Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Sex and Relationships

Men Who Love Burgers and Loathe Sex

By Susie Bright, SusieBright.com. Posted June 16, 2006.


There's an unhappy host of young men who seem to have soured on the mating game -- but why?
Advertisement

Advertisement One: A hunky guy stares at a sexy babe who appears before him -- she seems to crave his attention. He sees she would jump in the sack with him at the slightest encouragement! Yet, in the corner of his eye, he sees a brand-name beer waiting for his pleasure at an adjacent table. The beer wins his complete desire and attention; the foxy lady doesn't stand a chance.

Advertisement Two: A young man repeatedly chooses a big juicy taco over the invitation to score with willing and available girls.

Advertisement Three: Another young man is being observed in a laboratory environment. He is offered the pick between a delicious cheeseburger and a gorgeous, sexually-available wench. Overcome with his good luck, the boy gasps, "You mean I get to chose between a girl and a burger?" After a moment of suspense, he picks the girl. One of the lab observers turns to the other, and remarks, "What an anomaly! -- no one's ever done that before."

Welcome to the new breed of healthy young men who rate sex way beneath their other appetites. In this brave new world, girls are a pain, a disappointment, and rather dangerous to the soul. Self-preserving boys would rather be satisfied with a brew and bit of beef than an erotic tide of reckless passion.

Advertising agencies are capitalizing on our current generation's penchant for irony -- and yet there's a kernel of authentic confession in each of these promotions. There are lots of guys today who have sexually retreated, or soured on the mating game altogether, and you don't have to search out "Miller Time" or Taco Bell to find them.

Traditionally -- say, since the dawn of sexual stereotypes -- men have been the ones who were horny all the time, thinking with the little head instead of the big one; a heterosexual fool for Chantilly Lace and a pretty face. It was women who were supposed to say "no," who put the brakes on erotic interest in favor of their virtue or climb to success.

A woman who made an ass of herself over a sexual affair wasn't unheard of -- but she learned her lesson quickly, with a quick "Rules Girl" kick in the pants to join the feminine ranks of the sexually-reserved and pseudo-chaste.

When feminists and sex researchers started talking about women's sexuality in the 1960s, it became clear that one reason women didn't feel connected to their sexual self interest was because so many of them had never had sexual satisfaction to begin with. Finally, many liberated women spoke up, admitting that they'd never had an orgasm, and didn't know where to begin.

Sex is the one area men are supposed to excel in, by default. Their penis is so obviously "there"; their masturbation practice practically demands itself. They get an added helping of testosterone, and the same amount of encouragement to be virile that girls get to be virgins.

So when we see men today, non-plussed with sexual companionship, is it because they too, are losing their orgasmic pleasure, or because they lack desire altogether?

Let me make a brief caveat that this is not the experience of the majority, but the fact that it even exists as a tiny trend is noteworthy, because it is such a departure from the past. Sure, there are still plenty of horny men who will bark like a dog to get laid, but the big news is that so many young men in particular, are as ambivalent about sex as any pre-orgasmic housewife ever was. Some say that relief from their desire is a thing to envy.

These men say that (a) having erections is not automatic, (b) sexual pleasure can be elusive, and (c) having the drive to "score" is not their birthright. For some of them, coming out of the closet with their erotic alienation is a burden lifted from their balls. That burger is looking damn good.

The sensational event that has made so many unsatisfied men visible is the unbelievable sales of the erectile dysfunction drug, Viagra.

But what's so interesting about Viagra is the number of pills being popped for performance enhancement, not erectile dysfunction. Viagra in this case is used like a one-night insurance policy, a facsimile of a porn-star experience. These users aim for sexual performance the way they never had it. These aren't men looking for dreams of youth, they're youth who've discovered sex, in the prime of their lives, to be disappointing and even humiliating, because their penis didn't "behave" the way they believe it's supposed to, or because the pleasure it afforded them seemed less than the hype.

They aren't doing it for a thrill, they're using the drug to defend their reputations and their lovers' expectations. They know they're expected to produce wood, on contact, and that it won't be pretty if they can't. They fear their lover will feel scorned and unappreciated, and the backlash might get ugly. This anxiety is what promotes their use of Viagra, not their search for ecstatic sex. Not a very erotic or romantic picture, to say the least.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: sex

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Start With The Obvious
Posted by: Awake on Jun 16, 2006 12:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given a healthy young man who turns down an obvious, or apparently obvious, sexual invitation from a healthy young woman, the obvious conclusion is that he does not see the invitation as worth pursuing--in fact, he sees it as something to be avoided, and a decent meal is as good a diversion as any.
1. Can't perform dependably, that is, get a sustained, firm erection on demand (her demand). He has been shamed if he shows any sexual interest EXCEPT when the young woman has been ready and very willing. If he is not uncommonly handsome, wealthy or manipulative, that doesn't happen often, so why not just turn off the whole sexual circuit?
American women do their own version of Orwell's Anti-Sex League, then expect young men to be aroused when the women really mean it. Men never know when they really mean it and when they are selling something, or just messing with his head. Instead of dealing with the ambiguous stimulus array, why not just turn off the whole response circuit?
2. Don't seem interested. Sex for American single men has become such a source of shame, blame and inhibitory responses that sexual feeling itself has been repressed. A repressed sexuality weighs in when a young man sees a sexual stimulus and poses the question to himself: is it worth the risk of rejection? Not really. Even if he can score, is it worth the aggravation? Not really. Does he want to find out that she is making more money than he is in a job that is held open for women by women personnel managers? Not really. Will he really enjoy performing the sex on demand, auditioning his knowledge of the G-spot, the anatomy of the clitoris, his sense of pacing, and whatever else he is supposed to demonstrate for the privilege of being able to share close space with this young woman and perhaps enjoy a spasm of pleasure? Not really.
He decides, best to turn on the tube. At least there you know the women are selling you something, they can't reject you because they aren't really there, and you don't have to perform.

» You ARE angry about this! Posted by: ZoomerSlick
» RE: You ARE angry about this! Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: You ARE angry about this! Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: You ARE angry about this! Posted by: ZoomerSlick
» RE: You ARE angry about this! Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Lindie's issues Posted by: lamar
» RE: Lindie's issues Posted by: Lindie
» RE: Lindie's issues Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: Lindie's issues Posted by: Lindie
» RE: What misogyny problem? Posted by: rancespergl
» Right on brother! Posted by: jpinder
» RE: Start With The Obvious Posted by: caitlin
» RE: women DO like jerks Posted by: cold2touch
» Great Article and Illustrative Thread Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: Great Post Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Great Post Posted by: kateoneill
» Thank you kateoneill Posted by: rancespergl
» RE: Great Post Posted by: ericn613
» RE: Great Post Posted by: Conservativation
» Better he see the stereotype... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Not the help we want Posted by: maverika
» RE: Not the help we want Posted by: dangerouslysane
» Stereotypes Posted by: BlueTigress
» Messing with his head? Posted by: eastcoker
Women behaving like pigs a turn off
Posted by: Bobsays on Jun 16, 2006 2:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can see why men are turned off by some women. I shall explain. I have a very high sex drive and have never had a problem either finding the desire for sex or finding women who feel the same. I have lived and worked in many places around the world. In Asia, I never went without. In continental Europe and Canada this is also the case. But let's take the UK for example. I found the women so unappealing, in their drunken habits, loud mouths and unsavoury behaviour. Few women turned me on.

I think it is something to do with the US/UK attitudes to life and work. It creates an environment that plants a wedge between men and women. Women have bought into sex equality equally behaving like the worst men. But that isn't equality: that is being a pig. I would never date of marry such a woman. I only date women from other countries because they behave better, are better conversation.

» Pseudo-Darwinism and EP junk Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
» Durga Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Pseudo-Darwinism and EP junk Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
» RE: Pseudo-Darwinism and EP junk Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
» RE: Pseudo-Darwinism and EP junk Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
Reading a bit too much...
Posted by: RobW on Jun 16, 2006 2:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... into a handful of TV commercials, I think. The vast majority of ads that use sex at all still stick to the tried-and-true method of equating the product with increased sexuality, not decreased.

So, a few commercials use the opposite method for humorous effect... so what, really? The intent is to create a memorable ad- humor serves that intent nicely.

Another ad you could have mentioned, perhaps you didn't see it, had me laughing pretty hard. Young guy in car sees two charity carwashes: one is run by skimpy-clothed cheerleaders, the other by stern, elderly nuns. The cheerleaders are using plain soap and water... he's about to pull in there, when the nun holding the sign shows him her secret weapon- "brand x" car detergent. He immediately pulls into her lot. Hilarious, right?

Anyway... if you ARE going to insist on reading deep social trends into otherwise meaningless TV, have you considered simple demographics?

America's (indeed, the industrial world's) population is aging. The "boomers" are retiring. Hence, sales of Viagra are skyrocketing, memes like "50 is the new 40" are popular, adult diapers are advertised without embarrassment, etc.

AND- perhaps in an effort to avoid alienating an aging male market, these ads are a way of saying "just because your libido is reduced, you're not really getting old... you see, these young, healthy guys are just as uninterested in sex as you are!"

From my own personal perspective- at 39 (and not married), I am not as interested in sex as I was at 23... I mean, yes, I enjoy it and pursue it, but not with the same energy level as when I was younger. That is, not to the exclusion of all other interests. I think this is a good thing- I was, then, only interested in screwing. Nothing else really mattered. Not even physical beauty, really. "Available" trumped "beautiful" every time. Never mind intelligence, sense of humor and irony, conversation skills, shared interests, etc...

Maturity changes that. So these ads may simply reflect the attitude of a maturing audience: other things matter at least as much as sex, including other things like good food, good beer, sports, etc. Naturally, commercials are only going to focus on the sort of things that can be sold.

Something else I'd like to mention- actual sexual pleasure is, I think, less desirable for men than in the wild, pre-AIDS days of the mid-80s and earlier, before condom use became mandatory for all encounters.

This is something I think most women don't appreciate- sex with a condom is just not that much fun for men as it once was. Sensation is sufficiently reduced so as to make orgasm sometimes difficult to achieve, even without the ubiquitous drinking. So, if you're looking for reasons why some men seem less interested in having sex at all, you may want to look there first. Of course, NOT using a condom is NOT an option, so... we see an increase in the popularity of oral and manual sex.

» condoms are not bad Posted by: Allison
You've taught us well
Posted by: Logic's Edge on Jun 16, 2006 3:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know, when you read a constant torrent of studies like "more than half of women prefer chocolate to sex", and "three quarters of women never achieve orgasm during vaginal intercourse", you don't exactly feel encouraged to jump into bed.

Why bother? Give her a small tub of Haagen Daaz ice cream and she'll likely be happier. Stick with your hand and she won't have to fake it. It's depressing, really.

» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: Robba29
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: NYRugby
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: kc4choice
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: hmmm?
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: hmmm?
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: kc4choice
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: FauxPorteno
» It absolutely was the case Posted by: kc4choice
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: You've taught us well Posted by: Katrinepa
Another Woman Talking About Men
Posted by: ChristopherLL on Jun 16, 2006 3:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a man if I were to begin making judgements about women's sexual patterns, interests and behavior the response would be, in my experience, a vehement and immediate rejection of my opinions and observations. Men do not know what it is like to be a woman would be the more common comment I suspect. Thus, as a corallary, I consider as marginal what women say about men as they have scant knowledge and minimal understanding regarding the subject. Their perspective is limited and frequently distorted by personal biased, resentment and envy. For this article I would say that men are much more than their "little brain" (a sexist and demeaning description) and that it is what is beyond the surface (body, face, hair) that is equally attractive. Feminity as it supplements masculinity is what has been waning in the progression of womens social development. Advertising takes advantage of this situation

a problem
Posted by: rsaxto on Jun 16, 2006 4:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the extent that sex (or not) is a problem in today's world it is caused by a sea of pollutants, a sea of unnecesary prescription/other drugs, mental problems, dna problems, greed problems, religious problems, wars, diet problems and overpopulation. The first thing we should fix is the greed/war problem caused by the Bushies.

» And... Posted by: Allison
» You're delusional Posted by: rancespergl
» RE: a problem Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: a problem Posted by: Iconoclast421
» But wait! There's more! Posted by: RobW
» Materialism Equal Opportunity Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: But wait! There's more! Posted by: WhatNow?
Hamish
Posted by: JDBishop5 on Jun 16, 2006 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More and more men understand that the behavior and attitude of too many "modern" women proves the validity of the old rule. "If it flies, floats, or fucks, it is cheaper and better to rent."

» RE: Hamish Posted by: peterharrell
» RE: Hamish Posted by: Katrinepa
» RE: Hamish Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Hamish Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Hamish Posted by: eastcoker
Ouch Lindie
Posted by: cyclone2525 on Jun 16, 2006 5:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You bash someone earlier for being misogynistic and then you go and say that "all men" have no clue about the female anatomy. If you don't want someone stereotyping us as women, then don't stereotype all men. My husband is very "clued" in as have been most men I know. Yeah, there's a few who make me want to cry for their partners, but we're not all exactly experts either...

» RE: Ouch Lindie Posted by: Katrinepa
Few and far between
Posted by: Jeffersonista on Jun 16, 2006 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its been my experience, that the ratio of women who a)actually like sex and b) are any good at it, are extreemly rare. So why go out of your way and risk humiliation, rejection, and most of all waste a lot of time, when the likely hood of a even passibly pleasureable experience is less than 5%?

» RE: Few and far between Posted by: kateoneill
» RE: Few and far between Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Few and far between Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Few and far between Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Few and far between Posted by: kmaripo
» RE: Few and far between Posted by: MatthewSavage
drugs yes but not where you think....
Posted by: Farmertim on Jun 16, 2006 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
given the fact that most growth hormones given to our meat supply are female in origin or that large portions of the feed given to our meat supply mimic female hormone response is it any wonder our males are reduced in the ability and or want to express the male interests?
Is it any wonder our girls are entering pueberty at an increasingly earlier age and becoming more agressive with excess hormonal response?
We take the unseen and seldom recognized forces of hormones and emotions in our sexual experience for granted and now that it has been altered we don't really understand the new conditions we must negotiate when advancing toward the opposite sex.
Even our daily response to life has been altered, leading to the authors take on how medication may be affecting our interactions given most people are medicated to reduce the affects of the food supply.
If you take a Chinese medicinal view of our diet minus the hormonal influence, how we eat, when we eat it and what we eat will produce the same response in males of our society.
As a farmer I can I can tell you I can kill a bulls desire to breed with low levels of stress in many forms, and eliminate it completly with a hi soy unbalanced diet.
While it is important to look at whats going on in our realtions to one another, it is important to turn over a few more rocks to see the bigger picture.
Farmer Tim

Combination of Unpleasant Factors
Posted by: smthomas3 on Jun 16, 2006 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In my experience it's a combination of factors that lead men to avoid sex.

In my own case:

I've sat in bars and listened to men discussing the women around them and found myself absolutely revolted, found every word of theirs filled with violence and misogyny and never, ever, ever wanted to be put in the same category with them. I then have found myself in relationships with women who have slept with men of exactly that type and aren't remotely impressed by my would-be chivalry-feminism. It's confusing and frustrating; you sacrifices your rank in the Idiot Alpha Male game, out of a sense of self-respect and believing women will respect you more. Instead you find women seem to despise you as much as men for it, and you're at the bottom of every pile.

Then there's the Demand To Perform. Only sometimes I can't--and I've found that this started happening as soon as I started taking anti-depressants. And, of course, with pressure it just gets worse.

And then there's the "Princess Charming" dream that Arianna wrote of. Where does this come from? I really have no idea. But somehow it exists in the psyche of a lot of us, and--oops!--it's bullshit.

Now tack on to that the Numbers Game that every member of this generation loves to play--find yourself having to lie your way into double-digits when your friends of both sexes (and remember, you are only in your mid-twenties) are giving out 30s and 40s which makes you feel ashamed, strange, and insecure, and the association sex=humiliation takes pretty solid form in your mind. And you realize you're in a sexual culture every bit as bad and psychologically harmful as that of the religious right, and well damn it if you wouldn't rather have a cheeseburger.

» two faced turn ons Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: two faced turn ons Posted by: NYRugby
Not that new...
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jun 16, 2006 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Antidepressents killing sex drives is new, yes, but there are so many social and psychological aspects to sex that men have turned away from sex from religion, from emotional disappointment, from fear, from a desire for isolation, etc, etc.
A better question may be, why do we expect all men to be horn-dogs? It is common, but there are enough exceptions that it shouldn't be regarded as freakish.

» RE: Not that new... Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Not that new... Posted by: titosantana
» RE: Not that new... Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Not that new... Posted by: titosantana
» RE: Not that new... Posted by: eastcoker
"...dangerous to the soul"
Posted by: sausage on Jun 16, 2006 6:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the new advertising stereotype new breed "...of healthy young men who rate sex way beneath their other appetites" betrays a "conservative Christian" subtext, and castration anxiety.

I mean "Jesus" wouldn't jump into bed with the first women who came along, would he? And since the young women in the TV commericals cited above are the sexual aggressors, the young man, like the Arthurian Percival, has to protect his chasitity in his quest for his personal "Holy Grail," a hamburger in this case.

The Viagra, and similar products' to "fix"erectile dysfunction, commericals play the castration anxiety theme to the hilt, as it were. The otherwise virile, entering middle-age, husband, can no longer pleasure his sexually insatiable wife. The world is turned upside down! God's plan is out of kilter without the intervention of the "miracle" of modern pharmacology. Viagra is dropped, erection achieved, all's right with the world! "God" is happy.

Think about it. Chasitiy and castration anxiety are two constant subtexts of current Republican political messages. Just think about the conservative aversion to sexual equality in the workplace, "abstinence only" sex ed and war, war, war.

» RE: "...dangerous to the soul" Posted by: eastcoker
Personally,
Posted by: Krotos on Jun 16, 2006 6:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I tend to avoid younger American women these days because so many of them have become so vulgar, abrasive, and self-righteous that it kills any desire I may have to get to know them, let alone make the emotional and financial effort necessary to get into a relationship with them. Women in this society may still be biologically female, but they've long since stopped being feminine, and they don't seem to realize that men are attracted to the latter at least as much as they are to the former. With their newfound promiscuity and coarse speech and behavior, not to mention those god-awful tattoos they keep getting, women are trying to act like men. And that's exactly why men don't want them anymore.

This is also why increasing numbers of American men -- and more to the point, increasing numbers of younger, successful, attractive men who wouldn't have any problems getting laid -- are looking for wives outside the United States. Why settle for some slutty, beer-swilling, tramp-stamped shrew when there are literally hundreds of millions of quality women available in places like eastern Europe, East Asia, and Latin America? And no, men aren't doing this because they want to marry doormats or slaves. They're doing it because they want to marry ladies.

-K.Ai.-

» RE: Personally, Posted by: kateoneill
» RE: Personally, Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Personally, Posted by: kateoneill
» stranger Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Personally, Posted by: kateoneill
» RE: Personally, Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Thatslife
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» Historical ignorance! Posted by: FauxPorteno
» Wrong Posted by: eastcoker
» Get real! Posted by: FauxPorteno
» Excuse me? Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Krotos
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» RE: Personally, Posted by: kc4choice
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» it's true Posted by: Iconoclast421
» Don't waste your time Posted by: FauxPorteno
» RE: Personally, Posted by: kc4choice
» RE: Personally, Posted by: zoomorph
» RE: Personally, Posted by: eastcoker
» You are totally right Posted by: Bobsays
» US/UK girls Posted by: BlueTigress
» RE: Personally, Posted by: jeffersonian
» The Flip Side Posted by: azul
» RE: The Flip Side - actually . . . Posted by: FauxPorteno
» Not surprising, azul Posted by: Durga_is_my_homey
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Conservativation
» Krotos the Wise Posted by: vespasian01
» RE: Personally, Posted by: Katrinepa
» Something I Find Hilarious Posted by: Conservativation
» RE: Something I Find Hilarious Posted by: flyinfur
I've got no problem but the wife does so we have a problem
Posted by: gmknobl on Jun 16, 2006 6:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's an oft-told tale. I have no problem with my sex drive and never did. Of course, most women I met and were initially interested in weren't interested in me, a stable, intelligent though not a handsome guy. I was never in the "in" crowd. This could be par for the course or, more likely to me, because most women in high school and college who I was attracted to were simply immature and wanted the "in" guy who was handsome. I looked for intelligent, attractive women, but unfortunately, wasn't wise enough myself to look for wise women too.

Be that as it may, I eventually found my mate late in the game and she's a good person. We could bare contain ourselves before we got married. And after we married all was fine for around a year before she got pregnant. Many things change in a woman when she goes through pregnancy. One of those things are the hormones. My wife, who as on anti-depressants, had to change medications. Suddenly, and I do mean suddenly, she had no physical desire for me. See the change in that desire didn't coincide with the pregnancy but with the change in medication.

Unfortunately, she's never admitted that this is a problem. We've had one child and now a second. She's changed medication again because the second pregnancy was terrible on her. "Morning sickness" existed day and night for 9 months - the entire pregnancy. It was made worse, intially, by the medication she was on. It got nominally better after she switched.

of course, I did not expect her to be arroused by me during this period at all. No one wants sex when they feel like throwing up. But now that this is over and our second is a year old, she still has no where near the desire she use to have. It's not age, she's still in her 20s. It's not me, I'm in my 40s and by all accounts, my sex drive should be deminishing. It certainly hasn't increased.

The only consistant change is she's not on her original depression meds. I really, really want her to get off them entirely (though this is a sore subject since she's convinced she can't overcome depression by herself - a sad but true tale of drug company advertising and non-helpful but paid-by-drug-company psychiatrists) but will settle for her just going back to her original medication. But she won't. She refuses because she is happy. She doesn't want to risk having any problems switching back. But the side effects (of Zoloft) are causing a real problem in our marraige she refuses to see. I'm lucky if I'm... lucky 3 times a year. This is not normal. I'm never one to force myself on someone else; that's rape. But damn it, this makes me angry at her, the drug companies, and at psychiatrists who perscribe drugs first and real treatment later if at all.

I know our marraige would be better off with her at worst on her old drug but I believe it would be better without drugs entirely. That's a pretty amazing statement isn't it. I'm claiming to know what's better for someone else or at least what would be better to try. Arrogant? Not really.

I know what depression is like because I have suffered it too. And I beat it after several years, without the use of drugs but with therapy and the evolution of how I view the world and life. I know if you don't go through that evolution or try to fix yourself in this way, you are missing out on what could be a much better life. Instead, I am convinced that many people simply give up after too short of a time and decide to simply take a pill to make themselves better. And it hurts not only them, but those around them as well. And suppression of libido is just one of the side effects. Emotions tend to be depressed all the way around. Things are still funny and happy and sad but not as much. And that misses much of what life is and should be. And that's a crime against yourself and nature. My conclusion: the drug industry is our problem.

Yeah...Right! Also; Martians to Invade Tonight! Film at 11!
Posted by: hip2besq on Jun 16, 2006 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Men no longer interested in sex with women. Hmmm...me thinks this is a great way to sell more newspapers and raise more blogging revenue from advertisers. Unless, perhaps this is another phenomena of Global Warming. You know, like since the oceans are warmer and men go swimming in the oceans, therefore their testes are warmer...do you see where I'm going with this?

daw13
Posted by: daw13 on Jun 16, 2006 6:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interesting that all the comments are by men. Including mine. Personally, I think the author's right on. We're loosing our libidos, becoming more passive, and more vulnerable as a citizenry -- all these things interrelated, I feel. Fear? Anxiety? Denial? Drug induced?

Don't know, but its damned sure something to ponder.

» RE: daw13 Posted by: peterharrell
» RE: daw13 Posted by: kateoneill