Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Addiction, wrong expectations, habitual masturbation ...
User avatar
MayDayGirl
Hammock
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: The Burbs

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby MayDayGirl » Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:09 am

Paul B wrote:Your husband wants and needs to see you partially dressed, dressed with a few buttons open, bending over, and fully naked. He needs to see you flashing and teasing and tantalizing him with your body.

Question regarding the above: Is there such a thing as too much of a good thing in this regards? My DH doesn't really like me doing this randomly around the house. If he is in the mood, it is fine. Otherwise, he just thinks it's over the top. And he's never been interested in porn. Maybe he's just not visual??

deepinlove
Twin size
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:22 am

Postby deepinlove » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:23 am

Within a couple of months I noticed a difference - I found my wife even more arousing than I had before. (Fortunately she was pleased with this )


Okay, I have tried this, and am currently doing it, and it definitely works in that it cuts down on lust problems and temptation is held at bay more. However, I can't say that the end results of finding my wife more arousing than ever has been a welcome outcome.

I presume there are those who found themselves "looking" in the first place because there is not enough availability from the only valid source. I am not excusing lust, may it never be (As Paul said).

What does one do when the attraction to their wife is at an all time high, and there is just no way it is ever going to get met? For valid reasons. PMS, chronic fatigue, etc...

Searching for Holy options.

User avatar
Seekryt
On the floor
Posts: 1695
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:29 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): July 4th, 1999
Gender: Female
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby Seekryt » Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:43 am

MayDayGirl wrote:
Paul B wrote:Your husband wants and needs to see you partially dressed, dressed with a few buttons open, bending over, and fully naked. He needs to see you flashing and teasing and tantalizing him with your body.

Question regarding the above: Is there such a thing as too much of a good thing in this regards? My DH doesn't really like me doing this randomly around the house. If he is in the mood, it is fine. Otherwise, he just thinks it's over the top. And he's never been interested in porn. Maybe he's just not visual??

My DH can feel threatened by this, especially when we first started to become more intimate. He seems/ed to somehow think that I was trying to manipulate him sexually - maybe a holdover from porn? I'm not sure. Personally, I find the tantalizing and teasing part (like brief flashes, bending over etc) to be far more effective than being blatantly naked.
Always know where your towel is.

User avatar
Max Power
Double
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:17 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): July 2nd, 1994
Gender: Male
Location: Springfield, USA

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby Max Power » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:15 pm

Paul B wrote:Finally a word to wives - you have a part to play in this too. Given the world we live in there is no way any man can avoid all sexual noise - so a good strong visual sexual signal from you is vital. Your husband wants and needs to see you partially dressed, dressed with a few buttons open, bending over, and fully naked. He needs to see you flashing and teasing and tantalizing him with your body.


You know, good Christian women (like my wife) are taught modesty growing up and that dressing and acting that way is somehow slutty. This is reinforced by our world through porn, advertising, magazines, and people in general. This really ticks me off! :evil:

Her first reaction to the above quote was negative because of this. When I explained that it was only for me, in private, and that there is nothing slutty or wrong with it, then she understood. Apparently, women also need to keep the signal to noise ratio high as well, only the signal is their self-image/esteem.
You don't snuggle with Max Power, you strap yourself in and feel the G's!

User avatar
MayDayGirl
Hammock
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: The Burbs

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby MayDayGirl » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:23 pm

Seekryt wrote:My DH can feel threatened by this, especially when we first started to become more intimate. He seems/ed to somehow think that I was trying to manipulate him sexually - maybe a holdover from porn? I'm not sure.

My DH doesn't feel threatened. I *think* he just doesn't think it's very sexy to act like this 24-7. Like there's a time and a place for that. What I'm really wondering are if there are any men who would think that if their wives were constantly flashing them, etc., the *chase* would be somehow over and LM would not be as thrilling, etc. :?:

deepinlove
Twin size
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:22 am

Postby deepinlove » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:25 pm

I don't know about any other men, but I for one would be more than happy to give it a try and see what affect it had on me. :wink:

User avatar
Max Power
Double
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:17 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): July 2nd, 1994
Gender: Male
Location: Springfield, USA

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby Max Power » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:36 pm

MayDayGirl wrote:What I'm really wondering are if there are any men who would think that if their wives were constantly flashing them, etc., the *chase* would be somehow over and LM would not be as thrilling, etc. :?:


For me it depends on the spirit with which she would do it. If by "constantly flashing" you mean routinely just lifting her shirt without any kind of playfulness, then that would not be thrilling. If though she were to tease me and playfully do things like that, then point me to the bedroom ::luv (or perhaps I will be pointing myself :mrgreen: )
You don't snuggle with Max Power, you strap yourself in and feel the G's!

User avatar
thebigfish
King bed
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:28 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): June 17th, 1978
Gender: Male

Postby thebigfish » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:42 pm

What I'm really wondering are if there are any men who would think that if their wives were constantly flashing them, etc., the *chase* would be somehow over and LM would not be as thrilling, etc.

Not in this house, but there sure are lots of different kinds of people in this world.
thebigfish

User avatar
KyWildcat
Under the stars
Posts: 3354
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:27 am
Date of your marriage (past or future): December 29th, 1990
Gender: Male
Location: The unCommonwealth of Kentucky
Contact:

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby KyWildcat » Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:46 pm

MayDayGirl wrote: What I'm really wondering are if there are any men who would think that if their wives were constantly flashing them, etc., the *chase* would be somehow over and LM would not be as thrilling, etc. :?:

I think daily playful, creative, variety would be GREAT.

KW
Marriage will show your immaturity and selfishness faster than anything on earth. You either grow up or grow apart. It's your choice.

© A Grown Up Marriage
TMB Copyright and Fair Use

User avatar
ddad
Twin size
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 6:49 am
Location: The North

Postby ddad » Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:12 pm

To me this is guys wanting their DW's to DESIRE them and show it often in creative ways.

Signal to noise is a great way of explaining how DH's need to stick to the signal and DW's need to turn it up and drown out the noise!

D

User avatar
majic
Queen bed
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:18 am
Date of your marriage (past or future): June 23rd, 1990
Gender: Male
Location: Great Lakes State

Postby majic » Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:35 am

I think like many men it is difficult not to look. After reading this thread and the gererous husband articles on porn I decided to do the same as what Paul B. wrote on. It also brought back a memory of what DW said to me once. "You don't look at me the way you used to". How right she was. I started to look around quite a bit and my sensory system became cloudy. I wasn't consentrating on just her. Huge, Huge mistake. It has coused us tremendus difficulty in our relationship.

Please pray that I will be able to follow Paul B's example. I am looking forward to seeing my DW the way I used to again.

Thanks,
M

User avatar
niceguy44
King bed
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:43 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): May 7th, 1983
Gender: Male
Location: Where she's touching me with her smile and taking me to paradise
Contact:

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby niceguy44 » Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:47 am

MayDayGirl wrote: What I'm really wondering are if there are any men who would think that if their wives were constantly flashing them, etc., the *chase* would be somehow over and LM would not be as thrilling, etc. :?:


NO WAY!! 8-)

When DW does those things for me, the chase is still very much on! It just makes me happy to see that she is thinking of me like that.

I love for my DW to "bring the noise" for me. It cancels out any other noise I might detect. In fact, I find it makes the "chase" more fun. I can be much more creative about "chasing" her when she does that, and increase the "thrill" of LM.
***niceguy44***
Proverbs 3:5-6

Show me your friends, and I'll show you your future...

User avatar
Leah
Under the stars
Posts: 15911
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:42 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): November 3rd, 1979
Gender: Female
Location: The Volunteer State

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby Leah » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:00 am

Paul B wrote:Finally a word to wives - you have a part to play in this too. Given the world we live in there is no way any man can avoid all sexual noise - so a good strong visual sexual signal from you is vital. Your husband wants and needs to see you partially dressed, dressed with a few buttons open, bending over, and fully naked. He needs to see you flashing and teasing and tantalizing him with your body. I know, I know, you don't like to do this because you are overweight, or your breasts are too small, or your belly button is ugly or your labia are uneven, or your butt is too big. Three words for you - GET OVER IT! You have things none of the noise has - you are his loving wife, his willing sex partner, the woman he has great sex with. These things multiply the effect of your signal more than you can imagine.

Respectfully disagree on this point.

When a man exposes himself to so much noise over the years, he begins to lose his hearing. My husband does not look at me, talk to me, or touch me in any sexual way. I get a peck on the cheek in the morning and one before bed. Maybe a hug once in a while. My husband no longer sees or hears appropriate signals, no matter how strong they are.

If I had not taken the initiative, our sex life would have died altogether about 8 years ago. He finally pushed me away almost a year ago.

Pornography is not a wife's issue. It is only the issue of the addict. My attempt to control the addict is futile because I am powerless over what someone else craves. Until the addict gets help and renews his mind, he will not hear the signals right in front of him. He will only hear the noise.

Pornography is like a computer virus that corrupts everything it touches. It short circuits a man's wiring, and ruins relationships.

It is entirely appropriate to encourage wives in healthy marriages to visually stimuate their husbands. But for those of us who are married to men who have deafened themselves, it's pointless and only piles on to the guilt none of us deserve.
Leah

“I have learned now that while those who speak about one's miseries usually hurt, those who keep silence hurt more.”--C.S. Lewis


TMB Copyright and Fair Use

User avatar
King Charming
Hammock
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 8:55 pm

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby King Charming » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:38 am

If you're not a wife in a healthy marriage, why do you feel like undeserved guilt is being piled upon you?

I've been following this thread too, but have declined to share my enthusiasm for it's point. I don't fit in the neat and tidy box either. I agree with the paradigm. I am quite able -- despite having been exposured to porn -- to tune in to my DW's signal. I've found that the analogy Paul has articulated holds true. Yet I've also mostly tuned out. In some marriages the "signal" is a siren song. When I tune in to my DW and allow her song to draw me in, I often find that I'm left hard aground on the rocks -- often enough that I've learned to tune her out.

Paul's analogy and advice is excellent. The fact that I can't live by it causes me no feelings of guilt.
Princes don't have to change diapers and wash dishes.

User avatar
KyWildcat
Under the stars
Posts: 3354
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:27 am
Date of your marriage (past or future): December 29th, 1990
Gender: Male
Location: The unCommonwealth of Kentucky
Contact:

Postby KyWildcat » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:46 am

Leah,

This is primarily for the husband. Telling them to "tune into their wife" and to "tune out the sexual distractions around you." The small portion mentions the wife increasing her signal only works if the husband is "tuning into his wife." I'm sorry you chose to interpret it the way you did because this analogy works very well for men who are willing.

Blessings!
KW
Marriage will show your immaturity and selfishness faster than anything on earth. You either grow up or grow apart. It's your choice.

© A Grown Up Marriage
TMB Copyright and Fair Use

plainsofabraham

Postby plainsofabraham » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:08 am

Leah's experience is specific.

I am in a situation that is pretty much opposite. DW gives me absolutely zero signal. Of course, DW expects 100% purity from me but gives me no armor. I have to be watchful ONLY FOR MYSELF.

I think the bible is pretty specific and that 1cor7 applies even to this topic. It is a responsibility of a spouse to do what they can to keep the other from the temptation of sexual immorality. OF COURSE, that means that sexual immorality cannot be used to accomplish this.

User avatar
Leah
Under the stars
Posts: 15911
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:42 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): November 3rd, 1979
Gender: Female
Location: The Volunteer State

Re: Signal to noise ratio - follow up

Postby Leah » Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:15 am

King Charming wrote:If you're not a wife in a healthy marriage, why do you feel like undeserved guilt is being piled upon you?

For the simple reason that this thinking perpetuates the idea that somehow a wife is responsible for her husband's addiction to pornography. Addiction is nobody's responsibility except the addict's. When a person is in full-blown addiction mode, he can do little else but fix on his habit. Drugs, alcohol, gambling, pornography--they become the only thing the addict sees and hears.
Leah

“I have learned now that while those who speak about one's miseries usually hurt, those who keep silence hurt more.”--C.S. Lewis


TMB Copyright and Fair Use

elfryng

Postby elfryng » Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:00 pm

On the subject of a wife "increasing her signal"

I am in the happy position of informing you that both Leah and those who favor the usefulness of the above mentioned concept.

An addict can only blame himself or herself for his addiction. Paul's words were meant, I think, to encourage wives to encourage their husbands to be pure. If that was not his meaning, than my post is rendered inert. However, if I have guessed correctly the some of his intent, than there can be no more argument on the subject. The tactics listed by Paul are, in general, exceedingly helpful for use on most males of this species. But one easily infers that there are obviously many more ways to encourage this pure behavior in husbands like myself. Leah brings up an incredibly valid point though. One, which finds roots in the words of another more widely acclaimed Paul who wrote in our bible that we are to teach those who will listen, and to not waist time imparting instructions to those who are committed to ignoring them.

In conclusion, I think no man could do better than to have an encouraging wife. And I feel personally that I need to endeavour to deserve this angel God gave me. And if that means looking only to her to please my eyes, than I think she is deserving of that and more. If your love for your bride is anything like mine is, and I pray always will be, than the implementation of the OP's analogy can bring only good.

P.S. If you who are reading this are like Leah's husband, be warned. God does not suffer his daughters to be taken lightly. Treat your wife just as you would any other gift from the most important person in the universe.

Proverbs 5:15-20

User avatar
Leah
Under the stars
Posts: 15911
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:42 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): November 3rd, 1979
Gender: Female
Location: The Volunteer State

Postby Leah » Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:36 pm

elfryng wrote: P.S. If you who are reading this are like Leah's husband, be warned. God does not suffer his daughters to be taken lightly. Treat your wife just as you would any other gift from the most important person in the universe. Proverbs 5:15-20

Thank you very much for this encouragement.
Leah

“I have learned now that while those who speak about one's miseries usually hurt, those who keep silence hurt more.”--C.S. Lewis


TMB Copyright and Fair Use

User avatar
Seekryt
On the floor
Posts: 1695
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:29 pm
Date of your marriage (past or future): July 4th, 1999
Gender: Female
Location: Alberta, Canada

Postby Seekryt » Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:42 pm

elfryng wrote:P.S. If you who are reading this are like Leah's husband, be warned. God does not suffer his daughters to be taken lightly. Treat your wife just as you would any other gift from the most important person in the universe. Proverbs 5:15-20

I was thinking - wouldn't it be nice if THIS is what we wives could broadcast? Just right into their heads... :wink:
Always know where your towel is.


Return to “Pornography”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users