Willing
I’ve been kicked by the wind, robbed by the sleet
Had my head stoved in, but I’m still on my feet
And I’m still.
Willin’.
—Lowell George, “Willin’”
Rebekah’s column in this blog on the F-word – frequency of sex, and couples negotiating same – reminded me of something I’ve been wanting to write about for a while. It’s one of the best pieces of sex advice I ever read, and I wanted to pass it along.
It’s from lesbian sex adviser JoAnn Loulan. Now normally, I’m not a big fan of Loulan; she’s a bit too fixated on slotting people into sexual categories for my taste, she’s insisted that butch/femme is a universal concept that applies to all lesbians whether they like it or not; and she’s said some outrageously harsh and stupid things about bisexuals. But this piece of advice has always stuck with me. It’s one of the most useful ideas about sex that I’ve ever heard . . . and as my sex life has changed and shifted with the years, it’s only gotten more useful.
The idea is this: To have a sexual encounter that’s pleasurable for both (or all) partners, you don’t need to start out being aroused or excited or in the mood.
You just need to start out being willing
You need to start out willing to be aroused and excited and turned on. You need to start out willing to have sex, and to have a good time doing it. You need to be willing to be seduced . . . and to seduce. You don’t have to start out in the mood; you just have to be in the mood to be in the mood. If that makes sense.
I think this is good advice for anybody. But I think it’s especially good advice for those of us who are getting older and whose bodies aren’t as quick on the draw as they used to be. It’s especially good advice for long-term couples who have been together a while, and who aren’t as instantly excited by the mere presence of a sexually available person in their bed as they once were. And it’s especially good advice for busy, stressed-out couples who are scheduling and planning sex to make sure they make room for it in their lives.
Let’s take a closer look at that last one. Scheduling sex in advance is advice that’s often given to couples whose sex life is flagging. But it also gets a bad rap. It’s seen as unsexy, unspontaneous, clinical even, to have sex, not because you’re “in the mood,” but because it’s in your datebook.
But when you let go of the idea that you have to be “in the mood” to get things started, then scheduling sex suddenly gets a whole lot easier. When you start reframing a willingness to be in the mood as a version of being in the mood itself, a pre-scheduled sex date seems less like a cold duty and more like a tingly, long-anticipated treat. Like sitting down to dinner at a fabulous restaurant that you’ve had reservations for for weeks.
To make this work, though, there’s something you have to let go of.
You have to let go of the idea that sex should be perfect at all times, a splendid erotic ballet between perfectly harmonized bodies and souls. Specifically, you have to let go of the idea that the transition from not-sex to sex should always be fluid and graceful, the idea striking both parties like lightning at the exact same moment, the way it does in the movies.
A scheduled sexual encounter, between people who aren’t yet aroused but are willing to be, will sometimes start out a bit awkwardly. When one or both of you doesn’t quite have your motor revving at full throttle yet, there’ll sometimes be a few jerks and hiccups before you get going. You have to be willing to let that awkwardness happen, and trust that once things get going, it’ll pass.
So the thing to remember is this: Even if you’re not in the mood when you start, starting to have sex can get you in the mood. And like most things, this gets better and easier with practice. The more you let yourself be willing to be excited even though you’re not quite excited yet, the more natural and graceful it feels . . . and with the Pavlovian self-training of time and experience, your willingness to get excited feels more and more like the actual excitement itself.
This entry was posted on Thursday, 27 September 2007 at 12:00 am and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
on Monday, 1 October 2007 at 6:42 pm Rebekah Skoor wrote:
Thank you, Greta. You bring up a powerful point in this piece. Being willing to engage with a partner, be it sexually or otherwise, is paramount in successful communication. While we may desire our loved ones to approach us with unending enthusiasm, the simple fact that they are in fact approach us is a sign that growth is possible.
on Thursday, 20 December 2007 at 10:07 pm Dry Spells: A Reply | Blowfish Blog wrote:
[…] It can be weird, I won’t deny that. I wrote about this a little in my piece on this blog, Willing. Starting to have sex when my mind is on work and worries and errands and plans can feel awkward at first. But the awkwardness usually passes . . . to be replaced by more pleasurable emotions. […]
on Friday, 9 January 2009 at 11:29 am [Greta Christina] Sex, Moods, and a Wife’s Selfless Duty: And We Are in What Century Again? | Blowfish Blog wrote:
[…] I, myself, have argued that you don’t always need to be in the mood when you start sex. You just need to be willing to be in the mood. If you always wait until you’re both in the mood — especially if either or both of you are stressed, getting older, parents, a couple who’s been together for a while, or just insanely busy — you may wait a good long while, and will wind up having a lot less sex than either of you wants. But starting to have sex can get you in the mood, even if you weren’t in the mood to start with. It’s a good idea sometimes to let yourself be seduced, to start having sex before you’re in the mood and let yourself get drawn in it as you go. […]
on Friday, 24 April 2009 at 2:26 pm [Greta Christina] Sex, Spontaneity, and the “Swept Away” Myth | Blowfish Blog wrote:
[…] I’ve written before about the myth of sexual spontaneity: the myth that, for sex to be good and meaningful, the desire has to strike both partners out of the blue and be acted on immediately. I’ve written about how unrealistic the myth is, how poorly it fits into the reality of many people’s sex lives; I’ve written about the narrow and limiting definition of sexual desire it creates. […]
on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 at 11:12 pm [Greta Christina] Getting in the Mood | Blowfish Blog wrote:
[…] I’ve written before, many times, in lavish praise of scheduling sex. I’ve written about how scheduling sex can be one of the best ways to keep sex alive and lively for people who are getting older, people who have been together a long time, people who are just plain busy and overscheduled. I’ve written about the myth that being swept away by passion (as opposed to consciously making room for sex in your life) is inherently the best kind of sex . . . and how this myth reinforces the idea that sex is dirty and bad and the only valid excuse for it is that you were overcome by passion. And I’ve written about how you don’t need to be in the mood to have sex when you start having it: you just need to be willing to get into the mood. […]
on Wednesday, 21 April 2010 at 12:42 pm Mis-Matched Libidos: Can Mixed Marriages Ever Work? | Blowfish Blog wrote:
[…] Scheduling sex. I’ve written about this before. Many, many, many times, in fact. But I’m not sure I’ve ever written about it as a solution to this particular problem. So here goes: Scheduling sex isn’t just a solution for tired or stressed or over-scheduled couples. It can also be a solution for couples with mis-matched libidos. Oftentimes, in mis-matched- libido couples, the partner who wants sex more frequently will feel rejected and unwanted: if you’re the one who always makes the first move, and if you’re getting shot down more often than not, it can be very demoralizing. And the partner who wants sex less frequently can often feel pressured and inadequate. (All of which can lead to some nasty vicious circles/ self-fulfilling prophecies: nothing kills a libido faster than feeling like sex is an obligation.) […]