Would You Rather....
Would you rather have no sex or bad sex? No really, I'm curious. This is my current situation.
Feeling a mite better, actually. Had a whiskey last night before bed, which didn't hurt!
Calling doc to change my meds. Trying to work out some anger on my own. Talking to helpful people. Doing my best today.
So anyway, which would you rather?
17 Comments:
I know this can be annoying, but I'm going to split hairs here. It all depends on how the bad sex is perceived by both parties. If we have bad sex (usually my fault, coming too soon or not being attentive enough to her), but we're both able to talk about it, feel okay about it, and feel like we're still both trying to make a connection... in that case, I would rather have the bad sex than none at all. However, if it were making one of us resentful or uncomfortable, maybe none would be better.
For us, it's all about the communication. As long as we're talking and reassuring each other, it's fine. For the last couple months, her libido has been below zero due to changing her Zoloft dosage. But we talked about, I told her it was fine, I would be here whenever she felt different, and there was no pressure. And so it was fine that we went a few weeks without. And now it's all coming back around again, so it's all good.
Sorry, a long complicated answer to a simple question. But it's impossible for me to think too abstractly about it. I doubt I helped much, because it sounds from your previous posts like the bad sex gets you down, and that you really don't want to be doing anything with him at all. Sorry darlin'.
Personally speaking, I'd go with the bad sex. At least there's interaction with a living, breathing (hopefully) person with bad sex. No sex is just too boring.
I'd go with bad...at least it's SOME, which is more than I'm getting later. Besides, maybe your partner will be educatable at some point...
Bad sex is different for men and women. Men have bad sex and still get off...so I'd take that. For women, bad sex means lying there for 30 seconds while he gets off...I'd pass on that.
After having had some horrifically bad sex in the past few months with the husband, I'd have to vote for no sex. Bad sex to the degree I think you are talking about kills your soul.
Glad you spoke to your doctor. Kiss.
Having tried both, I'm all for no sex! Sex when done well is great - sex when done badly (and when communicating doesn't improve matters any) breaks me heart.
Easy answer, no sex. For one thing I couldn't stand being the one responsible for the bad sex, which mean it must be the other person, and then why am I with her? Oh, that's right, I'm married to her! Sheesh, glad that's all cleared up. ;)
'Ja, dis is all veddy interesting'
she says with a suggestive lowering of the glasses.
It's all in the definition. Bad sex to one represents great sex to another, based on one's expectations. I think we could all do with sex of some sort - good or bad. So I'll be greedy and ask for both please. Anyone out there volunteering? (evil grin)
A few years ago I'd have voted for bad sex. Now that I've experienced bad sex, I'd vote for none.
NYC and LA are full of attractive women who are so cut off from their own bodies that they think their job is to strip, lie there, and try not to move. (These were usually the same women who told me they found their own pussies 'gross')
BTW, I'm assuming you mean sex with a partner. Solo sex is still sex, and it can be great. Buy some new toys and really go at it.
The last time I went through an extended period of partnerlessness I bought my first vibrating buttplug and discovered my prostate. Halfway through my orgasm I decided I didn't care if I ever found another lover again!
Rob: Shoot for the stars, baby!
Don: Now that is a helpful visual.
Dear Wrygirl,
I have to agree with AAG, bad sex may be soul killing, however, there are times when a man just needs to unload physically. This is neither glamorous nor romantic....just a fact. A willing,if uninspired, but warm and wet partner beats the hell out of anyone's fist. Enjoying your writings.
Daytripper
Daytripper: I know not this 'unloading' you speak of. No one around here feels any particular urge to do much of anything. Thus the slow whithering of the soul.
*whither whither hither and yon*
wrygirl,
I guess that that is my problem...perhaps I shall call myself "always aroused boy." The "unloading" to which I refer, perhaps unimaginable by a woman, has to do with the release of painful, cock dripping pressure on th ol' nuts and prostate. Does this give "going through the motions" new meaning? Maybe it is not "sex" at all.
Premature coming can be overcome with whatever kind of attentiveness is desired. I guess that "bad sex" would only occur for me, if I didn't want to be a part of it, or if my partner didn't want to be there. 2 addl thoughts. Hope you get happy.
Wish there were more photos of your lovely bottom on the site.
Does this include solo sex? Cuz I just can't go along with that! If it doesn't mean no masturbating, then I vote for no sex over bad sex ANY DAY.
Let's stipulate that masturbating IS included. Bad sex plus masturbating or No Sex plus masturbating.
I'm for the latter.
Since you can always entertain yourself, there's no such thing as no sex, but in the realm of fun with others, I'd have to say bad is better than none at all.
Couldn't you just try again? Practice, practice, practice . . . they might get it, after a while.
Post a Comment
<< Home