My friend’s wife did this to him a few months before they got married. Didn’t ask, didn’t talk about it, just announced that they would be waiting to have sex again until after they were married, cuz it would be more special that way. He was really bummed out about it.
Soon after this, we’re at the office and he’s talking to her on the phone about what time he needs to pick her up from somewhere, and he says ‘Ok, so I’m going to come get you at 6?’ Being a (single) smartass I said ‘Tell her you’ll pick her up at 8, it’ll be more special that way.’ And he did. We stared aghast at him, and could hear her yelling through the phone. With a big grin on his face, he put his hand over the mouthpiece and said ‘Totally worth it.’
I agree with the others who feel if it’s done at all, it should be a mutual decision as opposed to “I’m cutting him off” (I know that’s not exactly what you said). But depending on when in January your wedding is scheduled, that could be two months away. Is that really necessary? If you only have sex once a month, then it would be no big deal but then you probably wouldn’t need our advice about it. If you have sex every day, it’s a pointless and mean thing to do. And do you really think the payoff is worth it?
My wife and I didn’t live together before we got married and didn’t see each other during the week before the ceremony, but we had an agreement that during that week neither of us would rub one out. The day of, we were both so horny for each other that there was an extremely strong sexual attraction to each other all day, being so close in church, and dancing at the reception, that we each had quite a twinkle in our eye while counting down the hours until we were alone. After the reception, the wedding party and some of the guests returned to the hotel where many of us were staying. My wife and I went upstairs and had a very quick but extremely explosive session of sex. We changed clothes and returned to the lobby bar. When the elevator doors opened to let us out at the lobby, about 50 friends and relatives stood and applauded and hooted and hollered, and then bought us several rounds of drinks. Lots of congratulations and back-slapping all around.
I think it sets a bad precedence. It treats sex as a commodity over which you are in control.
You could suggest it and see how the idea goes over. If it goes over and you both want the suspense and longing, cool. But it would have to be VERY mutual. Not the “I’m going along with this like I’m going along with the flower arrangements, and her aunt singing in the ceremony, and the mocha filling in the cake” sort of mutual, but a “that sounds like fun” sort of mutual.
I think everyone has said anything I’d have to add here already. I just hope you’re not of the opinion that the woman runs the marriage, Serenata. We get that idea from a lot of sources, but it isn’t accurate (or nice).
But does it, for her? Because if she sees a time without sex as “cutting him off,” it sounds like she doesn’t get anything out of it. It may just be bad phrasing, but seriously… why are you marrying him?
I don’t believe that sex is the end-all and be-all of a marriage, but… this is just so many kinds of wrong I can’t even put them in order.
Do you enjoy sex?
Do you enjoy sex with him?
Do you have sex with him as a way to please him, while laying back and thinking of Britain?
Has sex with him gotten better? Worse? It’s always been blah? If it had always been off-the-charts on the upper side, I can’t imagine talking of a dry period as “cutting him off,” so that doesn’t even sound like a possibility.
Have you always viewed sex as a commodity?
Why are you getting married? Do you want to spend the rest of your life with this particular guy, or is it a wedding that’s in your life plans and it doesn’t matter who plays the part of the groom? Are more weddings in the plans, or is this one supposed to be the only one?
If I was getting married and he went and unilaterally declared a “purity time” in the weeks leading to the wedding - I don’t think there would be a wedding.
I used to be married to someone who used physical intimacy - and withholding physical intimacy - as a way to maintain a level of control that was far out of proportion to her other contributions to the relationship. If I ever get even a hint of that kind of behavior from any future partner of mine, they’ll probably be an ex faster than you can say “resentful blowjob.”
I think this is ridiculous. Marriage is clearly not about sex for you, because you’re already doing it. So why abstain now? Will you also abstain from alcohol, cake, party-time, dressing up, kissing, loving, speaking, sharing meals, etc? Why just sex?
I don’t know the OP, but this is a very good observation and bears repeating.
I think you are all being too hard on the OP. I don’t have any problems about sex before marriage, and I am the least romantic person in the world–we got married on a Friday afternoon at the courthouse, went out for a nice dinner, and went home and went to bed. It was all of a month after we started talking about marriage, and I didn’t even tell anyone we were thinking about it until after it was done. So personally I’d never do anything like the OP is suggesting. But sex is different for different people. Everyone is kinked in different ways. Anticipation is a big deal for some people. As long as this is a mutual decision, I’m not going to say it couldn’t be a good idea or add some sort of spice. It wouldn’t for me, but neither would half the things other people do in bed.
Her phrasing was poor, but seriously, we’ve had people come on here and say “I’m thinking about asking my spouse if we can add a midget and a trained seal into our love play” and gotten mostly friendly advice, highly qualified concerns, and a few pointers from veterans, but abstaining for a month gets treated like the worst idea since invading Russia in January. It’s not stupid to think about things you could do in the bedroom to add variation, and merely asking about the idea doesn’t make her a terrible person.
I got the impression that it was going to be her decision imposed on him, and that she hadn’t considered consulting him about it. That’s what most of us seem to worry about: abstention is fine as long as it’s a mutual decision.
Yeah. It’s the “I’m cutting him off” part. She reduces herself to a sexual vending machine with that attitude. And if a vending machine is out of Mars Bars, there’s usually another one right around the corner.
I guess I am reading that as at least potentially a joke*, and no one really gave the OP a chance to explain herself before they called her every name in the book. I mean, this thread’s only a few hours old. People have asked about having illicit affairs and gotten less vitriol than this.
*Surely I am not the only one that uses the language of “sexual politics” within their own relationship in a highly ironic and self-deprecatory fashion?
Well, it might be a joke. Serenata67 has not come back to clarify anything or respond to the varied advice that she has received. And the responses that you call “vitriol” might be jokes, too
I would have thought it was a joke if she’d just used it in the title and then explained more about how she intended to implement the plan. But when it gets used in both title and post, and with no talk of discussion with him, mention of agreeing on it together, etc., then I tend to take a twice-repeated statement at face value.
In the OP, she says she’s thinking about “cutting it off”, not “cutting him off”, and I get the impression she came here first to see if anyone found a period of celibacy “worth it” before bringing the idea up with him–which is actually a lot better than trying to use the board opinion to convince him after he’s shown reluctance (That bothers me more: if your SO feels a certain way, what does it matter what the world thinks he should feel?)
It’s true, contrapuntal, there isn’t any name calling, but I don’t see jokes, either, in comments about how lucky he is to know now not to marry her, or that women that think like this are terrible, manipulative people.
