Finally caught up on this short Atlantic article, asking the pivotal question: Are Women The Bored Sex?
Unsurprisingly, this article — despite being written by a feminist — comes to similar conclusions as the Red Pill. Women stop wanting sex in monogamous relationships, especially after co-habitation. Yet another reminder that the Red Pill and Feminism are two sides of the same coin, they simply offer competing strategies to their own sex for dealing with “reality.”
None of this of course is to say that these arguments are “wrong,” of course. It is common for this to happen. Sex becomes routine, it stops being exciting. The woman “checks out,” and maybe like those girls featured in the article, start looking for ways to spice things up — or to move on entirely.
The question isn’t whether this happens, the question is WHY this happens. Why does the desire go away? Is it simply inevitable?
The Red Pill and Feminists would say yes. If it is normal for something to happen, that means it is unavoidable. Your only way of mitigating the damage is to thus eschewing commitment — keeping the relationship open (at least for one party, to leverage competitive tension), and/or keeping living spaces separate.
This means, however, that you have to give up sexuality exclusivity. And you also have to give up living under the same roof. Which means no kids, or accepting an awkward “quasi-divorced” dynamic of raising them.
So you essentially have to choose. Either have a stable, nuclear family with intimacy, yet without passion. Or have a hot, exciting sex life but go without the family and close connection.
The only problem with this binary paradigm?
It’s wrong.
And I know it is wrong, because while it is COMMON for relationships to romantically atrophy, and it’s NORMAL for desire to die in a relationship…
It is not universal.
The reality is that there are long term relationships that report HIGHER sexual satisfaction than at the beginning. More desire. More excitement. More love than even the honeymoon phase.
Why don’t researchers try to understand these elite couples, instead of focusing on average?
This lack of curiosity is really the key issue with the Red Pill; it doesn’t look for the exceptions to the rule, and it doesn’t examine why “the rule” exists in the first place. It doesn’t ask the question of whether the average should be predictive for you — or even more relevantly — whether the average happens to be operating in a healthy way.
No one in the manosphere is dumb enough to look to your average 30% BMI American for fitness advice. Few are foolish enough to ask your average “10k in debt, $1000 in their bank account” American for financial wisdom.
Yet when it comes to relationships, they revert to fatalistic thinking like the average is destiny — unless you have a whole lot of other weird romantic arrangements that have more or less zero scalability on a civilizational level.
We need to think more logically. Maybe average people have bad relationships because average people are… average? And don’t know what the fuck they are doing. Maybe the average is sick from decades of trauma and psyops, and needs to completely reassess how it is doing things.
Case in point, the answer to this problem of female sexual boredom is starting at us in the face in the article itself. Yet neither the author nor the red pill seems to address it:
“Jane has tried to tell John, in therapy and outside of it, what she’s after. She wants to want John and be wanted by him in that can’t-get-enough-of-each-other-way experts call “limerence”—the initial period of a relationship when it’s all new and hot. Jane has bought lingerie and booked hotel stays. She has suggested more radical-seeming potential fixes, too, like opening up the marriage.”
Jane doesn’t really want to be fucked by some stranger, what she wants is to be desired. She wants John to be excited by her; to crave her. The idea of sex with a stranger is considered because she imagines the stranger will appreciate the novelty of her sex more than John — he will be excited by her — and because this competition may inspire John to stop taking her for granted.
John doesn’t feel this way about Jane because he is holding back. Perhaps he feels like he cannot express certain things about himself to her. Maybe he is afraid, or ashamed. Either way, the result is that they are not fully connected. The relationship has hit a wall both of them implicitly understand, but rather lean in for the solution, they lean out. The result may be excitement, but it will come at the cost of intimacy, and eventually the relationship itself.
The truth is that you need to see your woman through new eyes if you have any hope of maintaining passion over the long haul. You must choose to love, over and over, through pain and panic, or else that love will wither like a neglected garden.
None of this is easy. But it is entirely doable.
Your level of success will depend on how uncomfortable you are willing to be.
Because it is these walls that are blocking out the love you seek.
If you want my help removing them, and saving your relationship…
Apply here: www.patstedman.com/application
– Pat
