Sexy Move: Not Until Tonight

This is a game for the girls to play on the boys.
Sometime early in the day/evening, ask him if he would like to play a game called “Not Until Tonight.” Compliance may be more quickly gained if you lightly brush your hand across the front of his pants as you ask. Once he’s agreeable, ask him to join you in the bedroom.
Once in the bedroom, close the door (and lock any kiddos out) and keeping him in a standing position, take his pants down to his knees. Then do whatever combination of hand or blowjob that you like. Once you get him 80% of the way to orgasm… stop. Just hands off and leave him dangling. Then smile sweetly and ask him if he wants you to finish. If he says “Yes”, give him a ten second kiss and on breaking say, “Not until Tonight.”
Then you simply rinse and repeat this process throughout the remainder of the day. Get him somewhat worked up and then stop, or stop and restart and then stop. Or stop, restart, stop, restart, stop, act like you might restart, but actually stop. Or stop, restart, stop, restart, stop, restart for just a second and then give his cock a playfully light slap and walk away laughing.
Of course you aren’t just going to want to do the handjob or blowjob thing every time. Some other suggestions…
(1) The handjob / blowjob thing.
(2) Tell him to get in the shower and wash each other. Kissing and of course soaping up his cock thoroughly.
(3) Get him to take his pants down. Just kiss him. Don’t touch his cock at all.
(4) Tell him to take his pants off and undress and get into whatever you plan to wear to bed tonight. Do the whole modelling and do-you-like-this routine. Mix it up with some playful stroking on him.
(5) Tell him to strip naked and give him a nice massage, but finish up with an awful lot of attention to touching his butt, inner thighs, balls and base of his penis.
(6) Have him lie on his back. Dangle your boobs into his mouth.
(7) Have him lie on his back. Take your underwear off and gently grind your pussy on his face. In the 69 position you get to suck on him or rub him with your hands. This is a delightful move in the vaginal juices tend to have a long lasting scent, and he’ll continue smelling you for several hours to come.
(8) Have him give you an orgasm. Your choice how.
(9) Tell him to rub his cock as he watches you masturbate.
(10) Tell to strip naked and lie on the bed, strip naked except your panties and grind on top of him in the cowgirl position. Kiss and make out. You can do this completely naked, but the game tends to end early for some strange reason.
Oh and naturally… if you play this game, you really better damn well end up having sex tonight. The distinction between “extended foreplay that’s totally hot” and “cock teasing bitch about to get what’s coming to her” is quite real and non-trivial.
If you’re really into torture, this can go on for multiple days. We’re on day four today. I have to go now.


  1. Are you out of your mind? Do you really think that's going to work the way you describe and not end up in spousal rape by like round 2?

  2. This was a wonderful idea, Athol! My hubby said he won the game because we didn't make it past the shower this morning. He's been in a playful mood ever since!

    I'm generally the higher drive partner trying to coax more sex and playfulness out of him, so, really, this was my victory (and yours, too)! Thanks, Athol!

  3. 61ff9aa6-0d5e-11e1-b8d7-000bcdcb8a73 says:

    Thanks, Athol.

    My wife earns about 25% more than me, and has worked at the same company (with benefits)for 20+ years. She owned our home when we met.

    I'm unemployed, held & lost 4 jobs in the last 10 years, 3 with no benefits.

    Neither of us are very good at expressing sexual wants.

    I'm just starting "MAP". How soon do you think it's safe for us to try this?


  4. I found this works equally well for women, anticipation IS half the fun.

  5. Are you out of your mind? Do you really think that's going to work the way you describe and not end up in spousal rape by like round 2?

    Female MMSL readers jerking on their husbands cock to rile him up a bit typically enjoy their husband fucking them hard.

  6. Dear 61ff9aa6-0d5e-11e1-b8d7-000bcdcb8a73

    It's a game. Talk about it and try it out.

  7. Also – I suppose you have to trust that he won't just take it until he gets blue balls and gives up on the whole thing in disgust.

  8. These are the posts that make me want to get married just so I can try this shit (or have her try it on me).

    "I found this works equally well for women, anticipation IS half the fun."

    The casual-sex enthusiast Roosh has discussed smooching a woman in the middle of a date, only to go back to normal conversation without a word. He says trying for too much kissing can look needy, but he didn't mention that the man is priming the pump, filling her mind will all sorts of sexual thoughts and imagination and also pulling a takeaway that leaves her wanting more. I realized it's no different from Athol's challenge to be smolderingly sexual the whole evening so that you don't ask her to just switch it on at 11pm when it's sexytime.

    Extraneous to Athol's blog: part of Roosh's advice is the fact we have this "dating script" in America that the kiss happens at the end of the date, but the PUAs have contributed their knowledge that a woman decides her attraction quickly, and that you can gain more from kissing early than by waiting to the end when it's all awkward and stuff.

  9. Just want to say, this:

    "be smolderingly sexual the whole evening so that you don't ask her to just switch it on at 11pm when it's sexytime."

    = YES. Your future wife is a lucky one.

  10. That sounds downright painful for the man involved.

    I don't think I'd accept her "delay".

  11. "= YES. Your future wife is a lucky one."

    Well I'm already smolderingly sexual…I just don't have anyone to smolder with so it's pretty frustrating, lulz.

  12. 61ff9aa6-0d5e-11e1-b8d7-000bcdcb8a73 says:

    You can call me Jason (dang AIM ID).

  13. lckychrmsrr says:


    I usually agree with Athol on his advice but not everyone can be right 100% of the time. This only works if your goal is to have him NOT wait until the night. I don't understand how telling woman how to perform a nuclear-level shit test is going to help marriage.

    Ladies: This is an ideal way to tempt/tease your man into turning on the masculinity monster and throwing you down for a solid hard rodgering. There is no way my wife could do that to me ALL DAY LONG without my repeatedly "messing it up" by screwing her brains out.

    Dudes: Absolutely agree with her to do this. Look her straight in the eye, tell her it could be fun, and then wait for her to start the first "tease." Of course, once she starts there's no turning back (you don't tell her this beforehand of course). When it's all said and done and she asks why you "broke the rules" or whatever nonsense (it's a shit test question to see if you're really as manly after the rough sex you just gave), you tell her "I just couldn't control my passion."

  14. For those that haven't tried it, it gets your your wife doing all kinds of sexy stuff for you all day and an amazingly explosive orgasm at the end of the day.

    She's not testing you, she's teasing you. It's a game you're playing together.It's very long foreplay.

    At some point the switch does flip and you get to stuff your dick into her firmly. And it's usually something they badly want by the end of the day too.

  15. Keep saying it, Athol. You're 100% right. I don't care if my husband "breaks the rules" and fucks me hard before nighttime. Yes, I love it when he says he can't control his lust for me. What a compliment!

  16. What about a list for women who find all of 1-10 above far too disgusting, degrading or whorish to consider, never mind perform?

  17. Anon @ 1:36:

    You find it disgusting to take a shower with your husband?
    You find it degrading to kiss him when he's not wearing pants?
    You find it whorish to have your husband kiss your breasts, or to receive an orgasm… from your husband?

    I'm not trying to judge you, I'm just legitimately curious. I guarantee you that your husband would not think you a whore for any of these things. The two of you are married, after all. He's far more likely to be wildly turned on by you, have a mind-blowing orgasm, enjoy the surge of dopamine and vasopressin, and be extremely happy and loving for a while, assuming he's a normal and healthy man. If he's got other problems, than those obviously need to be addressed before something like this comes into play.

  18. I never masturbate, and I find the thought of my husband doing so abhorrent. Oral sex is revolting – why would anyone want to put a man's penis in their mouth? Thne thought of him melling of my vaginal secretions afterwards is nauseating, and what sort of message does it send to anyone else who smells them on him?

    This doesn't exist in normal marriages, only in the realms of pornography.

  19. Sorry for my typing at 4:23 – it should read "The thought of him smelling of" not "Thne thought of him melling of"

  20. I'm not quite sure if you're trolling, but I'm going to respond to you anyway. My apologies if you're quite serious for being a little doubtful.

    I understand if you find masturbation wrong due to your religious or other beliefs. I understand if you don't savor the idea of going down on your husband – I can't say I've ever had a penis in my mouth, but like Athol said in his recent post on watching yourself in the mirror, it seems to me to be much more work than it is for a man to go down on a woman. As to your last point, I guarantee your husband will be the only one able to smell anything once you're done, unless you're close enough to kiss him. And no one else should be that close to him (save for perhaps your children, which is why this might be best to do either before work or after the kids are in bed). But I know that my job is not to change your mind about any of this, and I probably couldn't.

    But you never answered my original questions. What exactly about those activities do you find degrading and appalling? If you don't like some ideas, nothing is stopping you from using several helpings of the others.

    As for your statement about what does and does not exist in a normal marriage: I think you'd be surprised.

  21. Michael, I am not a troll. I assume that because my normal views are at odds with what is written here you think I am?
    Men urinate through their penises. How can having one in ones mouth be anything other than disgusting? The idea that a man should think he can be allowed to do so shows he has no regard for a woman, and expects her to degrade herself for his gratification.
    I never undress in front of my husband – the idea of him leering at me as I remove my clothes disguts me. Him slobbering like some animal makes my skin crawl.

    Why would I dangle my breasts in his mouth? He is not an infant that needs to be fed. The whole premise here seems to be that a woman is no more than a toy to be used to appease a man's lusts, no matter how unnatural or perverse. These are the sort of acts men seek out whores for, not things they should demand that they be allowed to subject their wives to.

  22. Hi Anon, your views simply are not normal and represent a quite repressive approach to sexuality. These are the sort of activities that the average woman does with a man she is attracted to.

    Jennifer does all of the above and more. She is no whore, but she is a good and pleasing lover, so I have no need of actual whores. She quite likes this stuff and my lust for her she takes as a compliment.

    I am curious as to why you are here.

  23. Hey anon, you didn't mention handjobs!

    Your problems are solved, now go and enjoy your newly sexed up, fully clothed marriage you sexy thang. Report back to us how it goes. Oh, and you're welcome.


  24. 61ff9aa6-0d5e-11e1-b8d7-000bcdcb8a73 says:

    > Hi Anon, your views simply are not normal and represent a quite repressive approach to sexuality. These are the sort of activities that the average woman does with a man she is attracted to.

    I'm actually glad "Anon" wrote this up (so it can be discussed), as I suspect it represents a "tape" that plays in the head of many a man or woman. Perhaps it depends on the era you were born and the social mores of the environment one grew up in. This is certainly an issue for me.


  25. No it's really out there.

    Even under Taliban rule you get to see you wife naked.

    To suggest I'm demeaning to Jennifer is quite silly when Jennifer is quite obviously taking part and enjoying it of her own free will.

    Anon is her own oppressor. And her husbands.

  26. Agreed. I find it a bit unlikely that someone so sexually repressed and anxious would be surfing around MMSL. I call troll. But whether I'm right or wrong, those kinds of people do exist, and it's a bit saddening to see. A marriage without intimacy is hardly a healthy, loving marriage.

  27. Anon– "trolling" means to be reading online– aka browsing– Michael wasn't calling you a "troll".

  28. I need to correct that last statement- trolling is not just browsing online– it is a negative attitude, calling names, being argumentative — which is why several folks asked why you were here. If you have legitimate questions,if you're looking for answers about sex/marriage etc and your own life– Athol is usually pretty good about trying to answer, but this is his space, and is some way his home. Please be respectful of him and the people here.. You wouldn't walk into his home and start insulting him and his wife…

  29. Well, our culture is very much about sex and this is a sex blog and Athol's avocation is sex, SO it may seem normal (and truly be normal) that couples frequently experience the type of sex play described on this blog. BUT what anon described and what Jason mentioned are also quite normal, I think. It is normal in that plenty of women are embarrassed to disrobe in front of their husbands or self-stimulate in front of their husbands (see I am too embarrassed even to use the m word), or to put on a show of sorts for their husbands. I don't know if the reason behind it is what Jason proposed about childhood conditioning or if it could just be that some people are not wired "that way". In any case, I think that calling it abnormal or repressed marginalizes people who already feel estranged from society (and their spouses!) because they do not understand what is so "fun" about sex and sex play.

  30. I'm with Polly – we need to be inclusive and indeed some people are probably hardwired to be shy or not interested in sex.

    Dear anonymous conservative lady – of course you need to work with your own situation and values and those of your husband. Some men are very conservative and may well be gay or just asexual or have some really conservative beliefs about sex. You don't want to shock them. I'm a conservative Christian woman so I understand.

    Yes I am more liberated now, but for most of my life I was pretty restricted in what I did. Even now, I am pretty vanilla I would believe. AND I find quite a lot of men have been the same way and are really happy with simple things and think they are really being so so wild with stuff that would not make a nun blush!

    SO …It's a pity we did not get a list of things for a conservative lady to do. Perhaps a walk hand holding? making a nice meal and spoiling him? preparing his clothes and laying them out for him? telling him how much you like and admire him? calling him the great love of your life? cuddling and hugs? massage of neck and shoulders? snuggling up to him fully clothed and draw designs on his chest while saying you can't wait until he gets home? I'll try to think of more. Basically men seem to really like being trusted, admired, petted and looked after!

    HOWEVER, you might find your husband would secretly like more than you do now and more than I suggest – maybe simple things like holding you tighter, a different position for sex or the lights on a little bit or some nice underwear etc. Perhaps if you are inclined you could start communication on the topic starting with really innocent things? Sometimes the really innocent things are very special and caring. I'd suggest pushing boundaries slowly and enjoying the journey.

    BTW – husbands tend not to see our figure faults – they tend to focus on what they think is cute. Therefore, with regard to nakedness, one needs to see oneself through their eyes and not be too shy.

    To everyone else that cannot understand why a lady might not be interested in oral sex (F-M) – see my post of 2 September 2011. I believe a lot of men may simply not wash properly and therefore be pretty icky down there. In reality a healthy properly washed man is pretty hygienic down there and urine should be sterile. In a monogamous relationship you should be pretty safe as long as you both were disease free to start with. Nevertheless, not everyone's cup of tea …

    Hope this helps!

    :-) Candice

  31. To Candice, Polly and Jason, thank you. I have no wish to insult Athol or his wife, but I was brought up to believe that the behaviour he describes is what whores do, not what decent women force themselves to do. My expereince tells me "whorish" is not an insult, simply the correct description.

    I cannot understand why women would apparently willingly do these things. Are they actually willing, or are they so afraid of the reaction of their husband that they undertake these actions out of fear of the consequences (divorce, abandonment?)

    Why is "intimacy" used as an alternative word for degenerate sexual behaviour? Intimacy involves sharing inner feelings and thoughts, not merely placing body parts where they were not intended to go. My husband and I share a deep level of intimacy regarding our beliefs, feelings, aspirations and dreams without having to be perverted.

    Michael, I find it quite offensive that simply because someone does not share your views, they must necessarily be wrong, and attempting to be insulting to you. Why are you (both specifically you, and others here) right, and I am wrong?

    Athol, how am I "oppressing" my husband? He shares my beliefs, views and opinions. Do you see me as somehow restricting by "limiting" his sexual expression to what reasonable people would do?

    Candice, quite apart from the health issues regarding hygiene and bacteria, which I accept could be controlled, the idea that any woman would willing allow a man to do this is beyond my understanding. What is it suposed to do for her? What does hse achieve by placing herself in such a degraded, submissive position, allowing a man to use her as a vessel for lust? She receives no sexual gratification by doing so, so the act is totally one-sided, quite apart from the negative physical and mental hygiene issues that arise from it.

    Athol, to suggest that the Taliban present a view of what a decent married relationship should be is deeply offensive to women. Would you equally suggest that a man should be able to starve his wife into compliance with these acts?

    Having a man leer at my body, his lust barely contained like some animal in a field revolts me – we are not beasts, but something higher.

    Candice, I do everything on your "It's a pity we did not get a list of things for a conservative lady to do" list, shouldn't that be enough? By the way – thank you for this, it shows at least that someone else understands my position, and that it is not totally unique (or in some way depraved itself). Do you have any more ideas?

    Thank you.

  32. Hello again – thank you for the considered answer – it has given me insight and cause to reflect. I've written something on my blog in answer to the oral sex issue. You will probably think I am not conservative when you read my blog – but I am underneath (and in appearance) and was in my past very conservative before I was single again and started to question my previous assumptions and gained the chance to explore relationships with a much older mind. I'm probably also tonnes more open and candid online than people you meet in person – yet they might be much more experimental with regard to sex than me.

    I'd like to emphasise that people are very, very different and that while some differences might be due to learning, some are hardwired. Therefore, my experience may not apply to all people.

    As for the "shouldn't that be enough" issue. Well that depends on the people involved. True rapport and connection is very powerful and meaningful. That and what I described plus vanilla sex and some nudity seem to be more than what is enjoyed by most couples. I've met quite a few sexually disgruntled married men who'd like more affection, adoration and a little vanilla innovation – and I am sure their wives think things are going really well at home.

    As to the husband leering at the body issue – I've had enough unwanted attention and even sexual assault experiences to be able to ID creepy from respectful appreciation. The first time a conservative couple are together the man may shake and have difficulty controlling himself – remember he has lacked an outlet and also may lack experience. One needs to be patient and let him settle (although assault and hurting should be stopped short – discuss boundaries beforehand – however, most men are gentle and kind). After that the looks should be sincerely appreciative, focused and respectful. I've never felt degraded with Awesome and appreciate his nice compliments.

    As to the vessel for lust issue – I think God designed marriage so that we could channel lust for good. If you want to read some Christian sites that analyse this, ask me and I'd google them again. However, it all comes down to what you believe in the end. Sometimes I think we lead such sheltered lives we don't know what creepy looks like, so we try to ID it from our very limited experience. I'm lucky in a way having been exposed to disrespectful men and men looking for sordid affairs – this has given perspective.

  33. I will address further tonight.

  34. Thag Jones says:

    Anonymous said…

    What about a list for women who find all of 1-10 above far too disgusting, degrading or whorish to consider, never mind perform?
    November 14, 2011 1:36 PM

    Wow, really? You could always join a convent. This was a really tame list.

  35. - Okay, so handjobs wouldn't work, since they're also one-sided.

    - You misrepresented Athol's mention of the Taliban. His point was (if I may be so bold) is that even the most repressive religious fascists in the world think it's okay for a husband to see his wife naked.

    - There are a lot of smart people who read and comment here. If you are truly looking for help, perhaps you could shed a little more light on your situation:

    How old are you and your husband?

    How long have you been married?

    Do you two currently have sex?

    What is your religious background?

    Are your husband's views on this the same as yours? Have you talked about that or are you just assuming it?

    Do you believe sex is for procreation only?

    Were you or your husband or both ever abused or assaulted in your past?

    Thanks in advance,

  36. SW-AL, thank you for your reply. Yes, I cannot see that "handjobs" offer any degree of mutuality or imtimacy, merely a tool for sating lust.

    To answer your questions specifically, my husband is 45, I am 42, married 19 years, together 24, three children (18, 16, 13).

    We indulge in intercourse once or twice per month, rarely more and seldom less, obviously not simply for procreation. My husband and I are both Anglican but our families were Methodist. Our views on sexual matters are similar: we have discussed the matter and feel that the practices described here (and in fairness elsewhere too) are degrading, demeaning, unhygenic and pander to bestial natures.

    I have never (thankfully!) experienced any sort of assault. My husband was attacked and beaten up whilst a student, but not in a sexual manner.

    Regarding the Taliban, my instinct is that they would consider it the husband's right to see his wife naked no matter what she thought or felt, and would probably expect him to do it regardless of his feelings too.

  37. Candice, thank you – I will read your blog.

    In the view of the church, the ideal is to avoid all sexual contact if at all possible. Knowing that this was functionally impossible, it was considered that marriage, where sex was contained and control, was the less of two evils (better than fornication), but not withstanding the guidance to not refuse except by mutual consent, it was a way of reducing the negative consequences of lust, not to direct lust. Lust is a sin.

  38. Anonymous, thank you for posting here. I am so glad you did, even though it must have been daunting to do so.

    My stats are very similar to yours, except that I have a few preschoolers, as well as the teens. I had been hoping to learn of couples who do not put such a high priority on sex, but instead, value the deep intimacy of shared feelings, dreams and aspirations that you describe in an early posting. You see, the difference between you and me is that I could never convince my husband that sex between spouses could be demeaning, nor that it is something to be engaged in only once a month or twice at best. I like how honest you have been about your feelings and about the amazing fact that your husband shares them.

    I had to laugh when I saw Thag Jones comment about joining a convent because I have thought about that in relation to myself at least three times just this week alone! But then I think, no, because I am a good mother to my children. In fact, I am a much better mother than I am a wife, so that is why I am at this blog: to learn more about what makes my husband tick. In truth, it is not going so well because I want the kind of marriage you seem to have, Anonymous. If that sounds a little idealistic, well, they don't call me Polly(anna) for nothing.

  39. 61ff9aa6-0d5e-11e1-b8d7-000bcdcb8a73 says:

    Anon. I can see this turning into an unpleasant theological debate, I hope not. I'm a newbie here, but my take is that in most cultures, even when some acts (under some circumstances or at some times) are proscribed, others are allowed, or encouraged. As long as you and your man are on the same page regarding this, and you are looking to either preserve the status quo or improve on it, then the "acts" for you are up to what your way of life allows and what you can conjure up in your imagination. I'm a newbie here, but my understanding of Athol's scheme is to remind the man throughout the day that he's desired and that his wife is to be desired and that this desire will be consummated. If this kind of game is truly beyond the bounds of both your beliefs, then it's not for Athol or for us to impose it on you.

  40. Hi Anonymous – I think that if you and your husband are both happy with your sex life, then there is no problem. But, since you are visiting a site about sex in marriage, maybe you are wanting to change things just a bit? I have to say, I don't think that the viewpoint on sex that you are describing is a Biblical point of view, although I agree that some churches in the past have adopted this point of view. The Bible says that the wife's body belongs to her husband, and the husband's body belongs to his wife. And Song of Songs is, in large part, a story of physical love between a husband and a wife. I have found a lot of good information on the Web site called Christian Nymphos ( – it focuses on sex in marriage and is targeted to Christian women. The overall perspective of the women who run the site is that sex was created by God for marriage and that, in that context, it's a wonderful gift (but one which has been spoiled in so many ways by our highly sexualized culture). Some things on the site are very blunt and "out there," but some is very mild. You might find some articles there that interest you.

  41. Anonymous: You typed that lust is a sin, but you imply thereby that sex itself is sinful. Athol's blog takes it for granted that sex itself is not a sin; treating sex as a sin invalidates most everything Athol has to say about it. In light of this, there is little for you to gain here.

    Anonymous and Polly: Idealistic does not mean good. The worst sins are not carnal, but spiritual. And, as Athol's blog asserts time and again as to marital sex, the highest does not stand without the lowest.

  42. Charles, I want to be sure I understand your last sentence. I am not sure what highest and lowest refer to. Is the highest the rapport of a couple who hold one another in respect and admiration while sharing their innermost thoughts and is the lowest sex? Do you mean that you can't be intimate in other ways until you have all your ducks in a row in your sex life?

  43. If you and your husband are both satisfied with your sex life as is…then, as Athol asked earlier, why are you here? Just to scold us filthy, lust-enjoying bestial sorts of people?

    The day my husband no longer leers/drools at my body will be a sad day for me because on that day, I'll officially consider myself OLD!

    It may surprise you but I also enjoy leering, grabbing and groping him and after 3 decades of marriage…he still likes it and is flattered. Can't say I've ever felt degraded or even submissive doing all those things on "the list." I've always found giving pleasure "in that way" to be extremely arousing for myself; go on and give it a try – see what happens!

  44. @Anonymous 1:36, using the terms "sin", "whoreish", "bestial", "degrading" etc., to describe peoples' normal sexual behaviors is very judgmental. Don't be surprised if you get as good as you give.

    And if you're so religious don't you know you are supposed to be submissive, and 1 Timothy 2:12 says you shouldn't be here preaching to men. See ya. Gotta go leer at the wife.

  45. Anon – let's cut to the chase.

    You've come on here and described my wife as a whore, and yet want my help for something.

    What is the help you want?

  46. There goes my theory that you might be a youngster…

    Please answer the question that's been posed several times now. Why are you here? What help are you seeking?


  47. By youngster I meant late teens early 20s.

  48. Polly: I'm saying, in general, that you cannot praise the spirit and revile the flesh; to preach such is to preach false doctrine. Yes, I mean, in the marital sense, that spiritual union is the highest and physical union – that is, 'one flesh' – is the lowest, with emotional union in between. No, emotional and spiritual union need not be barred from beginning until physical union is perfected; all I say is that they stand together in a marriage, and cannot reasonably be expected to stand apart.

  49. A married woman PRUDE is just as bad as an unmarried woman SLUT. (Calling amoral sexuality immoral is twisted thinking.) One wrongly represses, the other wrongly expresses. Both the married PRUDE and the unmarried SLUT are dishonest but the married PRUDE is forsaking her vows.

  50. I didn't know that wedding vows now included "I promise to f*ck hard and f*ck often". Of course, I am a relic from the dinosaur age when both parties promised to love, honor, and keep (one another) in sickness and in health, forsaking all others until death parted them.

    I don't see how the husband pressuring his wife for a type or frequency of sex that makes her uneasy is loving or honoring. Men can't expect to marry a virginal ingenue and have her turn into a tigeress when he slips the ring on her finger.

  51. Thanks, Charles, I see what you mean now. That seems like the ideal in a way: to have the spiritual, mental, and physical all in balance. Too bad that it seems darn near impossible for most couples to achieve.

  52. Anonymous:

    I think you might benefit from a response from a theologically orthodox Christian like myself. I don't mean that in a way that disparages Athol or the others (who may very well be Christians, for all I know); however, one can perhaps be more open to an answer from someone equally as interested in avoiding sin as yourself, and who defines sin through reliance on the same fountainhead of moral theology.

    So, operating on those assumptions, here is my answer to you:

    It seems to me as if you have mistaken some gnosticism for genuine Christian sexual teachings.

    And, I fear you also have been confused by the difference between how medieval moral theologians used certain terms, and how modern folk use them.

    Let me deal with the terminology part first. A medieval theologian using the term "lust" would mean by it a willful immersion in an extreme desire (not necessarily sexual) which was either inappropriate in degree, or in relative degree to other desires. Our higest good is God; our goal as creatures is to desire Him above all created things, and for our desires for created things to stem from service of God and thus be (a.) proportionally less, leading to a certain kind of "detachment", and (b.) correctly ordered, with our desire to please our spouses higher than our desire for, say, chocolate cake, but less than our desire to live in a manner pleasing to God.

    Now, you and I of course want lust, so defined, to not exist in our lives. We want no lust for our spouses, and no lust for cars or sunshiney days or food or anything else. That is to say: We want no disordered desires, and no disproportionate desires. We want all our desires to be congruent with the lordship of Jesus Christ.

    Well and good. But that is EMPHATICALLY not what bloggers and commenters are thinking of when they use the term "lust!"

    They are thinking of a high degree of physically-felt desire for physical intimacy with one's own spouse.

    This is not sinful (unless it gets so out-of-control that it gets in the way of some higher duty to Christ, but that's rarely an issue, and I suspect not at all likely in your own case). It is not only not sinful; it is a positive benefit inasmuch as it can assist a marriage in ease of marital fidelity, warmer feelings of companionship, and so forth.

    Have you ever read C.S.Lewis, especially his thoughts about the relationship of the Will, the Reason, and the Emotion? (Check out the book The Abolition of Man if you haven't already read it.) He notes that the Reason governs our actions through our (hopefully properly trained) emotions: The Head governs the Hands through the Chest, or the seat of magnanimity.

    For example: If we know we should do some dangerous but morally right thing, we find it difficult because fear gets in the way of carrying out our duty with promptness and power. But if our emotions are better-trained through experience and a lifetime of doing the right thing in difficult circumstances, we can overcome fear and even replace it with a kind of fierce joy…at which point our emotions begin to help, not hinder, our actions.

    Clearly physical desire is a great assistance to our duty to show affection for, and be a good companion to, our spouse. This blog often includes suggestions for strengthening that desire, and more importantly, how to understand why that desire sometimes goes away temporarily, and how to constructively respond instead of reacting in marriage-destroying ways.

    As I said before, when Athol and commenters here use the term "lust," they are merely speaking of an excitingly high degree of desire for physical intimacy with one's spouse.

    This, therefore, represents a successful implementation of the techniques described in the blog, towards the laudable goal of strengthening the marriage.


  53. …continuing…

    Anonymous, you also said,

    "In the view of the church, the ideal is to avoid all sexual contact if at all possible. Knowing that this was functionally impossible, it was considered that marriage, where sex was contained and control, was the less of two evils (better than fornication), but not withstanding the guidance to not refuse except by mutual consent, it was a way of reducing the negative consequences of lust, not to direct lust."

    Now, the first problem with this statement was the misunderstanding of how folks were using the word "lust."

    But even if we substitute "physical desire for one's spouse" in place of "lust," this is simply not correct. It is not good Christianity. I fear that in childhood or at some other time you were perhaps taught things that weren't true (if so, don't feel bad; you're not the first).

    In authentic Christian teaching (such as a very conservative or orthodox Catholic or Eastern Orthodox view), married love is far more and better than this description describes it.

    As it happens I was just earlier this evening re-reading "The Way of the Lord Jesus" by Germain Grisez ( This is as conservative, as orthodox a source as one could wish for, and is far more positive about married sexuality than your view seems to allow.

    Were marriage the kind of "unwished for, but tolerably comfortable prevention against sexual sin" that your view indicates, it would hardly have been ever used to indicate the love of Christ for His Church: Human marriage and its intimacy are invented by God so that we should have some watered-down, two-dimensional foretaste of the transcendent goodness of His love for us.

    Had marriage been an "unavoidable necessary evil," The Beatific Vision would not have been rendered in the Book of Revelation as "the wedding feast of the Lamb." Jesus would not have bothered making his first miracle take place at the Wedding at Cana. The Song of Solomon would never have made it into the canon of Scripture.

    And probably most importantly: The act which consummates marriage is also the act by which we cooperate with God in bringing new immortal souls into existence, if He chooses. A Christian believes that every baby will outlive the universe, and change the future through his choices for good or ill. God set it up that way. And if that was not a good thing, why then would He have said of the creation of man that it was "very good?"

    The Church holds, then, that marriage is an intrinsic good and an instrumental good; that is to say, it is good in its own right as well as good for specific purposes. Unless that's the view you have in your heart and mind and guts, Anonymous, you're not viewing marriage through Christian spectacles. The view you described seemed, so far as I could tell, to either be Gnostic or Manichean or Albigensian — all heresies.

    Again, I'm not blaming this on you. Plenty of people had the misfortune of being taught by well-intended but misguided Sunday School teachers that sex was bad. One friend of mine seemed inexplicably to think that original sin had something to do with sex! (Another ancient heresy.) I asked him why on earth he thought that, and he answered the nuns had taught him that in his youth!

    Anonymous, having dealt with terminology and (what seems to be) your negative view of marriage and sex, I'll deal with some of your original questions in my third part.


  54. …continuing…


    Your original question (which surprised so many folk) was:

    "What about a list for women who find all of 1-10 above far too disgusting, degrading or whorish to consider, never mind perform?"

    Looking at the list, I see nothing that any Christian teacher of sexual morality would object to except: (a.) him watching you masturbate, if this went all the way to climax, and (b.) you giving him manual or oral sex, if this went all the way to climax…and of course the whole point of the original post is that it wouldn't.

    So then the next issue is whether there is a practical reason (bacteria and the like) to avoid, say, oral-genital contact. The answer on this topic was succinctly given by Athol in a previous post: "Gentlemen, wash your cocks." A shower is an entirely appropriate prelude to intercourse.

    Consider, also, that the Song of Solomon hints at this very activity. (Song of Solomon 2:3, Song of Solomon 4:16.) Keep in mind that, following the writing style of the ancient Near East, when Scripture is very explicit about a sexual act, it is describing it negatively (e.g. Onan "spilling his seed," which is pretty blunt and graphic because a wrongdoing is being recorded). But for holy and licit sexual acts, because they are private and mysterious, Scripture habitually uses poetic symbolism and cryptic phrasing like "Adam knew his wife" or "going in to his/her tent." Song of Solomon is not being graphic, but poetical: The loving contact described therein is therefore being celebrated, not criticized.

    So only one question remains:

    Are these things distasteful to both you, and your husband…and will they remain that way, long-term?

    If they are distasteful, then neither of you should impose them on the other. That would be disrespectful of your spouse.

    As a Christian, I find these things are not distasteful to me. But I am in the position the Apostle Paul described regarding eating food sacrificed before idols: For some Christians, it was just food and not a matter of conscience. For others (recent converts from idol worship), their consciences were bothered and they thought it better to abstain.

    Paul takes the view that abstaining from such things is not required by the moral law, BUT, he would refrain whenever he was around people whose consciences were bothered by it, so as not to tempt or scandalize "the weaker brother."

    Likewise with alcohol: Drinking wine is not forbidden to Christians…but one ought not invite an alcoholic to a bar!

    Likewise with the item's in Athol's list: I note for you that (in trusting marriage, full of mutual love and respect, and with an attitude of wishing to please one's spouse) they are morally licit, and can, in some marriages, be beneficial. However…they are to be avoided if your conscience or your husband's is troubled. That would not be beneficial.

    Make sense?

  55. AndrewVanbergen says:

    Anonymous and Polly, as a Christian who goes to a fundamentalist conservative church in America, I find the view you present on sex between husband and wife unbiblical, selfish, and shockingly abnormal. To me it is the utter opposite of the idealism Polly referred to, it positively stinks of brimstone.

    I say it is shockingly abnormal because I never heard anything close, and I'm a 42-year old who's spent a lot of time in churches fundamentalist enough to speak in tongues. I have a book, for example, on the joy and blessing of married sex written by the prominent senior pastor of a Southern Baptist megachurch ("Pure Sex" by Homer Edwin Young), and it is by no means the only book celebrating married sex popular with conservative Christians. I know of no counterexamples.

    R.C. is doing a good job on the unbiblical part, I will mostly just agree. But I want to challenge you to find one single instance of married sexual contact for the purpose of enjoyment being in any way condemned, denigrated, or presented as shameful in the Bible. It is the very opposite; it is always normal (as in Genesis 28:8 where Issac is 'fondling' or 'sporting with' his wife Rebekah), celebrated (as in the Song of Songs), or commanded (as in 1 Cor 7:3-5).

    The attitude is selfish because of the pleasure that such an attitude withholds from the partner you ought to love.

    What could more clearly be a gift from God than non-procreative sexual pleasure in a marriage? It is about the only physical pleasure that is healthy to indulge as much as possible.

    What could be a purer example of married love than giving sexual pleasure? It is the only pleasure that is reserved to marriage. Loyalty and devotion are still holy to a friend, to a country, to a church. You can communicate intimately with anyone you choose. You must love everyone, you may honor anyone. Sex is the only thing your spouse may not share with anyone else; it is the very height of selfishness to be stingy with something she or he may have from no one else.

    It is not in any way a woman vs. man thing; I have heard from women whose husbands were selfish about giving sexual pleasure, and it has devastated them. Thank God the husbands at least did not try to blame it on God.

    Who but the Father of Lies could mislead people to think an attitude so opposite God's Word was idealism or piety?

    Now, it is certainly true that it is not love to push sex on someone who is uninclined, but it is love to overcome one's own disinclination to give it. Love does not take, does not demand, but it most certainly gives. As in 1 Cor 7:3, we are commanded to give, we are not given permission to take.

    I walked the walk I am talking; I freely gave oral sex to my wife about five times as often as I received attention of any kind, despite the fact I wanted and requested far more; I strove hard and with much success to give my love regardless of what I received. What other attitude towards giving befits a Christian?

  56. Polly, I don't advocate a balance among the physical, the emotional and the spiritual, but rather an interdependence and a hierarchy of service, where the higher masters the lower and the lower serves the higher. C. S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man has been brought up already, and is as good an illustration of this as any.

    Andrew Vanbergen, I too smelled brimstone in Anonymous's professed creed. The reviling of sex is really the reviling of pleasure itself, which tears down both joy and love, including that mode of love that takes its place among the primary virtues, that is, Charity.


  57. Looking Glass says:

    R.C. & Andrew, excellent work. While Athol isn't a Christian anymore, it's pretty much impossible to take someone like Anon seriously after Song of Solomon.

    Though, sadly, my first instinct, for trolls on this site, is to simply wonder how long his affairs have been going on? Though there are some guys that really don't want to get off that much. Some are very fine in that regard, so more power to them, if that's what they want.

  58. "Oral sex is revolting – why would anyone want to put a man's penis in their mouth? "
    I didn't see anyone else really address this for Anonymous. I was raised in a traditional Christian home, was a virgin when I got married, and sexually repressed in general. I have been married 13 years now, I am still a Christian, but have opened up sexually over the last couple of years. I now see being sexually open and available to my husband as being the best Christian wife that I can be.

    I love giving oral sex to my husband. He always is freshly showered when I do it, or else I don't think I would love it so much. The penis is clean, smooth, hair-free…a pleasure to have in my mouth. I love how much pleasure my husband gets from it, and I'm the one making that happen. He showers me with so much love, gratitude, and attention afterwards. He always says the words "best wife ever" after a BJ.

  59. Continued…
    How could any wife not enjoy that? Besides, it also turns me on sexually to give a BJ, really "primes" me. I actually love it so much, I read up on the subject ocassionally to find new techniques to surprise him with. He loves it, he loves me for doing it, and I love being the "best wife ever."

    I think your husband may also be sexually repressed, and he may not know what he is missing. Doing this for him would only bring you closer, in my opinion.

  60. Paul also wrote that the only permissible reason for abstaining from sex was as part of a "fast" for a season of prayer.

    God invented sex, He told us to become one flesh. The people who indoctrinate others into thinking that sex within marriage is sinful are evangelists for Satan.

  61. "These are the sort of acts men seek out whores for, not things they should demand that they be allowed to subject their wives to."

    Hmmm… I believe this is why her husband enjoy being married to her. Looks like she has no problem with him "seek[ing] out whores for" his own pleasure.

  62. Strong Man says:

    R.C. and Andrew did an excellent job of summarizing this issue from a doctrinal perspective. Athol addresses it from a practical perspective.

    Right on, and excellent work. The idea that married sex is bad and should be engaged in only as necessary is a lie that is evil and from the devil–even if it was taught in church, which would surprise me.

    I belong to a famously religiously conservative faith, Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints, or Mormons, and totally agree with R.C.s and Andrew's summary. For more on how blatantly pro-sex the Bible is, I've written Sex and Scripture

  63. Anonymous is either a troll or a frigid bitch.

    Man, imagine being married to someone like that!

  64. "wait til tonight" has been quite a blast. We usually touch, cuddle, kiss in passing, but I had to go out several nights this week. discovered the steps to garage are perfect height for BJ. he stood on top step, i was a few below. Teased him good before I left, then picked up where I left off when i got home. Excellent time was had by us both. hehehehe.

    StarGate Girl

Speak Your Mind