Ken Explains it All - Lori & Ken Alexander - Part 3

[cindyluvs24]

Ken is very fortunate to have someone like Lori because I don't see a lot of women lining up for that kind of treatment from a loved one. Lori's advice to just lube it up and it'll be over in ten minutes works great for my car's oil changes but it would not make me happy in bed. All they have done is publicize their lousy sex life. Yeah Ken, try to sue me for pointing that out.

[SpeakNow]

It takes 10 minutes to please most men... adding an extra 10 minutes once, twice three times a week to ones schedule seems like an easy thing to do, but for many it is a chore. Interestingly, it seems many wives may go into the idea of sex as just a duty and when the romantic tie is over they actually appreciated the time as there are so many healthy physical, psychological and emotional needs met by a healthy marriage romance.

OK, have it again... blow everything I said out of proportion and mischaracterize. I see the pattern here and it is clear.

I will be very selective going forward as two what or if I address any issues. Too much time wasted on you all.

Ten minutes? I can tell you that most women need more time than that in order to be wet enough to have enjoyable sex. Lots of ten minute quickies are not terribly enjoyable for women if they are not turned on.

[Mama Mia]

10 minutes??? I guessed fundie sex was crap, and yes, it is. No wonder these women aren't enjoying sex with the headship, he probably doesn't last long enough to let her finish. She might want to have sex with him more often if he wasn't bad at it.

So does it usually take longer than 10 minutes for a woman to have an ogasm :embarrassed: ? , by whatever means?

Sorry, not trying to veer to far off course,but I only have me to go by, and 10 minutes is more than plenty of time.....so I take it that's not that usual? Learn something new everyday.

[feministxtian]

Well...my man knows how to get my motor running LONG before we get to the getting nekkid part. But, that's probably because he gets off on making sure I get off. He's a REAL man...who knows how to make sure the horizontal bop is pleasurable for BOTH of us. And yeah, pretty much, I call the shots on that...but...after 15+ years of marriage it works for us.

[RosyDaisy]

If you're only taking 10 minutes to have sex, then you ain't doing it right!!! I was married to "the 7 minute wonder" (including foreplay). I was horny for the entire 7 years we were married. Now...I get enjoyable, long time, feels so good it almost hurts sex...yeah buddy!!!

But Ken, if all you need is 10 minutes start to finish, I highly advise getting some tips from porno flicks...

Or Viagra.

[Ken]

I think Ken is saying that:

Biblical=I care if my spouse is happy

Lots of people care if their spouse is happy. People of all religions. It is not just a Biblical thing.

Plus, I don't think "submitting" has anything to do with caring if your partner is happy. You can submit without giving a hoot whether your partner is happy.

Finally, if Lori says that wives should not be complaining about their husbands, then perhaps husbands should give their wives the same courtesy. Did you tell your friends that it was not loving, or Biblical, to complain about such an intimate matter with you?

(Though I don't understand how the "no complaining rule" coexists with the "seek godly counsel when your husband is mean" rule.)

Thank you...

There is fine line between complaining and seeking help from friends.

Yes, lots of people care about making their spouse happy, and lots do not. It is the one's that do not that no model of marriage will work, BUT at least in a Biblical model of the husband as leader and wife submissive, the husband can appeal to a wife's goodwill to be reasonable. It still may not work, but it will force her to decide what she really believes and who she follows. Many Christian women have bought into many lies, and I am not referring to a legitimate desire to be equal and treated with respect in a loving manner.

To all...

Yes, I should write more clearly what I mean, and I apologize for not doing so in this instance. I did not realize that I had spread to the end of the story and thought I was clear in my last paragraph lamenting that they had lost 15-20 years with this issue. There are times I rush through this Forum because I do not have the time for much of the nonsense. So I hit the red X without proofing or checking to insure that what I am saying will be understood by hostile and biased people whose purpose is try and create misunderstanding and confusion.

Communications goes both ways. If you are not sure of what is written and it is unclear, you can ask, instead of always accusing first.

For the record, my understanding is that most healthy couples enjoy sex 2-3 times a week in their 20's and this drops to 1-2 times a week in later years. This is probably mainly full love making. BUT for men who feel they need more frequency than their wife enjoys, she can usually please him alone with 10 minutes, requiring only him to need lube. I will leave it at that. That is what the ten minutes refers to ... not the normal longer romance. Get an imagination.

[polecat]

So does it usually take longer than 10 minutes for a woman to have an ogasm :embarrassed: ? , by whatever means?

Sorry, not trying to veer to far off course,but I only have me to go by, and 10 minutes is more than plenty of time.....so I take it that's not that usual? Learn something new everyday.

Every woman's body is different. Some may get there in two minutes while others take 30 minutes or more. Both extremes are completely normal. It does not make a woman frigid or unresponsive if she takes longer, nor does it make her (whatever other mean name people come up with) if she finishes faster.

[Ken]

Ken is very fortunate to have someone like Lori because I don't see a lot of women lining up for that kind of treatment from a loved one. Lori's advice to just lube it up and it'll be over in ten minutes works great for my car's oil changes but it would not make me happy in bed. All they have done is publicize their lousy sex life. Yeah Ken, try to sue me for pointing that out.

No Lori's point is that extra sex that a spouse desires an be accomplished in 10 minutes. Regular romance takes much longer. Separate the two in your thinking and many husbands will appreciate it.

In today's busy world there is no time ... so still meet needs

I Cor 7:5: "Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."

[ShesCrafty]

For the record, my understanding is that most healthy couples enjoy sex 2-3 times a week in their 20's and this drops to 1-2 times a week in later years. This is probably mainly full love making. BUT for men who feel they need more frequency than their wife enjoys, she can usually please him alone with 10 minutes, requiring only him to need lube. I will leave it at that. That is what the ten minutes refers to ... not the normal longer romance. Get an imagination.

Guess what else men can do if they feel they need(and I use that term loosely), sex more frequently than their wife enjoys, ensuring they don't have to rape her? I'll only say it requires lube and a free hand. Get an imagination.

[OkToBeTakei]

So does it usually take longer than 10 minutes for a woman to have an ogasm :embarrassed: ? , by whatever means?

Sorry, not trying to veer to far off course,but I only have me to go by, and 10 minutes is more than plenty of time.....so I take it that's not that usual? Learn something new everyday.

I'm a bit loath to talk about ALL women. I mean Ken feels OK talking about ALL men ...yet it is not accurate, it appears to be what he wishes to find. I would imagine in that type of how high can you piddle on the school toilet wall conversation, misleading. Also a great pressure for all concerned. If one party says OHHH really you need X amount of X and X amount of X and then Y? Is only going to garner a defensive reaction if it is posed in such a way as to appear the other person takes a different path to X and Y.

Or more simply. A guy can sit on the top deck of a double-decker bus and be satisfied by speed bumps. A girl with a washing machine who's spin cycle is a bit mad and the machine balance is off...same thing.

You can wake up one morning, good to go. Next not. You can be ill. You can be hot ,cold. You can be coming down with a virus, or on the other hand be that age where Randy McDandy should have been your given name. Or you could be just OK after a family loss or life event and want to feel alive and close, loved, warm and orgasm is fine but not particularly important.

I have no idea, is the short answer. I don't use a stopwatch. Nor is my body predictable. I don't really care. To be honest my favourite type of what we are discussing is hours not minutes. THAT is well good fun.

Shorter answer. Unlike Ken's prescribed method, there is no method. It's all about fun for two people.

[Ken]

Before he claims that he's never heard of it:

Lori Alexander:

I forgot about that book... and not sure I read much of it before marriage, but I bet my wife did. I am not sure a book was what these women needed, it was such a shock to the husbands.

The question is: "How does any spouse, husband or wife, help move their spouse out of bad thinking or bad behavior in a gentle and loving way?" That is the challenge for any marriage model. I believe that a Biblical model is most effective in getting necessary change because Christians can appeal to what the Bible teaches. Remember, the Bible dies not teach a spouse forcing anything upon the other... but either spouse can appeal to what God says He desires in a marriage and in life.

We can make requests without forcing or manipulating, and we can appeal to one's basic belief system and values to try to obtain changes. And any spouse is free to refuse to change. We are seeing many changes in marriages for the better with an appeal to Bible principles and values.

[Ken]

Shorter answer. Unlike Ken's prescribed method, there is no method. It's all about fun for two people.

Or when one partner is not in the mood, can't they make it fun for the one who wants it, if their values are to please their spouse?

[OkToBeTakei]

For the record, my understanding is that most healthy couples enjoy sex 2-3 times a week in their 20's and this drops to 1-2 times a week in later years. This is probably mainly full love making. BUT for men who feel they need more frequency than their wife enjoys, she can usually please him alone with 10 minutes, requiring only him to need lube. I will leave it at that. That is what the ten minutes refers to ... not the normal longer romance. Get an imagination.

Numbers, numbers. Obsessed with numbers.

Yes Ken has just described the ultimate selfish act.

OH sorry love. Need my selfish need. Here's the KY. Lie back and think of Jesus.

What a load of total defecate. ALL that time 'working' away? Lori being ill. Yet for the purposes of this argument/forum Ken makes it sound like it is a physical impossibility for his blokeness to get by without?

You are not catholic and it will not wither if you don't use it. OR fall off if YOU use your OWN (admittedly limited) imagination :lol:

[OkToBeTakei]

Or when one partner is not in the mood, can't they make it fun for the one who wants it, if their values are to please their spouse?

No.

I would never ask Mr OK to do this if he was not in the mood. :P

[lawfulevil]

Or when one partner is not in the mood, can't they make it fun for the one who wants it, if their values are to please their spouse?

It is astonishing how quickly I can go from angry and exhausted to totally down... given a 45 minute nap, a dinner I didn't have to cook, and someone slowly brushing my hair. (Don't knock it til you try it, it's tingly!) And all my husband needs to go from worried about work to down for lovemaking is a foot rub and showering together. We both enjoy a little candlelight and cologne/perfume on the other.

But if we're Really Not In The Mood... we just rub the feetses and cook the dinners, without expecting it'll lead to sex. Because we're a team.

It sickens me how the onus is on the non-horny spouse, when they are clearly the spouse experiencing stress or illness. Even men can't get horny if they're too sick or stressed out! There's no "making it fun" for someone who is exhausted, stressed out, or ill. "Pleasing" your spouse is a two-way street and genitals are only part of it. An important part, but only a part. You can in fact have a functional motor vehicle that doesn't have a transmission... and you can have a functional marriage that doesn't include sex. Asexual romantics do all the time.

ETA: If you're in a marriage where the other party is no longer ATTRACTED to you, that's different, but assuming you both still love and are attracted to one another, some simple consideration is what's required, not a bashing about the head and shoulders with a Bible.

[Coconut Flan]

:mouse-shock: :mouse-shock: :mouse-shock: :mouse-shock: :penguin-no: :penguin-no: :mouse-shock: :mouse-shock: :mouse-shock: :mouse-shock:

I didn't believe even Ken would go there.

[Full enough quiver]

I would think that if a couple had good communication, this wouldn't be a problem. Why not address it like any other issue. I have had sex with my husband when I'm tired, or otherwise less than enthusiastic, because I love him and enjoy pleasing him. 9 times in 10, because hubby cares about my pleasure, the mood gets there. When I turn him down, if I'm not feeling well, or it's that time of month, he respects my no. Sometimes he may ask for an alternative, and I will generally acquiesce.

I would say if one partner isn't having their needs met, sexually or otherwise, it's his or her responsibility to express that, and talk it out, until a compromise can be reached. If it can't, maybe it's time for some marriage counseling. Maybe there are deeper issues causing a lack of interest. Like I said, I want to please my man, but maybe I wouldn't feel that way if he wasn't the good husband he is. His goal is to please me. Our marriage isn't 50/50, it's 100/100. Nothing biblical about it.

[OkToBeTakei]

I went to a carpet store and there were thousands of colors and samples to look at. {This is simply overwhelming to me.} I told the owner, who had been there 35 years, what I wanted and the price I wanted to pay and he found a great one for me. When he came over to measure my room, he told me that 35 years ago when he began selling carpet, 80% of the orders were carpet, 10% tile, and 10% wood. Now it is 70% wood, 20% carpet, and 10% tile. He said the tile hurts women's muscles and joints since it is so hard. Carpet looks bad after 10 years {especially after four or five washings} so it needs to be replaced. Carpet is made completely from toxic chemicals and gathers germs, bacteria, pollutants, and everything else that comes off the streets. Wood floors last forever. By the time someone has replaced their carpet one time, they could have gotten wood. He said that no other place in the world do they use carpet like Americans do.

This is coming to you from a totally snark point of view. Taking in mind I had to look up 'snark' as a word when I found this site. Where I live 'taking the piss' is a part of life. ie. When somebody says something stupid....totally expect people will say things in response meant in humour with a side of total irony.

Primarily. I think Shag pile is right up Ken's street :lol: (oh to be Scottish)

A woman who thinks carpet shopping is daunting, yet feels quite 'confident' in telling women how to conduct their child rearing and relationships??

A woman who believes the first thing she hears. WHY Lori of course. America and specifically YOU who live in a warm climate use the most carpet. OH Ye Gods.

Numbers, numbers. I'm sorry you said Ken would not let you spend the amount of money to replace your sofas. I wonder if he would or could not. It is just the fact you wrote that on your blog. You are meant to be a supportive submissive happy person. I read that and thought. OH dear. Thrown her husband to the wolves.

I knew Ken would never let me spend that kind of money on couches.

Over to Ken .............

[garciarodrigez]

"BUT for men who feel they need more frequency than their wife enjoys, she can usually please him alone with 10 minutes, requiring only him to need lube. I will leave it at that. That is what the ten minutes refers to ... not the normal longer romance. Get an imagination."

Quote courtesy of this Ken dude.

First of all.....EWWWW

Second: correct me if I'm wrong but he's talking about a handy right? I didn't think spilling the seed unless it was for procreation was, hmmm, what's that word? Oh yes, Biblical.

Edited once for punctuation, twice to say so. Lol

[salex]

"BUT for men who feel they need more frequency than their wife enjoys, she can usually please him alone with 10 minutes, requiring only him to need lube. I will leave it at that. That is what the ten minutes refers to ... not the normal longer romance. Get an imagination."

Quote courtesy of this Ken dude.

First of all.....EWWWW

Second: correct me if I'm wrong but he's talking about a handy right? I didn't think spilling the seed unless it was for procreation was, hmmm, what's that word? Oh yes, Biblical.

Edited once for punctuation, twice to say so. Lol

So, what I'm getting out of this is as follows:

Since these men are for shit in the sack, their wives don't look forward to sexy time as much as one might hope... but instead of the men working with their wives to figure out what makes them tick, sexually--what turns them on, what gets them off, what gives their wives multiples, the answer is instead to treat their wives like blow up dolls or unpaid streetwalkers.

The selfishness. The ignoring of their wives as sexual beings in their own right. The actual use of the women they are supposed to love as no more than SSM's term "sperm recepticals" and the consistent statement "it only takes 10 minutes and a little lube" indicate their is no pretense that these quickies should / will be fun for the wives. Women can and do get off in a few minutes--but not if they are just being used.

A hooker at least gets paid. A lover gets love and her own orgasms...but apparently a ™gets "god and duty" and is expected to be used as masturbatory tools at will by men who won't masturbate. And in return, the men get what must be pretty lousy sex, most of the time, because just as bad currency drives out good, bad sex will become the "easy path" and the just for him quickie will over time outnumber any long afternoons of mutual fun between the sheets.

I would never say that both partners have to be equally interested to have good sex. But to me, it is incumbent on the more interested partner to make sure the less interested partner has as much fun as possible-- not that the less interested partner has to just play Fleshlight for the more interested partner, hoping all the while that it will be over soon.

[formergothardite]

I get it now... it is poor communications in what I wrote because you all think that the compromise to two days a week happened rather quickly, and I know and thought I communicated that it was 15-20 years later that the compromise was achieved.

I did not specifically say WHEN the compromised was achieved and I thought you would read to teh end and see that if 15-20 years was LOST you could put 2 and 2 together to realize that the compromise happened many years alter.

Here is exactly what I wrote:

As usual I am game...

1. There are so many circumstances that this can apply to and definitely, a full and complete discussion, many time son the subject is necessary, and maybe even with a counselor in some circumstances. I have two friends who married two sisters. Both sisters for some reason preferred sex once a month and I do not recall the details as it was years ago, but my sense what that it was not that pleasurable for them. Both of the friends were the opposite extreme... all about sex... so the mixture was lethal to the marriage, but being fine Christian men, both compromised on sex about twice a week.

Fast forward years later and both wives began to enjoy sex more, or found other ways to sexually please their men. The issue as it turned out was passed down from their mother and her view on sex.

Here would be my point: I think that these two couples lost out on 15-20 years of love making and the husbands were deprived not because there was not a real problem which needed to be worked through, but because they did not have a Biblical marriage. In a Biblical marriage the husband will always look out for the best interest of his wife, but as the leader in the relationship he may look beyond the immediate to the longer term, and make requests that the wife would willingly try to honor. In these marriages the wives took control over the sex life and guarded it, not sharing equally or willing to explore how to move beyond the impasse. For 15+ years it was simply "no interested" and these Christian husbands could do nothing but try to love them anyway. If these two had had Lori mentoring them I believe they would have found the place they are now with sex much faster.

The last "Here is my point" I thought made it clear that there was much struggle to move beyond once a month for many years... The compromise to twice a week did not happen until 15-20 years.

My bad for thinking you would read the last paragraph and understand that the compromise took many years to achieve. I do not know what "these two couples lost out on 15-20 years of love making" can mean if it does not mean a sexless marriage during that time.

Also I write: "For 15+ years it was simply "no interested" and these Christian husbands could do nothing but try to love them anyway." What do you think that means if it is not a sexless marriage? There still was no compromise.

It shows the limitation of trying to write something in a few words, no time to proof, nothing but bias from the readers, and no questions from the readers to clarify that there is a seeming contradiction if the compromise happens immediately... when I am still saying they are struggling 15-20 years later. I can see how your bias view can lead you to conclude what you did.

My fault... I will try to write much less... Sorry.

Ken, here is how language works. When someone says "Fast forward many years" they are telling you to fast forward from what was previously written or said. In your case it was "they compromised about twice a week" that we were fast forwarding from. You called me unreasonable, pulling things from thin air and mischaracterizing you for following the basic rules of language and communication. You have still not apologized to me for this. If you go and read back, you will see a poster did question you about it I even asked "When did twice a week become sexless?", but you never answered. It isn't a biased view that led us to believe that you felt that twice a week was sexless is the rules of language and communication. That you didn't follow them isn't my fault.

Recently I wrote a post that I thought was clear. Another poster responded and had gotten the opposite meaning out of what I wrote. I was puzzled for a second, went and read my post again, realized I hadn't communicated clearly and it was my fault, apologized for a poorly written post and clarified what I meant. It is on me to make sure I communicate my thoughts in a way that people can understand and if I don't do that, I can't blame the other posters for not being mind readers. This is what reasonable adults do Ken.

[salex]

So does it usually take longer than 10 minutes for a woman to have an ogasm :embarrassed: ? , by whatever means?

Sorry, not trying to veer to far off course,but I only have me to go by, and 10 minutes is more than plenty of time.....so I take it that's not that usual? Learn something new everyday.

I'm with you on this, however, the Christian Line is that men are microwaves, women are crockpots, sexually... (seriously, I have heard this more than once) I personally believe that if, early in the relationship, the man learns what works for the woman (and visa versa) then the long foreplay isn't required as often. It also sets up the expectation for both men and women that women take forever to orgasm and may not orgasm much/often... so men have an out and women have lowered expectations. Which feeds the whole miserable dynamic we've been getting descriptions of here lately.

I'd pity them for their rotten lives if they weren't such so arrogant about wanting everyone's lives to suck as much as theirs.

[RosyDaisy]

Ken is the epitome of "dirty old man".

[latraviata]

I'm with you on this, however, the Christian Line is that men are microwaves, women are crockpots, sexually... (seriously, I have heard this more than once) I personally believe that if, early in the relationship, the man learns what works for the woman (and visa versa) then the long foreplay isn't required as often. It also sets up the expectation for both men and women that women take forever to orgasm and may not orgasm much/often... so men have an out and women have lowered expectations. Which feeds the whole miserable dynamic we've been getting descriptions of here lately.

I'd pity them for their rotten lives if they weren't such so arrogant about wanting everyone's lives to suck as much as theirs.

Reading all this and summerising all the absurdities Ken wrote about being, a godly, biblical and christian leader.

I am glad I am an atheist.

[cindyluvs24]

Why the hell are they here instructing us on sex? Modest much? Or are we somehow too irresistible to ignore? Sheesh.