Is sex painful for you?

Post Reply New Topic

Do you have family or friends that you can turn to? A job? Community resources to help you care for your kids? Your husband is abusive and the best thing you could do for your kids, if it all possible, is for all of you to get out of that situation.

I have a lot of pain too but mostly in one or two spots during penetration. Nothing we try seems to work. I think I may have had sex once or twice where it wasn't painful but I don't remember what was different. I also feel burning sometimes when he ejaculates so I sometimes ask him to pull out before he does. Does anyone else feel this type of burning?

I also have a very low sex drive and am not really that interested in sex. I would much rather go skiing or something. There are times when I get hormonal and more sexual but that is probably once every month or so and it only lasts a couple of hours.

I have a lot of pain too but mostly in one or two spots during penetration. Nothing we try seems to work. I think I may have had sex once or twice where it wasn't painful but I don't remember what was different. I also feel burning sometimes when he ejaculates so I sometimes ask him to pull out before he does. Does anyone else feel this type of burning?

You may be allergic to his ejaculate. Yes, there is such a thing.

I also have a very low sex drive and am not really that interested in sex. I would much rather go skiing or something. There are times when I get hormonal and more sexual but that is probably once every month or so and it only lasts a couple of hours.

Not to sound to negative, but do you seriously think that you can have a long term relationship with this man, or any man with a normal sex drive? I suppose that it is possible if he is REALLY into you, AND you have an open relationship; that is, with your permission he can address his sexual needs with other women. Otherwise, I do not see how you can avoid relationship failure.

Assuming that there is failure, then the next time, you should try and find a man with a similar low sex drive, and yes they do exist. For the most part, the world is what it is and, as Steve Jobs found out, wishing it were different can work sometimes, but eventually wishing fails.

Did you (the both of you) bother with foreplay first? Because the only times sex hurts for me is when I've gone up a size that I'm not used to, if I'm still bruised from the last time, or if I wasn't physically prepared for sex (i.e. dry). That or if it's anal. Anal hurts most of the time, when I've tried it.

I know this is an old post, but designed by what or whom?

Given that women's vaginas tend to vary in depth and size, then if you're very small then I'd say that you're not 'designed' to be penetrated by a big dick. Same goes for childbirth, it's nearly universally very painful because a human baby's head is so much bigger than a woman's vagina. That's why you often need stitches there afterwards. If there's any design going on, I'd like to sue the designer.

Sorry for the rant, but I don't like this idea that nature is benign and/or knows what it's doing. Nature is just how things are and is basically indifferent to us.

As for myself, I've never had painful sex, but then I've never been with a guy who was bigger than I am down there (not on purpose, it's just the guys I've been with have just happened to be small to average.) I lube up a lot naturally, as well - but if you don't then I guess there's always lube in a tube.

I'm pretty sure the original poster meant "design" in a figurative sense. Yes, of course nature is indifferent to us, but that's not to say that natural phenomena occur simply for the hell of it. And when someone says that a vagina is "designed" to have a penis inserted into it, that doesn't necessarily mean every penis in every vagina.

Regarding the subject of childbirth and the size of infants' heads ... it's an evolutionary tradeoff between prenatal brain development and the ability of women to still be able to walk, given the necessary modifications to pelvic structure. Evolution doesn't select for convenience ... it selects for what keeps the species alive. In this case, the alternative would perhaps be a smaller infant head at the time of birth, but that would mean a longer postnatal development, and thus a longer time before a child would no longer require parental care. Given all the various factors, however, nature apparently "decided" that overall the bigger head worked better for the survival of the human species.

This is just enlightened speculation, of course. Obviously, this is what we've got, so presumably there's a reason for it. And again, I think when people use words like "benign" or "knows what it's doing", they're meant figuratively.

No almost never! The only time it really was the first time after I had a baby.

I don't know what design in a figurative sense means.

Natural phenomena do occur by cause and effect, but mutations and variations amongst a species do take place at random. Just because most women have a body that happens through natural selection to make it reasonably easy to be penetrated and give birth, doesn't mean that some women don't just have exceptionally small vaginas, or the wrong kind of nerve endings down there, or a psychosexual makeup (partly genetic, like homosexuality) that causes them to recoil from being penetrated (that's not me, but I know women like that) or just a body so 'bad' at giving birth that they would probably die if they had to do it (I know women like this, as well.) It's very possible to be that mutant outlier and not follow the 'design'. It would be like if someone told me, you're a human, so you're designed to be especially social because you belong to a social species (I'm autistic, so I'm less social than most homo sapiens - am I 'designed' right?)

As a word, it often carries the implication that if you aren't doing the things you were 'designed' to do, then you are somehow screwing up your life. Like, 'I'm designed to have babies' - no I'm not, I'm just capable of it, unfortunately. I guess I don't like the implication of 'design' because I've sometimes felt in the past that people have used it to judge me on the choices I make. Like nature has replaced God and I'm sinning against it because it has a 'will' that I'm not following. When religious people say 'God makes no mistakes' and people who think nature is sentient may say 'nature makes no mistakes' - I'd argue that it makes a tonne of mistakes if it is at all sentient (which I hope it isn't.) 'Mistakes' and other aberrations are integral to the way evolution works.