Get Real! This Is What Sexual Incompatibility Looks Like

Heather Corinna

Someone telling you they don't want to be intimate and that they don't like it when you do sexual activities for them is usually telling you quite clearly that they just are not feeling it with you when it comes to sex.

haiguyz asks:

My partner
seems to pick and choose when she wants to fool around with me.
Whenever I want to do anything, she doesn’t, and if I get her to do
anything, she complains the whole way through. When she gives me head,
if I suggest things to do, she gives me an evil look, and tells me to
shut up, like she’s being humiliated. But just a few days ago, she took
me into my room and gave me head without me even asking or suggesting
in any way! She once told me she doesn’t like for me to do anything to
her or vice versa, but this just confuses me. I know it sounds like I’m
pushing her to do these things, but I have nothing but the utmost
respect for her. I just would like to be intimate with her more often.
When I tell her this, she brings up that she doesn’t really like
intimacy. I’m so confused!

Heather Corinna replies:

A lot of what I’m reading in your post suggests to me that you two are just not in a good place for sex together right now.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

Someone telling you they don’t want to be intimate, that they don’t
like it when you do sexual activities for them, that they don’t like to
do them for you is usually telling you quite clearly that they just are
not feeling it with you when it comes to sex, and that you two are not
a good sexual match. Partners pushing or coercing each other into sex
makes clear that one or both partners are not treating one another with
respect or care and aren’t really connecting with each other deeply. In
other words, it seems very clear to me you two probably are just not
compatible to a degree where some stuff that really is not okay has
been going on.

It’s rare for me to tell anyone that I just don’t think them having
sex, or having sex with someone else, is the right choice. As an
outsider, it’s precarious to make that kind of call, especially without
a lot of talking and personal history. But in this case, I feel pretty
strongly that is the best answer. I think either you two should not be
sexual with each other anymore altogether, or that you both need to
work a whole lot on your communication skills together much more first,
putting sex on the shelf until you do that work and make some real

So you can have a better sense of what I’m observing, let me give
you an idea of what healthy dynamics would look like with some of these

1. You want to do something sexual, and suggest doing it to your
partner. She doesn’t want to do that, or doesn’t want to be sexual at
that time, period. So you drop it. You do not keep asking or
pushing or "get" her to do that thing. You drop it and either suggest
other things, and either find something you both DO want to do or you
accept that when you can’t find something you both want to do, sex just
isn’t going to happen that day.

2. She chooses to have oral sex with you. You make a suggestion
about what feels best to you; what you like. She either then tries what
you suggest, or if for whatever reason, she doesn’t want to try that
thing, she nixes your suggestion in a way that’s kind and caring.
Telling someone to shut up or giving them dirty looks is not kind or
caring. If this is about her feeling she likes sex best when you do
most of your verbal communicating before any kind of sex or after, she
can say that, and you can work with that and talk about the things you
like in advance, but a partner should also always be able to speak up
during sex to suggest something, voice when something does or does not
feel god, or ask to press pause or stop with sex.

3. She discovers she’d like to give you oral sex, and takes you into
your room. She either suggests oral sex in advance of taking you or
says something like, "I’d like to give you oral sex," when you get in
there, looking to you to either consent to that or not. If you do not
consent to it, verbally, or with other kinds of cues you both know by
now to mean consent, she drops it. If she would like to arrange to do
something like that without any words, she has the option of asking you
a week, a day, or hours in advance if she can do that sometime, and you
two can arrange some other kind of cue so she can know you are or are
not consenting at that time. Over time in a relationship you’ll often
get to a point where both of you have nonverbal cues you know well to
mean consent or nonconsent, so you might not always need to discuss it,
but you still both need to be assuring consent before you move forward
with anything sexual.

4. You want sex more often than she does. So you accept that at a
time when any of us are the partner who wants sex more frequently, we
need to defer to the partner’s pace who wants it less frequently.
Otherwise, we’re forcing or pressuring someone to have sex when they
don’t want to — which means they are NOT fully consenting — or to
have sex out of feelings of obligation, rather than desire. If you
discover you’re in a sexual partnership with someone who just wants sex
way less often than works for you, you either accept their frequency as
what the deal is or know that that relationship just isn’t going to meet your own needs and seek out partners who match you better in that way.

Everyone should pick and choose — and have the right to pick and choose — when they do and don’t have sex with a partner.

No person in a sexual partnership should ever feel they should or
must have sex whenever the other partner wants to: we have sex with a
partner when both of us feel a mutual, shared desire to do so. For
partners who really do want to be sexual with one another, and who want
similar things — a similar frequency of sex, a handful of sexual
activities they both mutually enjoy, a general sexual dynamic of that
works and feels authentic for both — even though there will be times
when one partner wants to be sexual and another doesn’t, often those
times will overlap and intersect enough to leave everyone satisfied
with the relationship. When people in sexual relationship aren’t
similar in those ways, it’s going to be really tough to have a sexual
relationship that works well for everyone involved.

I want to make sure this is clear: consent is not a no or a maybe.
Nor is it someone caving into another person nagging, whining,
pressuring, goading or pushing for sex. Consent is a big, fat, sure,
clear YES. If either one of you are continuing or trying to continue
sex with the other with anything but that sure yes, what you’re doing
is NOT consensual, and is potentially abuse or rape. This is not a
minor thing or a whatever: this is very serious business. To give real
consent, someone needs to be able to make decisions about sex without
any feelings of pressure. No always needs to be just as okay an answer
as yes, even if someone has to manage feelings of disappointment.

I also want to make clear that a partner telling another partner to
shut up when they are trying to communicate about sex is not healthy.
Certainly, sometimes people do that playfully — some folks use "shut
up" in a casual way — but this isn’t sounding like it was playful or
like it feels playful to you. Not getting someone’s consent with a
sexual activity, such as her pulling you into a room and just moving
forward if you didn’t want that and give her clear verbal or visual
cues you did, is also not okay, and may not have been consensual.

It may just be that you two are very different people sexually, or
at very different places in your sexuality, so it could be that the WAY
you are giving her cues during oral sex, for instance, isn’t a way she
likes or is receptive to. For instance, even something like the
language we use to talk about sex can be something one partner loves,
and another partner really dislikes. I don’t know what it is you have
been expressing to her during oral sex. What you’re asking might be
something like suggesting she move a bit more slowly or quickly, or
suggesting she focus on one area of your genitals rather than another,
which most people (who earnestly want to be sexual with you) should
receive positively. On the other hand, if you’re barking orders at her,
or using language for sex she finds offensive or a turnoff, or asking
her to do things she’s already told you she doesn’t like doing and
doesn’t want to do, that certainly may be part of that problematic
dynamic. In other words, she may look humiliated because she feels
humiliated. Some of her actions may also be because she feels like she
wants to initiate sex more, or call her own shots more in your sex
life, too. If that’s the case, that could also be why she’s behaving
the way she is: she may feel there’s not enough space for her to be the
driver in your sexual relationship. Of course, if you’re not always
really getting her consent, what happened with her doing something
without yours may have been something she assumed was okay because it
seems to her to be how you do things with her.

However, in a healthy relationship that’s something she should feel free to tell you, and should
tell you, and then you two can figure out healthy ways you both feel
good about to change those dynamics. In a healthy relationship, we
don’t just react: we reflect, communicate and respond thoughtfully. But
what I suspect is that the issue is bigger than that.

My feeling is that one or both of you aren’t quite ready for
partnered sex, or not with each other, anyway. To be honest, while I
hear you saying you respect her, I’m getting the feeling you two don’t
really even like each other very much: these scenarios just don’t sound
to me like those of two people who truly like each other. They look a
lot more like two people at odds with one another, and who are in a
power struggle.

I want to acknowledge that management skills for our sexuality and
sexual lives aren’t something we’re born with, but skills we learn. No
one can expect anyone to just have these skills or be an ace with them
right off the bat, nor to learn them in environments or relationships
which don’t nurture them. Sometimes we may have excellent models for
these skills, but more times than not in our cultures, people have not
had good or healthy modeling around sex. If one or both of your
families or communities just never talked to either of you about how to
manage your sexuality or sexual relationships, or about sex at all, and
all of your information on that has come from your peers — who often
also don’t magically have these skills, and also who often aren’t
honest with each other about their sex lives — or the media, chances
are good the modeling you have had hasn’t been healthy, sound or

One or both of you also may have had models that enabled certain
unhealthy behaviors around or ideas about sex a lot people presume to
be healthy, normal or just "how it is," when, in fact, some of that
stuff isn’t healthy, isn’t likely to lead to a mutually satisfying sex
life with someone, and certainly isn’t how it has to be. For example,
your girlfriend may have gotten modeling that says that talking during
sex isn’t sexy or okay, even though people in healthy, satisfying
relationships talk about sex and during sex all the time. She may have
gotten modeling that says consent from men isn’t something women need
to obtain. You may have gotten some modeling which suggests that it’s
okay or normal to have to goad women into sex, or that men should
expect women to be available for sex whenever men want them to be:
those, too, are not healthy models which lead to a satisfying,
equitable sex life with a partner.

Breaking silences around sexuality and starting to have real, honest
and open conversations about sex with friends, partners, parents and
good mentors, and unlearning poor modeling takes effort, time and life
experience: more of all three than many young people have had the
chance to have yet. There’s a long learning curve with all of this, and
sometimes any two people just aren’t at a point in that learning curve
where partnered sex, or certain kinds of partnered sex are wise or
likely to be positive. My feeling is that one or both of you have more
learning to do, and more skills and tools for managing your sexual life
and sexual communication before sex with each other or other partners
is going to be the good stuff.

I know some people have this idea that at a certain age, everyone is
ready for partnersex, but I just don’t agree. I say that because I
noticed you’re 19, so you might feel like what I’m saying is about
teens younger than you. The thing is, how old we are only has so much
to do with all of this. It also doesn’t have much to do with if we and
someone else are a good fit together. While some people at 19 — or 29,
or 59 — have unpacked negative modeling or yucky sexual dynamics, many
others have not. We all have our own learning curve, and the dynamics
of our relationships all differ depending on who is in them and what
that unique alchemy is like. I’m saying what I am not based on your
age, but on my perceptions of where you both may be at from information
you gave me in your question.

So, what are your options?

Do you two have a good relationship otherwise? When we’re not
dealing with sex, do you earnestly care for one another and both really
enjoy the time you spend together? Do you have lots of areas of common
interest, and also find that what both of you want and need in a
romantic relationship are in alignment? If and when you have any kind
of disagreement or conflict in other areas, do you communicate openly
and well together and find that you can resolve disputes in ways both
of you feel good about and satisfied with? Do you talk deeply about
other things, and connect deeply in other areas of your relationship?

If you answered yes to all or most of those questions, you might be
able to resolve these issues in time if you’re both committed to
changing the current dynamics and working through this together.

To do that, you’d want to start by bringing all the things I’m
telling you here — and the thoughts of your own they inspired — to
the table with her and do some real talking about it, probably having
more than just one talk. You’ll want to discuss issues like consent and
how both of you should be obtaining and respecting it, as well as
better and more compassionate communication, making clear both are
seriously important and necessary. It would be a good idea for each of
you to talk about your expectations around sex, what you feel you each
want and need, like and dislike. You should take responsibility for any
of your own behavior which may not have been healthy, such as if you
have been pushing her to do things sometimes when she has already said
no. She, ideally, will responsibility for hers, too, such as owning up
to the fact that telling you to shut up during sex isn’t okay. Then you
both can create some solid agreements around all of this. Those
agreements would include things like being clear that neither of you is
ever obligated to be sexual with the other when you don’t want
to, that one no is all either of you will ever need, that both will
always seek out and ask for consent, that you will both talk more about
all of this from here on out, and try to do so in a way that helps
develop communication rather than shutting it down.

While couples are working out major sexual problems, I feel it’s
best to take sex off the table while doing that. It’s just too hard to
try and talk through all of this stuff and create new patterns while
you’re still participating in the old ones, and it generally is going
to take time to get to a new place. Until you do get to that place, I
just don’t see the sex you two will have being a healthy thing. Since
pressure and obligation seem to have been issues, I also think that
you’d both benefit by taking any expectations of sex off the table for
a while so both of you can really develop a feeling of freedom from
those dynamics.

If you guys don’t have such a great relationship outside of sex,
though, you may not be able to do all of those things, or even get your
foot in the door to start working on them together. If that’s the case,
or you feel you can’t even have these talks, or have tried with no
success, I think it’s a good idea for the two of you to put an end to
your sexual relationship, full-stop.

Finding people with whom we are truly compatible in intimate
relationships in often is not easy, and can tend to take a good deal of
trial and error. It’s not like we’re going to be a good match on all
levels with everyone who we like and who likes us back, or to whom
we’re sexually attracted and is also attracted to us. From talking with
young people over the years, I get the impression that some think that
if any two people find one another physically attractive, both want to
be "in a relationship" (I put that in quotes because it’s not like that
means the same thing to everyone), and both are available, that’s about
all that is required for everything to be hunky-dory.

But that’s the stuff that only just opens the door to a relationship being a possibility,
not what makes for the right ones, for healthy ones, for those which
meet everyone’s wants and needs. For that, you have to have a lot of
your wants and needs in alignment, to be in a similar emotional and
intellectual place in your lives and development, to create and nurture
solid and deep communication. That’s why we tend to talk about dating
as a process, and separate dating from committed or long-term
relationships we pursue and build — if we want to — when all of that
is going on.

While that process can be frustrating and lonely at times, it is
what it is. We can’t make a house that will withstand time and the
elements without good raw materials and quality construction, and the
same goes for relationships.

I’d suggest reading through all of this again, including your own
words here, because I think even if I hadn’t answered, the information
you need is something you already had. You knew from the get-go, after
all, that what’s been going on hasn’t been working, big-time. Then give
yourself some time to figure out what the best route is going to be for
you: you might want to think about this on your own for a little while,
maybe even asking your girlfriend for a few days or weeks apart so you
can do that. I’d also suggest you trust your intuition when it comes to
if this earnestly feels like a quality, healthy relationship to you.

I’ll leave you with a few extra links I hope will be useful for you
in thinking about this, making your decisions about this relationship,
and in communicating together about this no matter what you decide, as
well as for navigating your sexual relationships in the future. Good
luck sorting everything out, and I hope whatever decisions you both
make get you to a better place.

News Politics

Clinton Campaign Announces Tim Kaine as Pick for Vice President

Ally Boguhn

The prospect of Kaine’s selection has been criticized by some progressives due to his stances on issues including abortion as well as bank and trade regulation.

The Clinton campaign announced Friday that Sen. Tim Kaine (R-VA) has been selected to join Hillary Clinton’s ticket as her vice presidential candidate.

“I’m thrilled to announce my running mate, @TimKaine, a man who’s devoted his life to fighting for others,” said Clinton in a tweet.

“.@TimKaine is a relentless optimist who believes no problem is unsolvable if you put in the work to solve it,” she added.

The prospect of Kaine’s selection has been criticized by some progressives due to his stances on issues including abortion as well as bank and trade regulation.

Kaine signed two letters this week calling for the regulations on banks to be eased, according to a Wednesday report published by the Huffington Post, thereby ”setting himself up as a figure willing to do battle with the progressive wing of the party.”

Charles Chamberlain, executive director of the progressive political action committee Democracy for America, told the New York Times that Kaine’s selection “could be disastrous for our efforts to defeat Donald Trump in the fall” given the senator’s apparent support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Just before Clinton’s campaign made the official announcement that Kaine had been selected, the senator praised the TPP during an interview with the Intercept, though he signaled he had ultimately not decided how he would vote on the matter.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

Kaine’s record on reproductive rights has also generated controversy as news began to circulate that he was being considered to join Clinton’s ticket. Though Kaine recently argued in favor of providing Planned Parenthood with access to funding to fight the Zika virus and signed on as a co-sponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act—which would prohibit states and the federal government from enacting restrictions on abortion that aren’t applied to comparable medical services—he has also been vocal about his personal opposition to abortion.

In a June interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Kaine told host Chuck Todd he was “personally” opposed to abortion. He went on, however, to affirm that he still believed “not just as a matter of politics, but even as a matter of morality, that matters about reproduction and intimacy and relationships and contraception are in the personal realm. They’re moral decisions for individuals to make for themselves. And the last thing we need is government intruding into those personal decisions.”

As Rewire has previously reported, though Kaine may have a 100 percent rating for his time in the Senate from Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the campaign website for his 2005 run for governor of Virginia promised he would “work in good faith to reduce abortions” by enforcing Virginia’s “restrictions on abortion and passing an enforceable ban on partial birth abortion that protects the life and health of the mother.”

As governor, Kaine did support some existing restrictions on abortion, including Virginia’s parental consent law and a so-called informed consent law. He also signed a 2009 measure that created “Choose Life” license plates in the state, and gave a percentage of the proceeds to a crisis pregnancy network.

Regardless of Clinton’s vice president pick, the “center of gravity in the Democratic Party has shifted in a bold, populist, progressive direction,” said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, in an emailed statement. “It’s now more important than ever that Hillary Clinton run an aggressive campaign on core economic ideas like expanding Social Security, debt-free college, Wall Street reform, and yes, stopping the TPP. It’s the best way to unite the Democratic Party, and stop Republicans from winning over swing voters on bread-and-butter issues.”

Roundups Sexual Health

This Week in Sex: The Sexually Transmitted Infections Edition

Martha Kempner

A new Zika case suggests the virus can be transmitted from an infected woman to a male partner. And, in other news, HPV-related cancers are on the rise, and an experimental chlamydia vaccine shows signs of promise.

This Week in Sex is a weekly summary of news and research related to sexual behavior, sexuality education, contraception, STIs, and more.

Zika May Have Been Sexually Transmitted From a Woman to Her Male Partner

A new case suggests that males may be infected with the Zika virus through unprotected sex with female partners. Researchers have known for a while that men can infect their partners through penetrative sexual intercourse, but this is the first suspected case of sexual transmission from a woman.

The case involves a New York City woman who is in her early 20s and traveled to a country with high rates of the mosquito-borne virus (her name and the specific country where she traveled have not been released). The woman, who experienced stomach cramps and a headache while waiting for her flight back to New York, reported one act of sexual intercourse without a condom the day she returned from her trip. The following day, her symptoms became worse and included fever, fatigue, a rash, and tingling in her hands and feet. Two days later, she visited her primary-care provider and tests confirmed she had the Zika virus.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

A few days after that (seven days after intercourse), her male partner, also in his 20s, began feeling similar symptoms. He had a rash, a fever, and also conjunctivitis (pink eye). He, too, was diagnosed with Zika. After meeting with him, public health officials in the New York City confirmed that he had not traveled out of the country nor had he been recently bit by a mosquito. This leaves sexual transmission from his partner as the most likely cause of his infection, though further tests are being done.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s recommendations for preventing Zika have been based on the assumption that virus was spread from a male to a receptive partner. Therefore the recommendations had been that pregnant women whose male partners had traveled or lived in a place where Zika virus is spreading use condoms or abstain from sex during the pregnancy. For those couples for whom pregnancy is not an issue, the CDC recommended that men who had traveled to countries with Zika outbreaks and had symptoms of the virus, use condoms or abstain from sex for six months after their trip. It also suggested that men who traveled but don’t have symptoms use condoms for at least eight weeks.

Based on this case—the first to suggest female-to-male transmission—the CDC may extend these recommendations to couples in which a female traveled to a country with an outbreak.

More Signs of Gonorrhea’s Growing Antibiotic Resistance

Last week, the CDC released new data on gonorrhea and warned once again that the bacteria that causes this common sexually transmitted infection (STI) is becoming resistant to the antibiotics used to treat it.

There are about 350,000 cases of gonorrhea reported each year, but it is estimated that 800,000 cases really occur with many going undiagnosed and untreated. Once easily treatable with antibiotics, the bacteria Neisseria gonorrhoeae has steadily gained resistance to whole classes of antibiotics over the decades. By the 1980s, penicillin no longer worked to treat it, and in 2007 the CDC stopped recommending the use of fluoroquinolones. Now, cephalosporins are the only class of drugs that work. The recommended treatment involves a combination of ceftriaxone (an injectable cephalosporin) and azithromycin (an oral antibiotic).

Unfortunately, the data released last week—which comes from analysis of more than 5,000 samples of gonorrhea (called isolates) collected from STI clinics across the country—shows that the bacteria is developing resistance to these drugs as well. In fact, the percentage of gonorrhea isolates with decreased susceptibility to azithromycin increased more than 300 percent between 2013 and 2014 (from 0.6 percent to 2.5 percent).

Though no cases of treatment failure has been reported in the United States, this is a troubling sign of what may be coming. Dr. Gail Bolan, director of CDC’s Division of STD Prevention, said in a press release: “It is unclear how long the combination therapy of azithromycin and ceftriaxone will be effective if the increases in resistance persists. We need to push forward on multiple fronts to ensure we can continue offering successful treatment to those who need it.”

HPV-Related Cancers Up Despite Vaccine 

The CDC also released new data this month showing an increase in HPV-associated cancers between 2008 and 2012 compared with the previous five-year period. HPV or human papillomavirus is an extremely common sexually transmitted infection. In fact, HPV is so common that the CDC believes most sexually active adults will get it at some point in their lives. Many cases of HPV clear spontaneously with no medical intervention, but certain types of the virus cause cancer of the cervix, vulva, penis, anus, mouth, and neck.

The CDC’s new data suggests that an average of 38,793 HPV-associated cancers were diagnosed each year between 2008 and 2012. This is a 17 percent increase from about 33,000 each year between 2004 and 2008. This is a particularly unfortunate trend given that the newest available vaccine—Gardasil 9—can prevent the types of HPV most often linked to cancer. In fact, researchers estimated that the majority of cancers found in the recent data (about 28,000 each year) were caused by types of the virus that could be prevented by the vaccine.

Unfortunately, as Rewire has reported, the vaccine is often mired in controversy and far fewer young people have received it than get most other recommended vaccines. In 2014, only 40 percent of girls and 22 percent of boys ages 13 to 17 had received all three recommended doses of the vaccine. In comparison, nearly 80 percent of young people in this age group had received the vaccine that protects against meningitis.

In response to the newest data, Dr. Electra Paskett, co-director of the Cancer Control Research Program at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, told HealthDay:

In order to increase HPV vaccination rates, we must change the perception of the HPV vaccine from something that prevents a sexually transmitted disease to a vaccine that prevents cancer. Every parent should ask the question: If there was a vaccine I could give my child that would prevent them from developing six different cancers, would I give it to them? The answer would be a resounding yes—and we would have a dramatic decrease in HPV-related cancers across the globe.

Making Inroads Toward a Chlamydia Vaccine

An article published in the journal Vaccine shows that researchers have made progress with a new vaccine to prevent chlamydia. According to lead researcher David Bulir of the M. G. DeGroote Institute for Infectious Disease Research at Canada’s McMaster University, efforts to create a vaccine have been underway for decades, but this is the first formulation to show success.

In 2014, there were 1.4 million reported cases of chlamydia in the United States. While this bacterial infection can be easily treated with antibiotics, it often goes undiagnosed because many people show no symptoms. Untreated chlamydia can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease, which can leave scar tissue in the fallopian tubes or uterus and ultimately result in infertility.

The experimental vaccine was created by Canadian researchers who used pieces of the bacteria that causes chlamydia to form an antigen they called BD584. The hope was that the antigen could prompt the body’s immune system to fight the chlamydia bacteria if exposed to it.

Researchers gave BD584 to mice using a nasal spray, and then exposed them to chlamydia. The results were very promising. The mice who received the spray cleared the infection faster than the mice who did not. Moreover, the mice given the nasal spray were less likely to show symptoms of infection, such as bacterial shedding from the vagina or fluid blockages of the fallopian tubes.

There are many steps to go before this vaccine could become available. The researchers need to test it on other strains of the bacteria and in other animals before testing it in humans. And, of course, experience with the HPV vaccine shows that there’s work to be done to make sure people get vaccines that prevent STIs even after they’re invented. Nonetheless, a vaccine to prevent chlamydia would be a great victory in our ongoing fight against STIs and their health consequences, and we here at This Week in Sex are happy to end on a bit of a positive note.