opposite sex and cpap

Wulfman... wrote:

Handgunner45 wrote:Sorry Babette, but I think the only way that modern science has found to remove the female sex drive is for her to get married .


Worked for my first 3 wives......... .

Yes, it's been proven over and over again that the consumption of wedding cake WILL work.

Den

That is why they save some in the freezer, incase they need a Booster Shot in a few years. Few need it, the first piece usually provides Lifetime Sex Drive resistance. Jim

Hye, babette, a couple of old sayings seem appropriate:

"Absence makes the heart grow fonder"

"Familiarity breeds contempt"

LOLOL

Kajun (who's been with Sweetie for 8 1/2 years now and still madly in love)

lilsheba wrote:

Nodzy wrote:

Wulfman wrote:Den (happily married to a wonderful woman who puts up with me)

Nodzy (Not quite blissfully single, because anyone who would put up with me is probably embalmed already.)

Don't be so hard on yourself!

Uh oh... ?? No, no... I jest.

Actually, I think I'd be a fine catch, if I wasn't always over <--- there when the seekers were over there --->. I think the problem is... I'm always so far behind my shadow that they see it and get tired of waiting and give up before I catch up.

Nodzy

amandalee wrote:Great post Sharon.
This:

the woman doing all the cooking, cleaning and laundry

is one of the things that makes me not ever want to get married. I agree that it's not always like that--my best friend and her husband are a great example of sharing all that household crap equally, and treating eachother with love, respect and equality over all.

However, among some guys that I personally have met, the attitude seems to be that getting married = free maid service for life.
In one of my classes back in college, I sat by some guys who acted this way. Guy A was married with a baby, Guy B was engaged. B came in one day, and started complaining about how much his fiancee's engagement ring cost. A replied, "Well, just think of what you're getting in return... a cook, dishwasher, housecleaner..." and they had a good laugh while I had to bite my lip to keep from asking them how many cows/pigs/goats or other livestock they had to trade for their brides' hand in marriage.

Yet another one of my many relationship issues. I'll shut up now.

Actually, the "dowry" was (traditionally) and still is in many societies what the bride's family brings to the union. Makes it sounds like they had to pay the guy to get her out of the house.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowry

Den

You know we ought to have a dating section on here so hose heads can find each other

lilsheba wrote:You know we ought to have a dating section on here so hose heads can find each other

No comment -- I will behave, I will behave, I will behave... but not for too long.

lilsheba wrote:You know we ought to have a dating section on here so hose heads can find each other

Another OLD subject from a thread from way back.....

viewtopic.php?t=4873


Den

Wow - you're right wulfman, that was an old subject, January of 2006. Sad it kind of fizzled out before we found out if Phil and Amethyst ever hooked (or hosed) up.

Kat

Sharon,

Actually, I've wanted that sort of relationship for years. Finances tend to dictate we end up moving in together, for a variety of reasons. The last BF had a living situation that was intolerable TO ME, and I wanted him out of it. In hindsight, he was probably FINE with it, he just liked to whine, and he whined to me, so I thought he should get out. (I tend to be sorta of male and want to fix everything, instead of female and just nod my head and commiserate) I had a place of my own, and we got along well, and were having sex every night. Made sense to me at the time that he move in.

No, he was NOT living with his ex-wife. (I know you so well...) He was living in his childhood home, which had been abandoned by his mother years previously, and been used as little more than a junk storage location by her for 20 years. It was a real nightmare. The house was one of those cluttered insane things you see on cable, his mom wouldn't let him DO ANYTHING about the mess, and there was no fenced yard for his lovely dog. And his mother is insane. Luckily she didn't LIVE there, but she'd show up at all hours and just barge in with her key. Caught us in bed once. Oy vay... Me, I have a fenced yard. And the dog likes me. And my place is NOT THAT CLUTTERED. And as psycho as I may or may not be, I'm NOT his mother! He'd be the first person to admit that.

Somewhere years ago I read a book that described that sort of relationship (LAT) as a Limited Partnership. I've wanted it for... I don't know. My entire adult life, I guess. I mentioned it to one boyfriend - that it would be great if we could rent either side of the duplex, and then just see each other when we wanted, and he was HORRIFIED. I've never been with a man yet who agreed with me that a Limited Partnership was a good thing. Most men I've been with DEMAND my presence in their bed as much as possible. Me sleeping alone doesn't sit well with them. Even after we've had sex. Who knew men could be so needy? I'm the one pushing THEM away. Talk about your "hug and roll"....

In their defense, I really haven't met a man yet who wanted a domestic slave. Sex slave, yes. Maid, no. Maybe because going in I advertise that I DON'T COOK, and they can easily see I don't clean my house. I do just enough to get by. It's by no means neat. I've seen worse on the cable clutter shows, so I can feel superior and smug.

Anyway, as I get even older, perhaps I'll meet more men interested in the LAT or limited partnership. I've heard about a lot of 60-somethings doing it. Maybe I'll just hang out alone for the next 20 years and see if some hot 60-something wants to be Limited Partners with me.

I suppose, in a sort of way, I'm doing the Limited Partnership with my most recent ex-boyfriend. Some days we feel together, some days we don't. I still refer to him in shorthand speech as my BF. It's easier, since I'm talking about HIM or something about him, not our relationship. I recently trotted him out verbally to a guy who made a small pass at me. "Look! My Defensive BoyFriend Shield! Do not attempt interface!" When we're together, we get along great. But we're not together much, and it's very random. To some people I describe the relationship as the Limited Partnership of my dreams, but it's really not. Particularly after his ex-wife spent 4 days sleeping at his house last Thanksgiving... I have refused to have sex with him since then, though we still flirt and kiss and cuddle. I don't think he's really figured out there's a correlation between the Ex-wife's "visit" and me being "too busy" for sex.

LOL,
B.

Kattitude wrote:Wow - you're right wulfman, that was an old subject, January of 2006. Sad it kind of fizzled out before we found out if Phil and Amethyst ever hooked (or hosed) up.

Kat

Actually, the original post on page 1 was on Sept. 29 of 2005.

If you were to do a search on "dating" (which is what I did), you'll see a few more threads. I just happened to remember that one and it was one of the longest in terms of pages of posts that showed up in the search.

Den

And people really wonder why I remain, "not quite blissfully single?" <shrug>

I would rather remain alone than not have consistency and stability in a mutually gratifying, soulfully intense, shared-abode union -- one based in deep love, respect, consideration and balanced desire and joy for and in cohabitation. Maybe it’s my traditionalist romantic nature. Or maybe it’s my protective Papa Bear nature (I’m not even sure that’s what I have, but it seemed to fit the theme.) I just know that LAT, or what I refer to as “when-and-if” romance, isn’t on my list of cravings.

I do comprehend numerous situations wherein LAT or similar sort of union can be beneficial on a temporarily basis, or permanently, for many people. It’s just not something I would be thrilled to have part in -- and wouldn’t find much fulfillment in. Much of my fulfillment is achieved in providing fulfillment. Complicated, but oh so simple in practice.

Oh well... it's not like I'm in a rush to find a mate anyway. So, it's really a moot point.

I do have my pillows, and it's about time to give one of the four some really good face. Though, I'll be content to have some really good mask. (What has my life become.)

Nodzy

And people really wonder why I remain, "not quite blissfully single?" <shrug>

I would rather remain alone than not have consistency and stability in a mutually gratifying, soulfully intense, shared-abode union -- one based in deep love, respect, consideration and balanced desire and joy for and in cohabitation. Maybe it’s my traditionalist romantic nature. Or maybe it’s my protective Papa Bear nature (I’m not even sure that’s what I have, but it seemed to fit the theme.) I just know that LAT, or what I refer to as “when-and-if” romance, isn’t on my list of cravings.

I do comprehend numerous situations wherein LAT or similar sort of union can be beneficial on a temporarily basis, or permanently, for many people. It’s just not something I would be thrilled to have part in -- and wouldn’t find much fulfillment in. Much of my fulfillment is achieved in providing fulfillment. Complicated, but oh so simple in practice.

Oh well... it's not like I'm in a rush to find a mate anyway. So, it's really a moot point.

I do have my pillows, and it's about time to give one of the four some really good face. Though, I'll be content to have some really good mask. (What has my life become.)

Nodzy

lilsheba wrote:You know we ought to have a dating section on here so hose heads can find each other

Well, there is the new equipment auction site ...

Otherwise, Babette, I can totally relate to where you're coming from because I've lived it too. Never had any live-ins other than my two husbands, but each time marriage was pretty much the kiss of death for our sex life and our relationship turned more or less into a "best friends" scenario.

Since then I've often wondered if maybe the ideal relationship for me would be one where we lived, say, just a few minutes apart in order to easily see each other yet maintain our independence. Sharon pretty much nailed all of that in her excellent post. I don't know if that would work for me, but it's pretty clear that the full-time living together hasn't been successful. Having tried the "till death do us part" route and having it fail--twice--leaves me little desire to get married again, though I wouldn't completely rule it out in the right circumstances.

Being single again can be lonely at times, but as the French say, "Mieux vaut être seul que mal accompagné" (better to be alone than in bad company).

zzzzzz!! wrote:Being single again can be lonely at times, but as the French say, "Mieux vaut être seul que mal accompagné" (better to be alone than in bad company).

D'Accord Mais Oui

Merci Beaucoup, La Belle ZZZZ!!!
Babette La Mauvaise

Wulfman... wrote:

Handgunner45 wrote:Sorry Babette, but I think the only way that modern science has found to remove the female sex drive is for her to get married .


Worked for my first 3 wives......... .

Yes, it's been proven over and over again that the consumption of wedding cake WILL work.

Den

Why didn't anyone tell me this before I got married..See I am the opposite I think I am in the prime and he is always too tired So annoying, being financially secure is nice, but I would at least like to have a man with a sex drive Okay I will go to my corner now