Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wouldn't be offended or upset at all, but then again I love my husband and I only have eyes for him anyway. I think that it is sweet that she found a man who was willing to do that for her. I don't think it is nice to say that it is illogical to want your husband to only lust after you. He was, after all, the one who wanted to marry her. Why marry someone if you can't keep your eyes to yourself?
I'm not saying I would do the same thing, but it is understandable. I just didn't think it was nice to feel sorry for a husband for his wife wanting him to look at only her. After all, that is kind of what you sign up for when you get married.
Ok, I guess different strokes for different folks then. To me, I don't limit my SO to checking out "just" my body. Heck, "I" even point him out to other women when I see a hot stuff passing our ways. No harm in looking, it's just looking anyways.
I didn't know that getting married required a man to go blind!
No, and people can look, it's when you oggle with blatant disregard to your SO that it gets to be an issue. It's human nature to view your surroundings, but that doesn't mean you stare at people.
Plus, SanAn, I already know your relationship and mine are totally different. No disrespect at all intended. We are just different gals. And I don't have the same expectations of my husband that pitt has, but I was standing up for her because I think that's sweet and I'm glad for her that she found a husband who only has eyes for her.
No, and people can look, it's when you oggle with blatant disregard to your SO that it gets to be an issue. It's human nature to view your surroundings, but that doesn't mean you stare at people.
Plus, SanAn, I already know your relationship and mine are totally different. No disrespect at all intended. We are just different gals. And I don't have the same expectations of my husband that pitt has, but I was standing up for her because I think that's sweet and I'm glad for her that she found a husband who only has eyes for her.
I know another name that most guys would call the husband, but I'll just refrain from saying it
I think a lot of the problem is with generalizations. I simply do not believe that biology alone makes all men the same, to need the same things, to be stimulated by the same things or respond to the same things in the same manner anymore than I believe biology does that to women either.
Again, it all boils down to chemistry and compatibility between each couple and there is no cookie cutter mold and no one size fits all situation that can be applied.
Personally, I do not feel sorry for a man who's wife wants him to have eyes only for her any more than I feel sorry for a woman who's husband wants the same, if in fact they are both compatible and happy in their relationship. Why should I feel sorry for someone that is happy.
I have to totally agree with Miss Martha that there is a huge difference, huge, between viewing/seeing and even appreciating the attractiveness of a member of the opposite sex, and oggling them or shifting the vision to certain body parts. No one expects anyone to go blind once they say their wedding vows and exchange rings, however, most do expect some sort of respectful behavior to be prevelent once that occurs.
Personally, absolutely yes I want my husband to have eyes only for me. Why the heck not. It doesn't mean that I don't want him looking at another woman or having to walk throughout his day with his eyes glued to the ground before him, however, I would like and appreciate that his thoughts remain pure in the process. Which BTW, is not more than what I am willing and able to offer to him. Having eyes only for him and maintaining my thoughts pure and towards him alone.
I see nothing wrong with this, and please, by all means do not feel sorry for either he or I. We are both perfectly content in our agreement and feelings of not needing to indulge in the viewing of other peoples bodies in that way.
What horribly unrealistic expectations. And dishonest ones, to boot.
Those of you who are espousing this are absolutely stating, with a straight face, that you have never had a sexual thought about an attractive person you've seen or met after getting married? Not once? Not even for just a second, before dismissing it as a harmless fantasy? That you've never once entertained the notion of what this guy might be like in bed, or what you might have done with that guy back in your single days? Not one time?
I don't buy it. That sounds like exaggerating (if not downright lying) to prove a point or to assuage a fear, to me. And it speaks to the "all men are pigs" generalization much more than any biological justification, by equating fantasy with adultery.
As far as openly staring at someone, predatory glint in eye, lascivious grin on face... the helpless, disrespected wife fretfully standing by... well, I think that's a pretty disingenuous example. Naturally, that's selfish and inconsiderate behavior. However, it also points to a specific type of husband that is obviously lacking in a whole lot of categories, rather than shedding any light on why it's morally wrong for an otherwise decent man to go to a bachelor party with strippers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
