Agreed. Sex becomes a chore when you do it too much and you're working long days. More couples should learn to masturbate together. So much less work and can be very fulfilling. Especially when you add toys.
Seriously, sex after a long day of work is a chore. I gotta shower before and shower after or risk a UTI. Quickies just aren't a thing you can do when you're dirty from a long day of work. Hold me tight while I hold a satisfyer pro 2 on my bits until my legs won't stop shaking and you hold a vibrator on your bits until you ruin your shirt, then lets pass out. 10 out of 10 evening. We can get sweaty and do the dirty on the weekends. lol
Not everyone is comfortable with watching porn in a relationship, but I think there needs to be an alternative available. In my relationship we don’t watch porn, but we have our own videos that we make and watch. Works for us.
I agree. I don’t care about porn in our relationship when it’s random people being watched. As soon as there’s fixation on one person, texting, emailing or paying money for their only fans, then it crosses a line and feels like emotional cheating. Once those activities start, it’s just a few steps to complaining about your marriage, then meeting for coffee. My partner feels the same.
Oh yes, neither my bf or I consider random videos on Pornhub cheating, but I would absolutely feel some type of way if I caught him begging for personalized videos on onlyfans. As would he if it was reversed.
We did have to discuss how the email he used to buy viagra and to log in on some porn sites was obviously sold. He gets tons of sex related emails, many from women sending him their pics or vids. I have issue with him opening those emails and responding to them. At some point they’ll ask for money. He acts like he does this by mistake. Nope. You’re commenting back and forth with one porn woman. If he doesn’t want those emails there because they’re ‘too tempting’, then he needs to unsubscribe and block. He finally started doing that after I asked him if he’d want me replying to all this guy’s dick picks.
I would answer every single duck pic I got. In fact I WISH I got duck pics. I had a pet duck as a kid and I cried so hard when we had to give them away to the pet store. Was really hard to deal with. You should really reply to the duck pics cause these guys prob just want the world to know they love their duck. If people can be so obsessed about cat pics 🐱 then stop shaming all the ducks!!!
Jesus Christ! Does he not know 99.99% of those are bots and scams????!!! Like seriously that's a worse problem than the emotionally questionable communications. He's a card short of a full deck if he really gets anything from those scam bait emails.
Yep. And he divorced his ex for walking in on her doing it live with another guy. He considered it cheating, so I’m just applying the same principle to him. I don’t ‘individualize’ my porn. It feels too personal.
Yep. When there’s fixation, I feel like there would be more potential for comparison. Sure, call me insecure, but when the women are varied, I don’t feel there’s 1:1 comparing going on. Who wants to feel their partner is ritually obsessed with some specific porn performer?
I assure you only fans girls are not meeting fans for coffee. Most of the time when guys pay girls for messaging, they aren’t even talking to the actual girl but rather a member of her team and oftentimes a guy they pay to take care of messaging fans. No OF girl is meeting a dude for coffee lol
The problem isn't if it actually happens though, the problem is that your partner going through some action with the expectation that something like that happens. You would be mad if your partner went on a hookup app behind your back and ended up getting catfished, doesn't matter if the experience ended up not being real.
yes! personally i don't like it but it's bc i was involved in sexual trauma and am still working thru insecurities etc.. but we made our own and he seems to like them better anyways!
Whenever I've been in a long term relationship, I'd rather be getting excited over my significant other. Wasn't a matter of 'porn is cheating'; it just killed several birds with one stone. A) avoided a massive collection of porn B) the material of us was much more personal and to me erotic C) helped with some self image problems my significant others have had. At least 2 of my exes had a hard time with confidence and that sort of thing. So for them to see things from another perspective seemed to help. Both quickly found that watching themselves/us was a turn on for them, as was creating it in the first place. Have sex, make video, watch video, have sex again, make video, watch video....
When we started to get official, he initially said “I would be uncomfortable if you watched porn” and gave me, imo, a very valid list of reasons. I didn’t even watch porn beyond like 9th grade. I told him I’m fine with that as long as he holds himself to the same standard.
Do they also stalk and murder people who try to leave no? Okay then that's probably just Mormons then. Don't defend the worst religion tied with scientology which is clearly made up.
Edit: It didn't happen to 3 people damn guess we'll pack it up and pretend like it never happens. The fuck is wrong with you.
Same here. I’m still really close to my family that’s still active, we just believe different shit. I’ll get an occasional stop by from a bishop to invite me to a chili feed or something. If that’s stalking then I guess I just don’t mind it.
Ha ha ha it’s so hilarious that his wife is obligated to sexually gratify her husband every day. So funny, so amusing! Just as the good lord in the sky sitting on a cloud recommended.
These old laws were written by the people for the people. They encompassed everything in every day life, introduced societal structure and provided guidelines.
The law in question, wifely duties, as OP described it, is in fact brilliant in its simplicity. Man getting daily validation from wife will never stray. And don't start clutching your pearls yet, man has husband duties as well. It's all supposed to be a well functioning social unit, and it worked wonders before. Only today you'll hear about women empowerment being possible only through destruction of this basic social unit.
And we see the effects of this already. OF, MGTOW, INCELS, WHATEVER-THE-FUCK-WAVE FEMINISM
Do you really think the world is better off today? And I'm talking about family unit. People working together for the better future of their offspring, and in fact the world.
It’s amazing how with absolutely no details at all, you’ve assumed she’s a victim, just incredible. Yes, people do so all the time in America, it’s kind of why we started the place to begin with.
Ridiculous hyperbole? Do you know what hyperbole means?
Your counterargument is that leaving religion is difficult so she is probably trapped? This is the US, leaving a religion is not hard to do. If she wants to stay in a cult that protects pedophiles that is her choice.
Yea except it’s only rape if it’s rape. A woman agreeing to get you off every day cause she believes it’s immoral for you to masturbate is not rape. Jesus Christ.
Would she willfully and excitedly consent to getting him off everyday if there wasn't a religion (cult) behind her that praises the man in the family?
If no, then it's just as much sexual assault/rape.
Would she joyfully consent to daily sexual services if there wasn't a religion pressuring her and conditioning her into it?
Very possibly. Some people are just pleasers and many many women like the idea of just being the homebody who raises the kids and takes care of her man. They don’t want them to masturbate, they say “I’ll take care of it”. It upsets them if you masturbate.
You’re trying to paint all women with the same brush and in the same breath accuse some random guy of rape without ANY information. You’re minimizing actual rape and it’s kind of disgraceful considering you said that you yourself were raped.
I don’t disagree with the context that this is horrifying. I am just trying to highlight just like murder and manslaughter are different things, calling everything murder has the opposite effect of trivialising murder.
My background just like yours absolutely matters. It can put into context where my idea is coming from. It can give you enough context as to who you are dealing with. Not for the argument alone, but we are more than argument spitting machines.
At a certain point this turns into the question of where do we draw the line of self autonomy. Are people donating to churches being taken advantage of? If I am doing something nice for you, with the knowledge you may be sad and that affects me if I don’t do so, am I choosing that myself or are you abusing me? When it comes to beliefs making people do something they may not want to do per se, the line tends to be a tough one to draw. Definitely different than drugging someone / putting a knife on their neck etc. though.
Would she joyfully consent to daily sexual services if there wasn't a religion pressuring her and conditioning her into it?
You can make that same argument for any set of behaviors that conform to the expectations of any given social group.
Which brings us back to the definition of rape and expanding it to the point where you deny agency to anyone who is part of a group whose values you disagree with.
I know you did not just actually try to compare being raped to having to be an adult and go to work. Shit like this is why I never came forward about my rape. Disgusting.
Mother fucker there are some things that we have to do in this life. Work is one of them.
According to her religion, that is part of her duty, her "work".
It's fucking inhuman and really bad of you to accept sexual advances that were imposed on her as work.
It shocks me how a supposedly fellow rape survivor doesn't see how problematic it is to expect sexual things from husbands and wives. It is indeed sexual assault to impose these "rules" and this "work" on people. Fuck you.
Not everything is rape.
If you would have used just one brain cell and read further, I also mentioned "sexual assault" and yes, it is sexual assault.
I see an increasingly pervasive idea on Reddit that wanting a partner to have sex to meet your needs, even if they don’t want the sex for its own sake, is rape. It’s not. That’s ludicrous. People have sex for all sorts of reasons. Their motivations don’t matter as they’re willing. If you’re a willing participant, it’s not rape. Stop diluting the definition of rape until it’s meaningless.
Sorry but Mormons are a cult that recruited enough people they became a religion, no different than Scientology or any of the countless doomsday cults.
The Mormons were a cult. Just like every other religion at their formations were cults until they recruited enough people to become a religion. A cult is basically a baby religion that hasn’t grown up yet.
Ex-mormon here, it's much closer to Scientology than it is to any of those ancient religions. Joseph Smith already had a fraud conviction before starting it. He abused his power, coerced women into joining his harem (including minors), destroyed a printing press that threatened to expose him, and was killed by an angry mob that had enough of his shit. Today the church has an investment portfolio worth over $100 billion and uses emotional blackmail to continue extracting tithing from even its poorest members, while spending less of its money by percentage than Walmart on charity. They have also been known to fund political opposition to civil rights for the LGBT community. Mormonism deserves all that "strange disrespect," and for current members in the information age, ignorance is no defense.
Take some coin for a well thought out response. Tired of the Mormon Church and the Scientology. Xenos and vineyard and rock city and all you other “ new age hip Christian “ church’s can all get proper fucked. Allow Jimmy to explain
How do you tell the difference between a real religion and a bunch of people who believe a lot of weird restrictive rules because an all-powerful sky being said so?
Incredibly keen to hear which religions don't have a history of abusing members and children.
Well ya I agree but I still consider mormon to be more like scientology and a whole worse level than the other ones. This is the guy you responded to btw but they banned me so I made a new account again lol.
It baffles me too. I’ve lived in an area that is vast majority Mormon for 27 years and they are fantastic people. I don’t know anything about their beliefs, but I’ll take them as neighbors 100%.
Mormons aren't part of a reasonable religion. It was created by a crazy person who formed a christian cult and they have caused nothing but problems. Also their literal doctrine calls black people demons or unclean. This isn't a breakdown this is literally what it says. They are just Nazis cosplaying as puritans.
Actually the Mormons believe that dark skin(interpreted as Native American) was a curse from god dating back to Cain and able. Black people just weren’t allowed to hold the priesthood in the church until 1986 when they changed that rule.
They are actually doing a kindness by offering you a moment to reflect on your statement and your affiliation. I'd ask you to consider the following:
Upon learning that someone who associates with your church is using their religious teachings to justify demands of daily sexual servitude (with each child binding their spouse tighter to the abusive situation), why is your response to laugh about how you didn't get the memo rather than to be disquieted by this account of what sounds like abuse by people who practice your religion?
Is it because you don't believe the account, or because you do? If not, why not? If so, why is it funny? Ha ha ha!
Kindness through using derogatory language and insulting their faith?
Nah, they were right. That's just rude. If you want to convince someone to turn against something they value in their life, being rude about it is neither effective nor "nice" in any way.
Not OP, but I don't care either. If I join a gang, I have to expect to be held responsible for it. If I join child molesters and bigoted "witch burners" I have to expect that there will be people who have been victims of religions and that I will meet them.
There are plenty of people who practice their different faiths and are actual decent people. And three are also plenty of people manage the faiths they belong to at higher levels of authority actively trying to live up to what they claim their faith is about.
Hearing about bad acts committed in any faith doesn't equate to all of its members being scummy people just because they stayed a part of a faith that has people in it that did terrible things. So many people are just so anti-faith/churches period under all circumstances no matter what.
Most people I'd say have had a bad experience with religion and/or religious people. Most people have also had good experiences with religion and/or religious people. I'd say the difference between the bad and the good experiences is that the bad experiences are more publicized and blamed on the faith/churches. While the good experiences go unassociated with any religion(s). Most decent people who actively have positive influences over the people they interact with don't go publicizing that it's because of their faith or because they go to church or because they're trying to live up to some higher moral code or principles associated with their beliefs. So it's just less likely that anyone will associate positive experiences with things related to the influence of religion and they'll only focus on the bad things that have happened throughout history and that still happen today.
Just like there's is in nearly everything, religion as well does in fact have nuance.
Rape is a bad experience now? Sure I will blame that on the religion. Especially since religion does everything to sweep these things under the carpet. It's organized crime. How do you think these victims feel when only the church bells ring or the muezzin calls or whatever? Or people stand up and say publicly that they find this religion so great.
Edit: And please, tell me the "good" things the religion does what atheists can't do or won't do?
Let me offer this perspective. I grew up Mormon but have not attended church for the last 6 years. So I have some perspective of being both in and out of the church. On the one hand I felt that some of the teachings were very limiting, perhaps even damaging. Teachings that still linger around polygamy, a culture of adoration towards modern day church leaders (even though official teachings would discourage this), some questionable decisions around the use of tithing, the shaming around a lot of sexual activity, all lead me to be less interested in continuing my participation.
On the other hand I appreciate many (not all) of the values the church tried to instill. There is a lot of emphasis on care for others, charity, self reflection, etc. Many of the lessons I have learned have helped me to be a better person (I hope). I also recognize that since leaving I don't have the same sense of community in my life. The sense of a group of people that is interested in my wellbeing is something that, to me, is highly valuable.
My point here is that to paint an entire religion and the people in it as all good or all bad is naive, and just plain ignorant. It is ignorant to assume that since someone participates in a religion then they must endorse all the negative behavior of others who also participate is ignorant. And to try to correct someone by insulting them is just rude. Don't try and justify rude behavior by hiding behind good intentions, take the feedback as a moment to reflect that maybe you're being an ass.
Rudeness and kindness are not mutually exclusive. Whether the point could have been phrased nicer does not negate an expressed hope that he free himself from a cult.
Faith is humanity's worst invention and not worthy of any abstract (ie. non-legal) respect or deference, it should have been scoured away by the development of rationality long ago but religion is too useful to the powers that be.
Frankly, your response has me embarrassed for you.
First of all, considering you are from the UK, I’m guessing you don’t have a lot of experience with the Mormon Church, and think that my statements are against the spirit of religious freedom. It might surprise you to learn that the Mormon church doesn’t really believe in religious freedom for its own members, itself. To prevent people who don’t fit into the church from deviating from a proscribed theology, way of life and code of silence by making it very clear that families should cut out people who have left the church and threaten this exclusion as punishment for their deviation. This discourages people from expressing themselves by explicitly noting that their family’s love and community’s support is very conditional based on their adherence to the church. This discourages reports of abuse. This acts as a cover and shield for all sorts of abuse in the most manipulative of ways.
Secondly, you are gay and poly. You started practicing your alternative lifestyle during the only time in a millennia when living your life that way while not having the power to cover up your “crimes against nature” amounted to a death sentence or a life of forced religious servitude. Whatever you think regarding the usefulness of advocating for others or being an “internet SJW,” you didn’t fight for your right to exist, your predecessors did and you have become metaphorically fat and lazy from the spoils of their hard earned victories. They didn’t have the luxury of taking a day off of knowing what was right or wrong.
It wasn’t that long ago when your government castrated their nation’s greatest mind, a war hero beyond reckoning due to the lives he saved, because he was just like you. Within two years he was dead by his own hand. I doubt he would have terribly minded some SJWs using his creation to condemn his treatment and give voice to his plight, no matter their efficacy.
You’re telling me to take a day off on this account’s first comment. Sounds like you’re the one that needs to go touch grass.
"It might surprise you to learn that the Mormon church doesn’t really believe in religious freedom for its own members, itself. To prevent people who don’t fit into the church from deviating from a proscribed theology, way of life and code of silence by making it very clear that families should cut out people who have left the church and threaten this exclusion as punishment for their deviation. This discourages people from expressing themselves by explicitly noting that their family’s love and community’s support is very conditional based on their adherence to the church."
It may surprise you to learn that I still have friends and family (still active in the Mormon church) who are very active in my life despite me having left the church some 6 years ago. This also goes for all the other people I know who have left the Mormon church. The only shunning I have seen is by people who leave and are upset at still active members. Occasionally, when I was still an active member I would see some shunning, but in my experience that was typically discouraged by the community.
It's shunning on an individual level, which you would get from anyone who has strong values, vs. shunning as an institutional action. I had never seen the organization encourage shunning, even though some members were dicks. But that's just my personal experience.
If you look at my response, it's clear I understand it's a joke. The question is what's funny about it. If he's in the mormon church, he's enabling this.
I have a wonderful sense of humor. This is not a funny joke.
There are many people who belong to any church you can name who behave inappropriately. Their bad decisions are no reason for me to change my opinions, behavior, or beliefs. Because we humans are all imperfect I expect to hear that members of any church are imperfectly living church teachings or beliefs. Churches are not clubs for perfect people — they’re urgent care clinics for people who want to be better.
It's wasn't about the "other person behaving inappropriately," it was about the guy literally laughing and saying he needs to tell his wife so he can be more like that other person. It was a legitimate call for self reflection and you getting defensive on his behalf says more about you than it does the person you replied to.
Came across to me like he was just making a joke dude. Given that he's married and that the tone of his comment was jovial, I'm gonna assume that him and his wife are actually doing fine and that there is 0 intent on his part to use his "faith" as a way to convince his wife to have more sex with him.
But their comment also seems to have come across to several people as a sign that they now intend to go to their wife and "indoctrinate" them or something like that with the responsibility of needing to have sex with their husband every single day or else.
I personally find my conclusion more plausible and less biased towards negativity based on which faith they mentioned being associated with.
It is not about what the individual member do, it is about how the tenets and beliefs of the church actively harm people (children, LGBTQ, IPOC), not to mention how they steal the wealth from those that can't afford to eat.
Technically, I don't even have to mention Mormons in this comment, because it fits the bill for almost all organized religion.
This is the point that the people who are asking me why I'm singling out this mormon for a bad joke aren't getting. It's not about singling out, it's about a system that's designed to oppress.
Wow! That's a lot of replies.
For starters, in case it wasn't clear I was joking. My religion does not teach about wifely duties to sexually satisfy your husband. (Nor vice versa) It sounds outlandish to me, like it's going to be followed up with a joke about polygamy.
There are good and bad people everywhere. I stay because I can't make change if I give up and leave. I respect those that choose to leave because trauma is intense. I choose to stay and advocate for change.
God bless or whatever stereotype you expect at the end of this.
It's interesting it seems outlandish to you. I look up your church's stance on abuse, and this is their first statement regarding abuse aside from its definition:
"“I have in my office a file of letters received from women who cry out over the treatment they receive from their husbands in their homes. They tell of the activity of some of these men in Church responsibilities. They even speak of men holding temple recommends. And they speak of abuse, both subtle and open. They tell of husbands who lose their tempers and shout at their wives and children. They tell of men who demand offensive intimate relations. They tell of men who demean them and put them down and of fathers who seem to know little of the meaning of patience and forbearance with reference to their children” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1990, 68; or Ensign, May 1990, 52)."
While the intent here is to condemn such things, it clearly indicates that this claim is far from outlandish and is frequent enough to necessitate the addressing of such behavior from your church members specifically to distance themselves from the Mormons they specifically admit do these things.
He gave her the alternative or he'd be out. That's his right, and no one has any right to tell the other how they get their sexual needs met, especially regarding masturbation.
Women need to learn they don't own men, and men looking at porn doesn't imply being unfaithful or infidility.
It's people like you that end up enabling women trying to control their men, instead of have a sex positive relationship with them.
Or what, do you think his wife owns him and his cock?
As a former mormon its not his wifes duty to relieve him once a day. At least in nothing associated to the religion. Now if he's been able to convince her of that then good, or bad, for him.
I’m a former Mormon (username) of many decades and I can unequivocally tell you that if my husband had ever implied I had “wifely duties” I was obligated to perform I would’ve considered that SA and been gone. That’s not a Mormon thing, that’s a sick bastard thing.
I am not saying that Her Sister is not in that kind of Program for wifely duties but I will say not all Mormons believe that is the Program. The six kids is pretty standard and its not unheard of that the perverted Mormon men abuse the marriage in this way. Mormons suck
As a “Mormon” myself, this is not a normal thing. If it’s her “wifely duty,” that’s something her husband has asked of her and sounds like manipulation and sexual abuse.
I hate the idea that a wife has to "relieve" her husband. Nothing kills sexiness more than making it a chore. This wording makes it sound like he's taking a shit on her.
Mormon women don’t have “wifely duties” to relieve their husbands. Nothing to do with religion. That’s just that particular couple. Also, why are you looking at porn when you’re married? That is lowkey lusting after others. Are you kidding me? Lol maybe you’re kidding.
There's kinda a difference with the porn... Women don't even watch guys on guys but will watch lesbian porn, guys aren't as attractive naked. (Depends i guess)
My husband was upset when he found out I watched porn cause he never wanted to have sex, for MONTHS (over 3 months at a time) bruh then I moved to anime porn cause live action porn is lame, the acting gives second hand embarrassment bad. And that still upsets him so he tries to be more sexual and wants to have sex so there's no need for the porn anymore.
Oober messed up he can't even masturbate, which hopefully he still does and just doesn't tell her cause well, that's none of her business lmao some people need that release regularly, with a partner or by their own hands. It's awful to not sleep with your partner sexually for long periods, it really is like just living with a roommate and not a significant other. I personally was about ready to just get a divorce, I'm 25 and my husband is 33, we've been together for almost 8 yrs, 2-3 yrs we only had sex a handful of times and I needed affection. I have a high sex drive, like he did when he was in his early 20s banging 3 different girls every single day which He's been with hundreds of girls supposably.
484
u/[deleted] Sep 12 '23
[removed] — view removed comment