I pointed out in my roundup of 2010 that this oldie – Your husband has a right to expect regular sex – is still one of the most popular posts on this blog.

Well guess what? I logged into my dashboard earlier and discovered yet another comment (from yet  another poor put-upon husband) waiting to be let through.

I’ve had several of these comments over the last 12 months, but for various reasons (mainly to do with not wanting to give the authors free reign to comment at will here) I’ve been loath to inflict them on the readers of this blog. Well, up until now that is.

Now I’ve decided that as the authors of these comments put so much thought and effort into crafting them, and as this is obviously an issue that people still want to discuss over a year after the original post went up, it would be mean of me not to publish them. And it would also be mean of me not to give readers here the opportunity to respond to them 🙂

So here we go. Let’s call this “Your husband has a right to expect regular sex part 2 – the view from the other (entitled) side.

Thornton is confused and wants to know what marriage even means these days:

“I see a lot of different comments here, my question is what does marriage really mean legaly and scripturealy and by scripturealy I mean moraly?
Not how some one feels about it but what is written in black and white.
Problems in marriage range on a wide spectrum of difficulity, and there is not a itemized contract that people vow to follow legaly or moraly. It is really very general and vauge as to how we are expected to fullfill our vows to each other.But how we do it either leads to a great marriage or to a marriage fill with problems that end up in divorce.
So what do we know to be true?”

Meanwhile MRA fidelbogen has this to say/rant:

“Briefly, I would say that any partner who is forced to endure a sexless marriage (or nearly sexless), cannot be held amiss for straying into other pastures.

Any wife who practices “behavior modification” on her husband by using “nookie cookies” to coerce or reinforce desired behaviors, deserves no sympathy if he humiliates her spectacularly with infidelity. Although I would advise him to ‘no-fault divorce’ her as quickly as feasible.

Finally, as to the matter of marital rape. The problem here is the same as for rape in general, i.e. the difficulty of proof. Given the usual lack of witnesses, the majority of rape cases boil down to the classic “he said-she said” dilemma, which in my opinion (usually) warrants throwing the case out of court. But in the case of marital rape, the difficulties are compounded many-fold, considering that so-called “circumstantial” evidence is less apt to be warrantably circumstantial in the case of people who normally spend a lot of time alone together.

Regardless what you think about the permissibility of “marital rape” per se, it is hard to understand what positive good the laws against it could be reasonably said to accomplish.”

Mark appears to think I’m some kind of therapist:

“I’m a husband the low maintance type. I don’t require any sex from my wife or any one else, Sex is to much work wortless waste of time. Wife and I have been married 40 + years and we had sex may be 25 or 30 time in the last 40 years. I hate sex and hate to be touched by anyone except my doctor. If i’m touched it drives me crazy, I have to go wash myself.”

While Chris thinks that if he’s prepared to give up his Saturdays to help his wife compile recipes, the least she can do in return is fulfill his manly needs.


‘What irks me is that this kind of shit only applies to male/female relationships. What if some guy wanted to play tennis with his friend, and his friend didn’t want to? Would you even have a situation where the guy would expect his friend to play tennis anyway? No. No one expects their friends to engage in activities that they don’t want to do. They certainly don’t write to advice columnists or take their friends to a therapist’s office and have a neutral third party tell the friend to just buck up and play tennis.’


You have a point, but then it would be perfectly within my rights to go play tennis with somebody else. Bad analogy… do I really have the option to go somewhere else for sex? Not if I care about my marriage.

I see alot of the general attitude ‘it’s my body and I’ll do what I want with it’ in this thread. Yes, it is a woman’s right to control her own body, but it is my opinion that if that woman TRULY LOVED her husband she would make accommodations to make him happy. If she doesn’t feel comfortable with vaginal sex there are other ways to show that love AND fulfill his needs.

I would argue that those in the responses above who take the stance ‘It’s my body and and I don’t feel like it, he should just suck it up’ show very little regard for this person who is supposed to be their lifemate and I fear that those relationships are already too far gone. They’re basically saying, ‘I don’t give a sh!t what my spouse wants or needs, I’m going to do what I want’… is that a good basis for a loving and sharing relationship?

Marriage is about sacrifice and sharing. I sacrifice many things that I want to do for spending time with my wife and doing things that I definitely DO NOT want to do.
Do I want to help her with her Chemistry homework? NO.
Do I want to spend my whole Saturday helping her compile recipes for a project she’s working on? NO
Do I want to give up playing golf so we can afford her scrapbooking hobby? NO

But I do them all, because I love and respect my spouse… how is that ANY different from her making a sacrifice to help me with something that is important to me (and sex is VERY important to me).


‘This kind of shit only comes up with male/female relationships b/c women aren’t seen as autonomous individuals whose wishes are just as important as a man’s.’


No, the problem is that many women do not see sex as a need, and/or they use it to assert power over their spouse.

So what do you lot reckon? Is anyone out there persuaded yet that husbands really do have a right to expect regular sex?

No. Me neither.