men. And I say that in the purest sense. But, I'm not sure I understand them all the time and that bothers me. I want to understand more. I want to do better in my practice (i'm a psychotherapist and do a lot of couples counseling) and in my personal life. So, men on this forum? Will you help me?

I have two observations I'd like to discuss.

1) In my practice , I hear frequently that men need their women to want them sexually. This seems reasonable enough on its face. But I also hear that she could be the best at lots of other non-sexual nurturing but if it doesn't translate into hot/erotic/passionate expressions in the bedroom, then it isn't enough. From the wife, I often hear "but I do want sex and I do want you! and we have sex all the time." But he can't receive that. It isn't enough and both end up frustrated.

I'm trying to understand this better because I often see that attachment needs and sexual needs get fused and confused. But if it is healthy, then perhaps she just isn't showing him she wants him in ways he can interpret. Can you help me understand what is a healthy need and what is not? Can you help me understand better what men are asking for and what need they are trying to fill? Are men trying to capture a sexual fantasy, or is this a lesson women need to learn?

2) Also, I often see that some men are intimidated by strong women. I have a boss right now that quickly puts me down if anything I say references his insecurities. I feel compassion, but his defenses are rather hurtful.

Can you help me understand what helps men increase ego strength without becoming a woman who has to diminish herself in order to do it? I'm trying to understand this male ego thing. I don't want to judge it or shame it. I just want to better understand how to help men develop more security without making them feel like they have to be "womanish" to achieve it. And I don't want to have to stop being my best self as a woman or as a female therapist in order to placate the ego into feeling better.

Does that make sense? I hope so.

I can not speak for other men, but I can offer my own insights in the hope that getting the perspective of this man can also help you in your quest to understand others. In my marriage I came to the realization very early that my wife and I have very different perspectives and especially reactions to the sexual experience. I could not understand what she was talking about when she told me that she had never been aroused before (before marriage). I was kind of hurt... I mean here I was thinking she found me attractive before agreeing to marry me. After all I had the exact opposite experience, not a day went by from the age of twelve to the age of 24 that I wasn't aroused. Simply being around girls arouses me... or at least it did when I was a younger man. I'm not sure if this has changed because of my relationship with my wife, or because of age. Anyhow the point is that I felt undesirable just knowing that being around me never brought about arousal, because the inverse was not true (I experienced arousal around her).

After coming to terms with the fact that arousal is different for women, I learned that she does being physically intimate. But it is true that she rarely initiates intimacy, which can leave me feeling undesirable. The whole experience is just plain less satisfying if I feel like she is being a martyr to satisfy my "man urges" but doesn't reciprocate desire. This is how I feel when I always am the one initiating. I feel unwanted, or at the very least frustrated.

One crazy thing that I have also noticed is that I apparently have a fairly feminine perspective on setting the mood. You see I end up doing well over 90% of the dishes at my house, and if I don't work to tidy up the house it doesn't happen. This trumps my desire for my wife. I just don't want to engage her when my needs for a clean living space are not being met.

As for your remark/query about the wife doing all manner of other things but not having the red hot bedroom activity not being enough... I think this has to do with wanting a lover not a mother. We certainly have our expectations of what should be done around the house and home (and it would be great to have them done) but from the far more masculine side of my psyche comes the thought that sex is what makes marriage tolerable. Without it their simply would be no point putting up with this woman and all of her ideas, expenses, and needs. Now I know that sounds terrible, and their is more to the relationship than physical gratification, but it is undeniably an important aspect that helps bring us together and keep us together.

Anyway I hope this is useful to you in some way.

As for the second point about men being intimidated by strong women. I'm not sure really what your experiences are (I apologize if this has been hashed out in detail already in this thread because I'm late to the party and the thread is long), but I find this to be more of weak individual thing than a gender thing. If your boss is being a bit of a bully it may have nothing to do with you being a woman. On the other hand it may have everything to do with you being a woman who may come across as being arrogant and suffering from a superiority complex. I've personally never felt "threatened" by women in power positions (usually the ones considered strong women), but have often been very irritated by their attitude that women are better than men. I'm not saying that this is you - just stating my own experience, which may shed some light on where he is coming from. But then I view strength of character a lot differently than most. I do not appreciate pushy people that are revered for their confidence and self-assurance, nor do I appreciate posturing to always be right. I see it as a greater sign of strength to admit mistakes and to humbly perform the duties we are tasked with.

I suppose I simply don't really follow the second question that well. In what ways do you have to diminish yourself to stroke his ego?

[Guest]

So...

Wading into very deep water here...

What, exactly, is wrong with telling a wife that she should be having regular, enthusiastic sex with her husband? Because she should. If she is not*, she is harming their marriage, just as surely as her husband would be harming their marriage with neglect or misdeeds. Yet it's considered bad form to state this most obvious of truths. Why?

*Assuming there is no underlying physical barrier to regular, enthusiastic sex, and assuming the husband has fulfilled his marital duties, including kindness and fidelity.

There's nothing wrong with it. Nothing at all. And my husband knows that.

[Vort]

As for the second point about men being intimidated by strong women. I'm not sure really what your experiences are (I apologize if this has been hashed out in detail already in this thread because I'm late to the party and the thread is long), but I find this to be more of weak individual thing than a gender thing.

I agree with SpiritDragon. I'm sure there are men who are intimidated by strong, successful women, but I don't see them very often. And such men are deserving of exactly the same compassion and understanding as the women who are intimidated by men (and I have worked for at least two such women -- very unpleasant).

[Misshalfway]

I know this can be an issue for men. On a personal note this fear surfaced for my husband when I got sick. It took almost a decade for him to talk about it. It took a long time for him to understand that I didn't need an orgasm to love him and I didn't need an orgasm to want sex. When health issues arise these issues surface faster than in marriages where both husband and wife are physically healthy.

I read an article years ago that stated men need sex to feel love and women need to feel loved to want sex. We often talk about this when we discuss desire in women but we don't talk about it when discussing sexuality in men. What this article helped me with was understanding that I needed to verbally and physically express love in other ways. It also took a lot of reminders before my husband believed I loved him even if I didn't have an orgasm. Sometimes its still an issue.

I haven't read through the whole thread. But I want to add one thing that keeps popping into my head as I've read the first few pages: "Selfishness has no place in marriage and definitely not in the bed." It applies to both men and women. When we place conditions on our love (physical or otherwise) then we're setting ourselves up for heartache.

Hi Apple! I really appreciate this post and I thank you for sharing some of your personal experience to help articulate something I've felt but couldn't say as well as you have here. I'm hoping more comment on this!

There's a very respected therapist and author named Barry McCarthy. In his work, he says couples need to change their definitions of good sex. He advocates moving away from orgasm focused success into what he calls "good enough sex". While this perspective, i've noticed, doesn't seem that palatable at the first for men, the couples who "get it" find better ways to measure and end up enjoying sex and connection in broader ways. I like this because it helps to lessen sexual perfectionism. I suspect that helping couples let go of sexual perfectionism could be a portal to solving some of these impasses.

[Misshalfway]

@ Classylady...

Have you (the therapist) or the wife actually asked specifically what the husband wants? Has the husband viewed porn and expects similar behavior from his wife? Is the husband able to articulate exactly what he needs/wants? What were his expectations of sex prior to getting married? Are his perceived expectations unrealistic?

Oh yes! Questions like this are essential.

I'm thinking that even though my husband and I do a lot of communicating, I don't know as though I've ever asked him specifically, bedroom wise, what he would like from me. I'll ask him "do you like this?", and he'll almost always say "yes". But, I've never asked him what he would like me to do that perhaps I'm not doing. And the same goes for him, he has never specifically asked me what I want from him beyond if I happen to like what he's presently doing. Maybe more communication is in order? But, like I've told my husband, communication is also talking about feelings. For me, communication needs to be more than just superficial dissemination of facts, likes, or wants. I need the emotion of it--the whys, wherefores, and how it makes you feel.

I think you are on to something important here. Talking about emotions on both sides IS an absolute essential in my view. It's easier to stay in intellectual dialogue and performance based analysis. It keeps us safe. Talking about emotions is more risky. It brings up a lot of fear and discomfort. And neither sex likes that. We often assume that women don't feel uncomfortable talking about emotions and it's just the men who avoid this. Trust me. Both men and women are dodging the vulnerability.

Part of my goal in therapy and partly in this thread, is to find ways to understand men so that I can see the landscape of the minefield they experience. I think I get the female mine field! Since I've gotten stuck on my own land mines.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Misshalfway

[Misshalfway]

I'm ignoring the entire string, and just reacting to the title. Asking women to understand men is like asking a CPA to understand the process of counting with one's fingers. We're so simple most women don't get us. They keep thinking there has to be more, when there really isn't.

One doctor understands us well though:

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4665830301896152&w=113&h=177&c=7&rs=1&pid=1.7

Thanks for the book recommendation! I'll add it to the already tipping pile of books on my nightstand!

In reference to your first amusing statement about men, I have to admit that this hurts me a little and makes me feel bad that men are often characterized or reduced in this way, even by themselves.

It is my opinion and experience, that men are dynamic and complex and rich emotional creatures. Men may be fundamentally different, but no less intricate. I think these statements, while good humored and true enough to bring a smile, they do men and women a disservice. Trust me....men don't avoid emotions because they don't have them. Relationships are emotionally driven processes and men are just as fundamentally a part of the emotional landscape as the women. I'm just not sure any of us really understands the complete landscape. :)

Edited September 20, 2013 by Misshalfway

[Misshalfway]

So...

Wading into very deep water here...

What, exactly, is wrong with telling a wife that she should be having regular, enthusiastic sex with her husband? Because she should. If she is not*, she is harming their marriage, just as surely as her husband would be harming their marriage with neglect or misdeeds. Yet it's considered bad form to state this most obvious of truths. Why?

*Assuming there is no underlying physical barrier to regular, enthusiastic sex, and assuming the husband has fulfilled his marital duties, including kindness and fidelity.

Absolutely nothing! I want to make that clear.

But I think this is the point.... that there ARE underlying barriers. My intension is to learn more about what those are for men without needing to pathologize.

I'm sort of noodling over Applepansy's wish that her husband would understand that she feels all the things he needs her too feel regardless of whether or not she has an orgasm. I really want to understand more about what blocks this connection for the man even with her reassurances. I'm so grateful for her honesty that "it's still an issue" even with all of her efforts to explain her position

(see!...another example where good communication happens but connection doesn't! Sorry...i'm beating this horse, arent' I? :) )

In reference to another post, I think women have been forced to hypersexualize themselves in order to be what the man needs her to be. Sometimes I think this looks like a more exploitative interaction, but more often than not, I think the woman is sincerely trying for the man even if it means going against herself to do it. I think the best interactions on the emotional plain or in the sexual arena are the ones that do follow the law of sacrifice for the marriage, but that don't require each to go against themselves to do it.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Misshalfway

[Misshalfway]

I also want to say a big thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread! SO many good comments and honest expressions. I really appreciate what you all have offered and am considering each respectively.

[Vort]

Absolutely nothing! I want to make that clear.

I'm pleased, and a little surprised, to hear that. I don't have much experience with counselors or counseling (my mother worked for a while as a counselor of sorts), but my mental model of marriage counselors seems to involve the counselor telling the man to be more sensitive to his wife's needs.

Sincere questions: How often have you (or counselors in general) turned to the wife, in front of her husband, and said, "You owe it to your husband to have joyful, enthusiastic sex with him three or more times per week"? (Or words to that effect.) I have never heard of this or seen it portrayed in Hollywood productions, which of course doesn't necessarily mean anything. Are such statements as common as the more stereotypical statement to the husband about him not fulfilling his duties? If not, why not? (And if so, why are people like me unaware of that?)

[Guest]

Absolutely nothing! I want to make that clear.

But I think this is the point.... that there ARE underlying barriers. My intension is to learn more about what those are for men without needing to pathologize.

I'm sort of noodling over Applepansy's wish that her husband would understand that she feels all the things he needs her too feel regardless of whether or not she has an orgasm. I really want to understand more about what blocks this connection for the man even with her reassurances. I'm so grateful for her honesty that "it's still an issue" even with all of her efforts to explain her position

(see!...another example where good communication happens but connection doesn't! Sorry...i'm beating this horse, arent' I? :) )

In reference to another post, I think women have been forced to hypersexualize themselves in order to be what the man needs her to be. Sometimes I think this looks like a more exploitative interaction, but more often than not, I think the woman is sincerely trying for the man even if it means going against herself to do it. I think the best interactions on the emotional plain or in the sexual arena are the ones that do follow the law of sacrifice for the marriage, but that don't require each to go against themselves to do it.

My experience is different from Apple's. My husband is a "what you see is what you get" kind of guy. My lack of climax is a hit on his pride. My husband feels it very important that he gets me to that point because if I don't get to that point, then he feels like he failed to please me. There's some underlying guilt feelings he feels when he gets there and I didn't. He feels like he is being selfish.

It only becomes a lack of love on my part when he starts to connect the dots to think that I purposefully rejected his efforts and that's why I didn't get there.

We got through this because he knows without a doubt how much I love him, so the connect the dots never goes to the rejected efforts realm. So, we concentrated on working on his feelings of inadequacy as well as working on my sexual hang-ups and what constitutes "I am very well pleased" for the both of us.