(8 or 9 times a week)

Well although sex is more than important to my partner and I, this article is just a little flirtatious. James is not treating the sexual craft seriously enough.

- legislative amendments to sex between, consenting (and non paying) adults are unnecessary. James puts up a re-legislative possibility as quickly as he shoots it down.

- a Kinsey like study of sex in Australia by a parliamentary committee presents the specter of already pissed pollies and polliesses getting off watching flicks of their constituents getting off. No. There's plenty of sexually improving literature about without the need for psycho-sociologists getting involved, who then highlight particular (and marginal) statistical findings.

James has a point about about heat in the bedroom. My partner (she's a she) and I find its almost too hot at the moment (even counting the aircon and large fan in the bedroom) so taking it slow - with a break between each of her orgasms - seems to be the best way to avoid pools of sweat.

James' reference to many positions is a bit of a throw away. As you get older overly acrobatic posi's become more of a backstrain. Don't know about you bloggers but "missionary" presents the best opportunity to pace yourself, angle her hips, keep eye contact and chat. Throw in one or two other posi's and I've probably gone beyond what is socially "polite" to say on the web.

Sex is a normal human function, monogomy is not practised by the majority of the world's population, so it seems perfectly acceptable for committed marriage partners who love each other to have sex outside of the marriage if they want/need to.
The USA is a christian country, however mistresses are common, China is a communist country and mistresses are common. Most of South East Asia have relationships outside marriage, and Africa didn't achieve the highest AIDS infection rate in the world because it practises monogomy.
Let's face it a great deal of the world's population enjoys extra marital affairs, why not remove the stigma from such activity. I personnally do not require any outside stimulis, however many people do it seems, if a couple have a loving relationship surely they can communicate their desires to their partners in this day and age.
If one or both partners need something extra in a psycical sense, provided they love each other, and are committed to each other, an open marriage should be possible in the 21st century

Yes let's talk about this organism called "Happiness and sex".
The trouble is some women read the Bible during the ritualist organism as a way to increasing the population.
That is what sex is for, so women can have a baby to make them happy.
But then some get post-natal depression. How do we fix that?
Maybe they can have another good read.

Under the new anti-terrorism laws it should be easy for the government to do a considerable amount of research on what happens in the bedrooms.
I wonder if they will consider using any of the data to increase our level of happiness.

1) Just become something is popular doesn't mean it is suddenly "moral". Racism was popular in America's South a generation ago, millions did it, so surely the stigma of it should have gone, right?

2) If somebody is at such a high level of happiness/trust with their spouse, why would such a person need extra-marital sex? Surely it can only be a purely physiological process, because if its anything more, its likely to mess up a marriage. (Husband suddenly decides he "loves" his latest shag more than his wife, jealousy issues, etc.) Also, even if the couple's marriage is "strong", what about the other party in the sexual encounter? Whose to say it won't be psychologically disturbing (i.e. the person could fall in love with one of the spouses) for him/her?

3) What if the couple's marriage is not strong, and for example the husband tries to coerce the uninterested wife into expanding the marriage against her wishes (possibly using force, we already have many abused women).

4) Whose kids are so well-adjusted they don't care who mummy is sleeping with tonight? Please don't tell me they won't find out, kids are not as naive as you think. Also, if extra-marital sex has even a chance of diminishing the strength of a marriage (see 2 and 3), if only for the sake of the children, it is immoral.

Under the best of circumstances, opening marriages up like this is risky, but under the worst, they are terrible.

When I was just 13 years old my mother put me on the contraceptive pill, to help with my bad skin. Not long after, I developed sever depression, and mood swings. I struggled with depression and low sex drive for years before I went to see a doctor about it. He put me on Zoloft, which stopped me from feeling down every day, rather emotionless, but I still suffered from mood swings, and a low sex drive. I went from feeling normal, to crying for no reason. By this time I was well into my twenties.
When I broke up with my long term Boyfriend in 2001, I decided to quit Zoloft, and the pill. I finally felt happy again, my mood swings had gone and my sex drive had returned. A year later I found my current boyfriend and decided to go back on the pill. My depression and mood swings came back! I couldn’t understand it, I should be happy but instead I would break into tears for no reason. My hormones were going mad.
Finally I read my pill packet, and there it was in black and white (may cause depression and mood swings). I went to my doctor and explained what was happening, so he put me on a lower dose pill, but it made no difference. Finally after trying many different contraceptive pills, with no success, I decided to quit the pill all together. That was two years ago, and I have been happy ever since. My boyfriend and I are careful and I have not fallen pregnant.
I have talked with a lot of girls about this, and it seems to be quite a common problem.
I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOUNG GIRLS ARE NOT WARNED ABOUT THIS SERIOUS SIDE EFFECT OF THE CONTRACEPTIVE PILL?
I can’t help but feel I spent my youth in misery, all because of a hormonal imbalance I am angry at my doctor, for putting me onto unnecessary medication, and for not diagnosing my depression for what it really was THE PILL!

Celene

Your post lends an interesting twist to the article.

Yes, your doctor should have informed you and your mother of the possibility of depression as a side effect of the Pill. And yes, you and your mother should have read the instruction leaflet. Your mother was the responsible adult when you were 13 years. She should have educated you. And you were the responsible adult when you decided to take the Pill again. Some? 10 years later, you could have informed and educated yourself. The writing was on the wall. You chose not to read it.

Doctor blaming is an easy way out We all have to take responsibility for our own behaviours - including asking questions of doctors.

Cheers
Kay

Sex, one of the 3 most powerful creative energy forces in our world. Along with music and the mind, they are what runs our world and are used for both good and bad. Add humour to them all and you have happiness. Happy sex with musical humour may have mind blowing consequenses, leading to more happiness

From a realistic point of view, make mine 5 times day. The more you have the better you feel. Without it, you wouldn't be here, so celebrate it in whatever way you wish, just accept the responsibly of your actions. Particularily the good ones

James has produced a humourus article, as well as brought out some interesting facts and theories.

"5 times a day." Crikey!

Is that a duet, group or solo performance?

I'm glad to see others (above) got something meaningful or interesting from reading the article, because, frankly, I thought it was immature, dull, not humorous, not satirical, boring, trite, sexless and just plain ordinary - the sort of thing an academic, I imagine, would probably think was extremely naughty and daringly clever.

Unfortunately it was not.

Ho-hum, never mind.

How long is it before the good writers come back?

Maximus,
Have you tried more bonking in your life, lighten up mate, this is why God created sex. 5 times per day...you are a machine alchemist, twice a week keeps me going. I thought is was a good article to start people talking about the subject. Sex is not talked about enough.

As stated a normal bodily function should not be a moral dilema for discussion, we all participate in it, the taboo should be well and truely dispersed in this day and age of supposed enlightenment.

Sex has been around since Adam and Eve, and had it not been we would not be here, safe sex is important, and extra marital affairs need to be discreet, as a previous poster said, the children are not stupid, and this behaviour should not be engaged in if both parties in a marriage do not agree on it. I have just tried to represent the facts of world sexual practises, I certainly wouldn't support it being mandatory.

Plantagenet, please don't be so crass, we have ethics, just the 3 of us 5 times each.

Maximus being minimus, we understand how dull lawyers are, so it is a good laugh to see one struggling to communicate meaningfully.

Shonga, a well oiled machine, one that flows along in shimmering sensuality. Just like the wheel chair I need at the end of each day.

Lots of people use sexual affairs to try and solve their personal problems, as it take them into another world and they think that it will be their saviour. But like all illusionary saviors, it is but a few minutes of bliss and then the deflation of it not solving anything, but adding more confusion.

Alchemist

I knew you had it in ya mate. Shame about the wheelchair, but.

Yes I agree that affairs (bed hopping) are a momentary thrill. Its inhumane for a person in a relationship to sleep around.

I'd say for females, and even males, there is an element of feeling (even affection) in interfaces on timeshare basis. If there is no feeling then the person is either in denial or he/she has a serious bundle of "issues" that need to be resolved.

In contrast to what the article's author says I contend that banging around (like drinking alone too much) usually makes a person feel more unhappy than when they started.

SHONGA like Alchemist

I'm heartened to see "youse" also don't have the (typically country Queensland) distrust/fear of sex.

Sex between adults in a steady relationship is a whole different matter. Its a superb way to communicate, spend time together and exercise. When many other men in their 40s indulge in fishing/golf/TAB/pub drinking/pokies all away from their partner, you can guess where I am :)

Plantagenet,
I guess you are a woman, correct? I find sex a very inadequate word to describe the interaction my wife and I have, I mean 2 dogs on a street corner can have sex. I do not like using Arericanisms however I describe our experience as "making love" because of the communication we both feel, and the satisfaction we both achieve, as we try very hard to please each other in every way, which maybe is why I don't look outside the marriage, as I know many do.

I agree with a previous poster that emotion is involved with most of us, but not all, I have met people to whom sex is merely a psyical act. And have also met people in wife swapping clubs, whose original marriage/relationship breaks down because of it, so please don't misunderstand me, I am not an advocate for extra marital affairs, I merely acknowledge that they exist in greater numbers than the ordinary person is willing to recognise.

True love and making love go hand in hand, some of us have been very lucky to find true love on more than one occasion, some have not been so fortunate. In my humble opinion, if you are one of the luck ones, make the most of it...although a threesome five times a day is by my standards a little excessive [jealous]

Five times a day is 1825 a year. Nahhhhhhhh paralysis would set in not to mention the boredom.

I've just found the love of my life. She's broad beamed, 45 foot and in need of some attention. She also has auto pilot so I guess I hope to get lucky again sometime. Just shows hope does spring eternal.

The best sex I can recall was the night of my wedding and the later conception of my children. After my divorce and in my forties I had three affairs. On a power scale those affairs would be regarded as nuclear. Most of us from all those times have retained a fairly warm friendship and affection.
I guess that about sums it all up for me.

Since my dad had girlfriends well into his seventies, I guess it's still quite possible for me too. Only trouble is I think once you've tasted real passion and love anything less becomes pretty mundane.

SHONGA

Well what can I say. My first post at the top of this string indicated that my partner is a "she".

Yes I've toyed with the idea of becoming a lesbian. But no - there are some physiological realities working against this. I'm 6 feet and 100 kgs - do you think that would be a good look on a woman? So (looking down) I suppose that makes me a bloke.

Throw in an extended study (and some experience) of the intelligence trade, military organisation and weaponry and you get some male thought patterns creeping in as well.

But I must admit that I prefer the company of woman as friends. This helps me be better lover because it gives me a far better insight into what woman want - to use a very hackneyed phrase.

Call me a traitor but I find most men too inarticulate about little and big things - so woman it is.

Anyway, my male side allows me to "nail" my woman with considerable force (and she loves it) and my intricate study of female thinking (and anatomy) allows me to caress her leisurely like a good lesbian lover (and she doesn't mind that either).

Here endeth my simplistic yet indulgent observations.

PS (A little Advert) For more particulars on the spying game see my site "Spying Bad Things" at http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

I found the article quite confusing. Sex is not defined other then
physical coitus. My definition of sex involves the physical, emotional and
spiritual aspects. In that context I think the best sex is within a committed relationship and this is most found in a mariage relationship. Happiness needs also to be defined. My understanding is that there is a lot of evidence supporting better health outcomes in married couples then in any other relationship. I would think that sex is included in this. I think in a permissive society anything goes but happiness is not a durable variable as it is usually associated with a good happening.
Lets not degrade the sexual union by watering it down to a physical act. Lets upgrade it as an act that is the most sacred and intimate union between husband and wife. Sexual unions outside this relationship is the cause for a lot ills and not happiness.

Jeshua

I find it interesting that so many male posters (author included) think that to be happy more sex would help.

As a woman, my experience has shown that if I am happy I am more likely to want to have sex than if I'm miserable.

My ex-husband would come home from work, sit down in front of the TV and relax. I would come home from work, prepare dinner, clean, wash dishes and fall asleep in front of the TV. We would then go to bed and surprise - he who had done nothing all evening would want sex - I wanted sleep. This attitude applied when we argued - he would yell and beat me up and then want what he called 'make-up' sex - not a turn-on I assure you.

I know that if I am treated well and respectfully I feel happier and then will want to have sex (make love) with my partner.

That's relationship sex - mutual love and respect makes for good sex which increases happiness.

Casual sex is different - when single I have picked up someone I've fancied, had a good time and that was that - like scratching an itch; fleeting happiness.

The bottom line is - if I have a secure roof over my head, clothes on my back and food on the table, then I can consider sex. I don't need sex to make me happy, I see it more as icing on the cake. The basic human essentials need to be taken care of first.

Scout,
Can I start by saying you are a very well adjusted lady, and to me have the correct attitude to the subject.

No man should ever belt his wife/girlfriend, they are cowards, and usually shy away from confrontation with other men. In my home although I don't contribute as much as I would like to, I have assigned household jobs, which I am responsible for getting done, I think that is only fair, equal sufferage is the key to these things.

Women who are faced with the situation of your ex-husband should leave immediately, and find a good lawyer to get the most possible in monetry terms. Sorry, back to sex, at atmosphere conducive to love making must exist for both partners to get the most from the experience, if one partner is exhausted while the other is rested, this is impossible.

True love means sharing more than lovemaking, it means sharing responsibilities, and household work, and enjoying doing so, if one partner exploits the other making love reverts back to sex for the exploited partner, and shows little consideration on behalf of the exploiter. On the positive side, there is always someone out there who will really love you for who you are, even if it takes a few years to find them, as was my experience, when I met my second wife.

If you are on your own at the moment please don't become bitter, when you least expect it, you will meet someone, and the first time you make love with them will stay with you, for the rest of your life.

I agree with the last 2 posts.

Thank you Shonga & Jeshua.

I expected a diatribe instead I received support - now I feel very happy indeed ;-)

I am currently single and not in a hurry to change that status - yes I would love to love. Fortunately though, I have reached a level of maturity where I am able to stand independently without feeling as if I am failure for not having a partner. There is happiness in my autonomy.

If someone does enter my life - that would be a bonus, but my happiness isn't dependent on having a significant other.

Currently I am more concerned about meeting my mortgage payments - unemployment definitely depletes the happiness quotient.

Cheers

I see mutual compatibility as being the most important aspect of a successful partnership.

Similar attitudes to health, politics, religion/spirituality, family, finance and social responsibility. Interests which can be shared, rather than having mainly separate interests which take you away from one another. And similar avertions too. I could not, for instance, share my life with a smoker, heavy drinker, regular gambler or [to my mind] religious extremist.

If one partner is naturally highly sexed and the other not, then that will inevitably lead to dissention. If one expects sexual monogamy whilst the other wants to sleep around, then that would be a recipe for disaster.

At 21 I met my first wife at a dance. She was extremely attractive, I have a romantic turn of mind and felt that I'd met my "one and only". But what do we typically base our feelings on when we are young? "Wow, I like the look of THAT one!" We wouldn't get a dog or buy a car on that basis would we? No, we'd check out the characteristics and specifications.

After we [inevitably] parted, I was on my own for a while, but had a number of girlfriends. After my first marriage, I'd learned a few things and was still learning. Then I met a lady at a dance who swept me off my feet [but I remained logical this time as well]. We were together for over 22 years, but I sadly lost Kathy nearly 4 years ago to cancer [with her lifestyle, she did nothing to deserve it].

I like having a loving partner and have been close to Emiko for over two years. She is also a dancer and a very good one too.

Yes, sex is important, perhaps for most of us extremely so. And for me, one lady at a time is definitely enough. But there are many other things which need to be taken into account as well.

But I am well aware that my attitude of mainly shared interests and mainly shared time would be stifling to some people. We're all different, aren't we?

Rex

Yes "we're all different".

I'm not.

I agree that there's far more than sex in choosing a partner (sorry I meant WIFE - I don't wish to offend any of OLO's religious sufferers).

I'd go eeven further on the "looks" issue though.

I've found (when I've been on the prowl) that I instantly distrust woman who are very good looking - they walk. I'm not talking about the "naturals" but woman who are overly made up and dressed just so, at great expense.

They're a high risk proposition to the experienced male unless he's after a short term fling.

I think many woman might feel the same about very good looking men.

I hope this Hot Looks Are Risky theory is heeded by pre-first-maritals.

There are indications that many ant-depressants cause a lack of libido. I would contend that this is actually why they work:

The logic goes this way:

Often a person is depressed because of lack of satisfying physical contact with another human being, but that person still has a libido that wants sex:

In essence, lack of sex leaves them sad and depressed.

Anti-depressants cause a lowering of libido:

The person doesn't want to have sex as often.

So they don't feel as sad and depressed at not having sex.

Therefore they feel less depressed overall.

Meanwhile, it should be remembered that men trade affection for sex, and women trade sex for affection.

As for married people having more sex - the bean jar principle should be remembered: that if a couple place a bean in a jar every time they have sex during courtship and the first year of marriage, and take a bean out every time they have sex after that first year - well - the jar will never be empty.

Lastly, the reasns why condoms come in packs of twelve is well established from when they were a prime contraceptual resource in marriage:

Twelve:

January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, Novemember, December.

Hamlet,
I enjoyed your post immensely, especially the 12 condoms part, but let me assure you from one who is and has suffered chronic major depression, that anti-depressants definately do lower the libido, however not for the reason you may think. Lowered libido is a side effect of many anti-depressants, along with weight gain, and you must really work very hard to overcome the three evils, depression, loss of libido and weight gain.
Depression is a terrible affliction, I won't go on with the subject.

Scout, I feel for you in your situation, I have recently also become unemployed, and I know how tough it is to survive let alone pay a mortgage, however I am heartened by your comments, it is uaually when you are not looking that someone comes along out of the blue to provide you with that "bonus" which YOU so richly deserve, I pray the sooner the better.

I really love discussing relationships, my second marriage began when I was on my own, after my first wife left me for a younger man with more energy, she was 27, he was 19, I was 32, at the time. I had been communicating with another employee of the company I was working for, who was at another branch 1,000k's away, when she mentioned one day that her husband belted her, so I offered her a safe haven if she wanted to run, never expecting anything other than to provide accomodation. That was 1992, we are still happily married. I had not been looking, nor had she, but we hit it off immediately, out of the blue, you see Scout sometimes minor miracles do happen...

Hamlet - only once a month? - And only the missionary position no doubt :oP

Shonga - you are very kind. I am going to describe myself as being in between jobs rather than unemployed in future. Having excellent admin & computer skills I intend working as a 'temp' - I am fed up with office politics and bullying. Have a number of plans for income which will provide the freedom I need to be happy.

Notice how the focus is back on sex - I would like to ask all posters a chicken and egg type question:

Do you need sex to be happy or do you want sex when you are happy?

I have already explained the importance of sex to me - as a desirable bonus, but not a necessity like food, shelter and so on.

Scout

To respond to your question "Do you need sex to be happy or do you want sex when you are happy?"

I run the risk of sounding crass, shallow, boastful, characteristically overboard and obsessed with sex BUT what the hell I'll answer anyway.

Yes I need sex to be happy because sex (instead of I how I kick a ball or how much money I make) is one standard I measure myself by. Since my divorce (yes its a rite of passage these days) from my first wife, I've had three partners - for 8 months, 3 months and 11 months (still going strong). Along with affection I've always attended to their sexual needs.

How do you measure sexual skill? Well originally it was over the sheer number of orgasms I could give her (say 5 or 6) per "session" on average.

I've altered my art to giving her fewer but much more intense and prolonged orgasms (now just 2 or 3 per session). As with my previous partners she's over the hill. So I know I'm doing well in life in one area at least.

This reinforces our deep love, affection and spiritual (in the broad non religeous sense) bonds.

She and I both agree that sexual ability is an essential trait in a partner. Not the only trait, of course, but for us it isn't underestimated.

So thats my response, keeping on subject and to the point.

I've noticed how coy other poster's in this string have been about (what and how) they actually do IT. I think this coyness is quite cute :)

plantagenet - your boast is safe with me.

However, I wager that you treat your partner with respect, you have a secure roof over your head, lots of yummy food and clearly a good sense of humour.

If your partner was miserable (for whatever reason) - you wouldn't force yourself on her now would you? So you have a happy partner, ergot lots of lovely sex.

For women the orgasm starts with the quality of the relationship - well before the bedroom.

Thanks for your response.

Now, come on people don't be so coy.

Scout,
To answer your question in part at least:

Personally making love tends to make us both happier, as opposed to "does it make you happy, or if you are happy do you want sex". For us it is a non planned activity, which happens, and after which we both feel happier than we did before making love.As it reinforces our commitment to each other, in spirit [also the non religeous type].

As for what we do and how we do it, I certainly don't mind telling, however I don't want to be censoured, and banned from The Forum, so if Graham gives his permission, I would be happy to describe chapter and verse, but for now surfice to say lots of foreplay is essential in a good love life for us. Our first time took 12 hours, which we have not been able to replicate, however today's version lasts well over an hour, I don't have any time for the "wham,bam, thank you mam" theory practised by self indulgant men, who are selfish to the core,and couldn't care less for their partners feelings.

I call a spade a spade, I am currently unemployed after a 21 year stint as a Purchasing Officer, with a multi national company, due to a restructure, and the Purchasing Section being transfered to Brisbane, 1,500k's away, which has worsened my chronic depression, however I will take this opprtunity to try to rid myself of this illness before seeking further employment, as I too am weary of office back-stabbing, being bullied and harrassed, and emotionally and psysicaly assulted and threatened

I don't believe you need sex to be happy, but it does make you happier. Nor do I think how or where you do it matters, it is the feeling you get from your partners response that is most important and satisfying.

I was lucky to spend more than 20 years with someone that had the same drive as me and we found the time to express our love for each other anywhere and at any time. Since that time more than 13 years ago, I've not met anyone that I feel that way towards, so I am celibate until I find one that wants that form of sensual expression constantly. For me being on a sensual high is the ultimate feeling and just makes you want to get closer to your partner until you are one

As someone said early, lots of women us it as a means of getting what they want. I find that and mens approach a turn off. Until you have developed a strong trusting friendship, then sex is just an act of possession.

Sex has been used for many reasons, but to me it is a union that may lead to a better understanding and open doors into our souls. Lots of people search for their soul mate and want to form a union that attains being at one.

I studied a philosophy that stated you could attain a conscious eternity with the right combination of creative energies that included intimate sensuality. It was fascinating and would be great if it could be attained. The problem would be finding those that wished to take that path and all its creative intricacies.

We seem to be one of the only beings that indulge in sex constantly and not just for the procreation, why is that do you suppose

"We seem to be one of the only beings that indulge in sex constantly and not just for the procreation, why is that do you suppose"

One theory is that, because the woman is pregnant for a long time and then the infant needs constant care for a long time, she needs a man around to provide the necessities of life. A great way to keep a man interested in staying is to constantly be available for sex.

Although many things have changed since the early times of Homo Sapiens, mutually satisfying sex is still a great bonding factor. [But obviously not the only significant aspect of a satisfactory partnership.]

Actually I have some different beliefs about sex than some people here.

Firstly, I don't believe that anyone can 'give' another person an orgasm. Orgasms come from within (excuse the bad pun) not from without.

I don't think that it is a good idea to compare oneself with others in the area of sexual activities, because the only way to really get a comparison is to either hear about how you compare with your lover's previous partners, or to invite your lover to compare you with new partners. I don't think either is such a good idea.

And just because your partner has two, three or four orgasms with you doesn't mean that they didn't have seven or eight with another person who they haven't told you about.

Don't forget, that even with eyes open, the person you are making love with may be 'with' another person in their mind.

No one has ever died from not having sex. It is not a need, but a pleasure.

I believe that having no sex is better than having lots of bad sex. Sex can be a bond between two people, it can also be the cause of bitter division.

Sex is not always about sex. It can be about power, control, manipulation, subservience, money (even in relationships), bodily integrity and just plain affection.

Some people actually enjoy the missionary position, others swinging from the chandellier and others in a hot tub or sneaking a quickie in a public place.

Some people enjoy sex without needing to have an orgasm.

There are many people in caring, loving and tender relationships without sexual activity being involved.

Essentially, there is no such thing as normal: just the area of what is healthy and beneficial for the individual, physically, spiritually and morally.

Well, that is tuppence worth up to this point.

Ok my 5c worth, seeing everyone is giving theirs...

There is some truth in the saying that women need a reason for sex, men need a place. I guess its just hormonal differences, they do affect behaviour after all. One thing about sex, it can make for a good sleeping pill :)

Pairbonding, as we and some other species do it, has some good evolutionary reasons for being as it is. Its common in species where lots of resources are required to raise the offspring. So lots of what we do is easily explainable.

As I get older (53) my view on love and relationships has actually changed. I married my wife as she was cute and we kind of got on and seldom argued. We split on good terms, we just wanted different things from life. She was a city girl, I've grown to love country life. But we were never really on the same mental frequency, which some might understand.

Since then I've had some amazing, soulmate kind of relationships with some women. Love, affection, sex etc can take on a whole new meaning under those circumstances. It really can become kind of spiritual, based purely on that huge mental understanding.

Problem is, they have kids, grandkids etc in other parts of the world and those grandmommy hormones are awfully powerful, meantime I want to live here in country WA. So there is no solution sadly.

So if any thinking female who likes country life, is looking for a new boyfriend, please let me know :)
bonobo@westnet.com.au

Hamlet (and other unbelievers in my individualistic "philosophy")

Taking your statements point by point:

Its true that woman have orgasms mainly through there own efforts but making them feel relaxed enough and in the right frame of mind to acheive orgasm is the mark of a sensitive sex partner.

My mates (male and female) compare their cars, renovation costs and incomes so why not compare sexual abilities (and gain some handy insights as well)?

I've fully debriefed my partner on her previous lovers, using all my fiendishly successful (but cuddly) interrogation techniques and NO, nobody else comes out better.

Record of Interview: She appeared to have no reason to lie when she said that after our first date (no we didn't do it) she felt so distracted and HOT she nearly had a car accident. Another gal has said that before too (so there).

Whatever has been said on this string about woman being "different" (because they don't really get horny) is wrong - in my experience.

New partners? I doubt it - I'm kinda an investment. It ain't easy, I do the cooking and cleaning as well - while she does the working.

Has she generated more orgasms with others? - Unlikely or she would take here life elsewhere. Either that or the love, support and happiness I give her must count for something.

Is she lying? I have a greater faith in the female half of humanity than the male. Woman make me happier and she's paying most of the bills.

"making love with may be ...another person in their mind"! - a perceptive comment and quite possible sometimes. I do it myself sometimes, but "thinking distracted" usually puts one off the "act".

I don't disagree with your other statements.

In my case (perhaps similar to others in this string) I've got the type of mentality which requires bucketloads of sodium valproate and lithium. While the type of "public service" I was in doesn't want such people I've carved out a new niche for myself as a "house husband, writer and lover".

Well Plantagenet, yesterday you were telling us "I've found (when I've been on the prowl) that I instantly distrust woman who are very good looking - they walk."

That sounds to me like a kind of insecurity.

Check out the words to When You're in Love With a Beautiful Woman by Dr Hook
and If You Want to be Happy for the Rest of Your Life by Trini Lopez.

These songs follow your concept for lasting happiness by recommending that men avoid getting involved with attractive women.

Well Rex matey

At first glance I thought your question was "smart" and rhetorical then I postulated that deep insecurities made you ask it.

The comments I've made on this string are sincere, even if they look flippant and attempt humour.

Its up to the depth of the reader to understand where I'm coming from.

Forgive me when I say I base my comments on personal experience rather than your selection of lyrics. Ideas are rarely original just packaged better by the famous.

Anyway to answer your question "insecurity?" - partly, but mainly a sensible estimation of risk and an appreciation of how I measure up.

Like men as woman get older maintaining the desire to look like a 22 year old becomes a heavy investment (cosmetics, dresses and plastic surgury are priced high). Such woman are welcome to follow their values but high cost appearance maintenance is not of interest to me and beides I cannot compete with men who generate a large income.

This assumes 3 generalised "Laws":

1. People frequently move to a new partner as their own social aspirations change or increase (eg. the "sugar daddy" or "trophy wife" phenomena);

2. There is a "correlation of looks" (no doubt mirrored in lyrics) which suggests that in general, people that pair off have the same level of looks. A man that looks less attractive usually needs a countervailing trait to keep his mate - usually steady money; and

3. Sincere love not only relies on the heart but the head.

Hope this helps you through the day.

this kinsey-esque approach to sex, viewing it purely as something physical and abstracted from our overall humanity, that could be measured and described with metrics and diagrams is completely absurd. this is the high watermark for a reductionist society obsessed with dry diagrams and economic modelling.

it completely misses out the beauty of being truly close to another person, and being able to explore one another's bodies without boundaries. the way different kinds of touching benefit different people in the context of whatever kind of connection they have is very personal and particular.

have you not heard of a little word known as 'intimacy'. maybe the reason married people are so happy, before and after, is becuase they are able to forge intimate connections, both platonic and sexual, and they are the kind of people who can make a committed monogamous relationship work.

only a lonely clutching product of todays hyper consumerist society, where everything including sex is disembodied from its context, could really suggest such a study.

be it the thrill of sudden closeness with someone new and strangely familiar, or someone you love and share your life with, the happiness brought into life by sex has to do with more than the angle of penetration. its the whole package.

oh yeah, and seventies swingers parties weren't all that!

I'm usually considered to be a relatively intelligent woman, I'm not used to 'just not getting it' when intelligent people put their view across, so this article and most of the subsequent posts have me very intrigued indeed.

On the one hand, perhaps (hopefully) the article was seriously tongue in cheek, somehow taking a jab at someone or something or other and the majority of the male posters are 'in on' the 'in joke'.

On the other hand, the author and some of the subsequent posters are really of the belief that sex equates to happiness!! Astounding if in fact this is the case.

On the other, most likely hand, (sometimes 3 hands are handy) it's an amalgamation of the first 2 options... a juvenille male perception (that some men manage to grow out of) that sex equates to happiness, (the more the better) coupled with the maturity to understand that this is not a generally accepted view and so therefore 'candy-coat' it in OTT locker-room innuendo to allow those who disagree to see it as a joke and those who agree to feel supported.

My experience as a pretty promiscuous young woman was that sex was lots of fun and provided a decent distraction from unhappiness even when it wasn't satisfying or decent enough to actually make me happy. Then I met my first husband...

Sex had never been anything like that before... it was an out-of-body experience... perfect. Unfortunately the rest of the relationship was a train wreck. When we divorced I found the few attempts at casual sex subsequently to be boring and somehow a little irritating. Definately no cause of happiness.

Now in my relationship with my new husband it is the relationship that provides the happiness and sex is the icing.

Sex and Happiness are NOT mutually inclusive. Nor are they mutually exclusive. The only conclusion therefore must be that whilst sex is not necessarily a cause of unhappiness it is certainly not the primary cause of happiness no matter what sort of relationship one is or isn't in.

Oh, and just to take the conversation out of the locker room and put it into a perspective that is perhaps somewhat more universal, I'd like to add my own thoughts on happiness and the causes of happiness.

I don't think happiness is a goal that is achieved, it is merely an experience. It's not meant to be everlasting, in fact the aspiration for happiness is what keeps us ticking, keeps us striving for new and better ways to exist.

I think happiness is experienced in many different forms, one of which (for some) is apparently having multiple, guilt-free, extra-marital relationships. I think that contentment is the goal, but that as soon as it's achieved we bore with it and 'create' other issues that we're discontented with. Ala Deep Purple: "It's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase"

I believe that as humans, we have a biological imperative to strive, to change, to improve... not only ourselves but the world around us. It is exactly this dissatisfaction with our current state of affairs that inspires such creative processes as to distinguish us from other animals in this matter. Dinosaurs didn't look at wooly mammoths and think... "OOO they must be warm in their fur coats... what if I took that off them and wore it myself, then I'd be warm too", but I bet they got lots of sex with lots of different partners before their lack of imagination bumped them out of existence.

Humans have always been looking for ways to get what we want and get rid of what we don't want. This seems to simultaneously be an urge toward happiness and the cause of constant dissatisfaction for us, interestingly one that seems to have no end.

Obviously there are documented medical, psychological, environmental etc. etc. causes for UNHAPPINESS, my feeling is that is much simpler to pinpoint these than it is to pinpoint the medical, psychological and environmental etc. etc. causes for HAPPINESS. Any attempt to do so seems fraught with conclusions such as were stunningly outlined in the lead article to this discussion.

Dear Dancing..Edge

Well thanks for coming late to school. It would appear us "naughty boys" have been caught by matron in the locker room.

Note that most prominent commentators on sexual matters are female (eg Bettina Arnt).

Furthermore "Cleo" and "Cosmopolitan" discuss female orgasm and sexual positions constantly and without social stigma. They are not considered pornographic because their target audience is not male.

This reflects a sexist prejudice that when men talk about sex they are automatically reducing a serious topic to the locker room.

Now just because some men on this string (eg me) have been directly addressing the issue of sex does not mean that we "equate happiness with sex".

To me sex is very important (thats my right) but it is just one component of happiness.

The fact that you wished to focus on happiness does not mean that you can denigrate those who have taken the opportunity to focus on sex.

I may be wrong but I think as people get older and have had a relationship with a partner for several years the magic of sex may, to a degree, diminish. It is probably stating the obvioous to say that one's immediate circumstances influence one's value judgements.

Regards

Peter

Maybe the 'problem' Plantagenat, is that in the past women have been told to 'lie back and think of England', or indeed that many men have been scared of women finding their sexual, and sensual, potential that they have actively worked against women having knowledge of mutually rewarding sexuality.

I personally grew out of comparing sexual abilities with my mates some time around 1975, before I had actually had sex.

Sex is not something to boast about, to compare or to value yourself by.

Sex can contribute to happiness, but I also firmly believe that happiness isn't everything. My views hark back to those expressed by Kahlil Gibran:

Then a woman said, "Speak to us of Joy and Sorrow."

And he answered:

Your joy is your sorrow unmasked.

And the selfsame well from which your laughter rises was oftentimes filled with your tears.

And how else can it be?

The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy you can contain.

Is not the cup that hold your wine the very cup that was burned in the potter's oven?

And is not the lute that soothes your spirit, the very wood that was hollowed with knives?

When you are joyous, look deep into your heart and you shall find it is only that which has given you sorrow that is giving you joy.

When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight.

Some of you say, "Joy is greater than sorrow," and others say, "Nay, sorrow is the greater."

But I say unto you, they are inseparable.

Together they come, and when one sits alone with you at your board, remember that the other is asleep upon your bed.

Verily you are suspended like scales between your sorrow and your joy.

Only when you are empty are you at standstill and balanced.

When the treasure-keeper lifts you to weigh his gold and his silver, needs must your joy or your sorrow rise or fall

Hamlet

What you say in your first paragraph rings true. Sex has been treated as a base and naughty instinct of men - something women have to endure.

That was the case until the 1970s in Australia. This may explain why this attitude appears to be prevalent in people who reached their sexual peak (or fixed their views) in the 1960s.

I don't know if the repression of sexual discussion or knowledge is mainly due to men. Rather there seems to be a sheer nervousness or oddness in parents talking about it honestly and patiently to their preteens or teens. This is a shame because kids (especially girls) often learn the hard way from more knowledgeable or manipulating kids. Of course there is little or no data to support the above comments just anecdotal snippets picked up by this sensitive soul.

I'll tell you a little secret, just between you and me. I don't compare my performance with other men because almost all men from their 30s onward are cautioned that such discussion is chauvinistic or lewd so they no longer talk.

Meanwhile the many woman I've chatted to on this issue say that they openly chat about sex with their female friends in a casual and relaxed way. I suspect men don't want to get into any area where any hint of inadequacy my crop up.

On boasting I'm just telling how it is. Nobody else let on in such detail on this string so my comments stuck out.

We're anonymous here. Why don't people talk more explicitly about a key issue of life. I had confidence that if my posts were in context and not lewd Graham wouldn't censor them (he didn't)

SOME TWISTED WORDS CONTINUED

Hamlet

Turning to happiness you're right. You may only know you are happy if you have truly suffered. Anyone who has suffered manic depression (like me) knows what its like to be on the edge of losing their mind - thats suffering. To rise from that and then to marry, have children and a "fairly successful" career is happiness. Part of that is momentary but without contrasts one can't appreciate happiness.

Its true "happiness isn't everything". Gibran writes with great eloquence. Psychiatric science has come to a similar conclusion as him - that even rising mania (too much "happiness") masks a deepening depressive undercurrent.

Intensity of feeling appears to be the key creative strength of a depressive but in many more cases it is a recipe for burnout. Writers like Hemingway and Robert Burns were extremely creative but then burned out. As manic depressives they knew deep depression and great success (maybe they were happy) but they drank too much and died early. Looks like Gibran (a Lebanese Christian) died of cirrhosis of the liver so maybe he "self medicated" as well.

Anyway looks like I've shifted from one unmentionable personal area (sex) to that of depression (via happiness).

Just don’t tell anyone on OLO. We never know whose watching!

Just to clarify...

My first post was addressing the original article which suggested that legislating legal polygamy meant legislating for happiness… trying to give some credibility to an age old misconception that SEX = HAPPINESS. Evidently the author of this notion believes that the utter and overnight disruption of millennia old social norms and mores is going to make people happy!

I resent the personal attack planet, and yet I think I understand it… perhaps you feel that I have attacked your manhood and so left my womanhood up for criticism. I am highly aware of the balance of the scales tipping in favour of women in many ways in recent years... the fact that women in some ways today enjoy a greater freedom than men who are still stuck in societal roles dating from two millennia ago.

I think this is partially because women have stood up and fought the hard fight and earned those freedoms and partially because our suppressions did not necessarily directly relate to our 'WOMANHOOD', whereas men who talk about their feelings, relationships etc are still open to attacks on their MANHOOD; (for being homosexual or 'snags') something few men are willing to have challenged... and understandably so.

I am not in any way adverse to open and honest conversation about sex. Admittedly, I seem to have outgrown the double-entendre and flirtatious edge to such conversations, but these have been replaced with a keen interest in what makes people and societies tick, an important part of which is sex.

Nor am I embarrassed or disgusted by conversations about the intimacies and intricacies of sex, no matter how explicit… I am however irritated by the presumption that sex is somehow the cause of happiness. It is no more the cause of happiness than having children (for want of a better analogy). Great, strong, overwhelming feelings of joy rush through you, and then you get on with a life interspersed with happiness and suffering, children are A cause of happiness and A cause of suffering… so is sex... this is my point!

Planet, believe me; I had no intention back then of attacking anyone’s personal posts, only of addressing the original premise, one that I found to be incredibly juvenile and banal. I did intend however to attempt to return the conversation back to the ‘happiness’ aspect of the debate… not to steer away from the sex aspect entirely, just to put it back into perspective in relation to the issue of scientific research into the causes of happiness.

If the original article had a premise along the lines of ‘freer and more open sexual relationships can make people happier’, we’d all be saying ‘no sh** Sherlock!’ The fact that this article promotes the premise that polygamous sex causes happiness is utter rubbish. In my opinion it is crackpot science catering to a personal whim of the worst kind because it perpetuates a social dichotomy that has been an age old cause of suffering.

Scientists would have us believe that happiness is caused by endorphins. Certainly there is a correlation, but if it were exclusively true every junkie would have it right, just give me more endorphin rushes and I’ll be happy!! Presumably scientific research into happiness is looking more at the ways to ‘naturally’ increase and release endorphins… obviously sex is ONE way to do that, but even more obviously not the only cause… if it were, even paedophiles could be considered altruists!!

I’m 35. I love making love and sharing orgasms with the man I love, and I love when we’re both too tired to continue and just fall asleep mid-coitus, with no insecurity that we ‘have to get the job done’. I pray to fall asleep with my husband in that way when I’m 90 and likely to die of the multiple orgasms that some men seem to take such pride in.

Just one last point… unless the woman you’re having sex with has issues, you don’t have to be a particularly wonderful or sensitive man to give her multiple orgasms, you just have to know female anatomy and get off on her getting off. Don’t flatter yourselves boys.

Dancing..

Your last two posts address the imbalances of McConvill's article with deep insight. So I agree with what you've said and we now seem to be on the same wavelength.

Two things: As your 35 and I'm 44 I regret that I was throwing an age-ist aspersion at you. I also noted that your first two posts (that I criticised) were the first that you'd ever made on OLO - being instantly critcised clearly wasn't fun. For that I apologise.

I agree that the concept of group sex (that McConvill treats so superficially) should be rejected by those already in a fulfilling relationship.

Yes good sex is but a side effect of a happy relationship, not a cause.

On endorphin rushes - they can also be generated by mental illness and (again) this type of production does not lead to lasting happiness.

About your own approach to love making - we clearly will need to respect our different attitudes. Our differing attitudes are partially guided by our respective partners differing expectations...

You appear to be experiencing the deep love that I also have (finally) found.

On your last para (unless mass studies are out about the prevelence of muliple female orgasms in Australia) I have to rely on anecdotal research that multiple orgasm is not as common as you think. Orgasms on a SOLO basis may be more frequent and men aren't needed to assist of course.

I may be under a misconception here.

Anyway I hope we can discuss such matters much more on OLO.

Regards

Peter

plantagenet, As a 60 year old bloke, I can assure you that multiple orgasms in women are common. Over the last 40 years it has become more common as women approach sex from their own point of view and not a sociological stereotype, that they were fed previously.

Young women back then had little knowledge of their sexuality, striving to maintain the decorum, they were supposed to have. Those same women have changed dramatically as have young women of today. Today, they don't feel bad about wanting sex and are very open about their intentions, why and what they expect.

I have gained this impression from my business life, which is in hospitality, entertainemt and tourism. I have watched as my younger female staff have no hesitation in expressiong to me what they would like from a prospective male. Mind you it is just like the blokes, they undress them in their minds. I may be lucky that they feel comfortable in being able to do that with someone much older than themselves.

I thinks its brilliant, just wish, they were so open back then.

Sex, it gets better as you get older, as long as the body holds out, more exhilerating and frequent

What pathetic sicko posted this? The world is certainly a sad case when people dont know what the words dignity privacy and respect mean.

Wendy Lewthwaite

Which "pathetic sicko"?

And who doesn't know what "dignity privacy and respect" mean.

Maybe I have missed something - I would appreciate a little more information please.

Yes Wendy

Judging by your last post its easy to roll in and criticise people who discuss the important subject of sex.

We're all waiting for you to contribute something that is not narrow minded and male bashing.

Pete

Well Wendy, you are free to switch off the lights, chew an apple,
think of England or the pope. As they say, whatever gets you
through the night :)

Wendy, people at this site are trying to have a robust discussion on a subject that comes naturally to all of us.

If you have nothing to contribute, except your last post, You deserve pity not ridicule, and you certainly have pity from me.

Graham warned me about being explicit so I have not been, however it would seem Wendy is digusted with the subject.

Scout, please feel free to contact me on any subject at shonganewman@bigpond.com, others have already done so, I have left my address on another thread