# Responsive Desire in Women



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

The link is from the Huffington Post, so I think that we can assume it's not a misogynistic red-pill screed.

The Arousal Principle: The Complexity And Simplicity Of Female Erotic Desire | HuffPost

The main idea is that, while men tend to be about 75% spontaneous desire (they are generally often thinking about and need little encouragement to engage in sex), women are about 75% responsive desire (i.e. "it turns out many people (perhaps especially women) often experience desire as responsive, emerging in response to, rather than in anticipation of, erotic stimulation").

If there's a sexless marriage situation and the wife is the LD, then it would seem that there is a good chance of improving the situation if she does have responsive desire and both the husband and wife learn how to work with it.

Many men are running around thinking that, if their wife isn't initiating, their wife doesn't find them desirable.

Many women may think that because they don't have spontaneous desire, they don't want sex (and that it's wrong to have sex if you don't spontaneously desire it). They can think that they're "broken" or that there's something "missing" from their relationship because they don't feel that way.

I see may situations on TAM that could be due to this, but the advice always seems to be for the husband to improve himself so that his wife desires him or "divorce her and, next time find someone who's more sexually compatible" (although the same thing is likely to happen with his next partner).

I think this is one area where insisting that men and women are exactly the same can get in the way of solving problems.

Thoughts?


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

about 75% of statistics are made up on the spot just to prove some point. including this one and about everything huffington posts.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Mr. Nail said:


> about 75% of statistics are made up on the spot just to prove some point. including this one and about everything huffington posts.


There is quite a bit of evidence for this, not just the Huffington Post.

I wouldn't trust the Huff Post in general, but I wanted a source that was known to be liberal and feminist friendly.

So, I'm guessing that you disagree and believe responsive desire isn't a thing? Or that there's no gender based difference in desire type?


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> The link is from the Huffington Post, so I think that we can assume it's not a misogynistic red-pill screed.
> 
> The Arousal Principle: The Complexity And Simplicity Of Female Erotic Desire | HuffPost
> 
> ...


I think that there is a lot of truth in that.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

My thoughts on the article"
While I agree with Nail (that HuffPost is hardly a legitimate source for much of anything, sexual advice included), this specific article did seem to make some sense. 

But the ultimate conclusion doesn't seem to be any different that of many of the other threads around here lately -- namely, "Men, you need to do more."


My thoughts on your thoughts,


Buddy400 said:


> Many men are running around thinking that, if their wife isn't initiating, their wife doesn't find them desirable.


My observation (which admittedly may be colored by my own experience) is that many men are running around thinking that, if their wife_ constantly turns them down, or reluctantly acquiesces to unenthusiastic sex_, their wife doesn't find them attractive. -- Or that she is simply LD. Either way, the net result is the same. 



Buddy400 said:


> I see may situations on TAM that could be due to this, but the advice always seems to be for the husband to improve himself so that his wife desires him or "divorce her and, next time find someone who's more sexually compatible" (although the same thing is likely to happen with his next partner).
> Thoughts?


I agree. Many are too quick to throw out the baby with the bath water. This article does explain a dynamic many probably aren't aware of, which may help them address the disconnect.




Buddy400 said:


> I think this is one area where insisting that men and women are exactly the same can get in the way of solving problems.
> Thoughts?


Agree 100%.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Lots of variation in humans so while statistics may be a good source if ideas for approaches to try, they are not a good indication of what will actually work in any specific situation.


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

Buddy400;

Since you are a fan of Huf-Po, hear is another possible explanation, one that I don't particularly like.

How Arousal Overrides Disgust During Sex: Study | HuffPost

It basically says some women are disgusted by the "ick" factor associated with sex and that they need to get aroused to the point that they mind surpresses their disgust of having sex.

Another potential explanation is that foreplay releases a variety of "feel good sex hormones" and that is what is really turning a responsive desire woman on and getting her in the mood. There are studies that show Oxytocine, the bonding hormone, will block neural signals that trigger fear and creates a false sense of trust.

My favorite perspective is from David Schnarch (Passionate Marriage, Crucible, etc). He feels that all aspects of marriage are a negotiation of LD/HD partners. One partner may be LD for chocolate ice cream and the other may "need" it three times a day. The HD partner may serve chocolate ice cream for dinner each night, while the LD parnter politely plays with it. The HD partner might even sneak out at lunch for a quick ice cream cone and another one on the commute home. 

Alternately, one partner may be HD for watching professional football on TV. They may need to watch it Monday, Thursday, and Sundays all winter long. The LD football spouse might sit politely and read a book or go to another room. 

The point is that all aspects of marriage involve an imbalance of "desire" that can be labeled HD/LD, whether it is what to have for dinner, what to watch on TV, how often to go to in-laws, invite friends over, to having sex. A solid marriage requires the couple to negotiate a compromise that they can both live with.

That compromise may involve one being forced to do more than they want and the other forced to do less, as in the case of the chocolate ice cream. So the point is it doesn't matter why one is LD as long as they both negotiate what each needs to be happy.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> There is quite a bit of evidence for this, not just the Huffington Post.
> 
> I wouldn't trust the Huff Post in general, but I wanted a source that was known to be liberal and feminist friendly.
> 
> So, I'm guessing that you disagree and believe responsive desire isn't a thing? Or that there's no gender based difference in desire type?


Naw, I just hate the huff. I'm tossed up about responsive desire. It flies in the face of the affirmative consent principle, leads to seduction fantasies, and in specific ends up making me spend hours as an amateur masseuse. Spontaneous desire is more fun, more inviting, and specifically it is what I signed up for 30+ years ago. I often think the whole responsive desire thing is about shuffling off the initiation "Chore" to the man.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Young at Heart said:


> Buddy400;
> 
> Since you are a fan of Huf-Po, hear is another possible explanation, one that I don't particularly like.


Ack! I am not a fan of Huf-Po. :surprise:

When searching for links, I always try to find a reference from a source that agrees with me as little as possible.

If I'm trying to support a conservative point, I think it's more persuasive if I can quote MSNBC instead of Breitbart.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Young at Heart said:


> hear is another possible explanation, one that I don't particularly like.
> 
> How Arousal Overrides Disgust During Sex: Study | HuffPost
> 
> It basically says some women are disgusted by the "ick" factor associated with sex and that they need to get aroused to the point that they mind surpresses their disgust of having sex.


Yeah, if that's the case, then I'd rather put my head in the sand!


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I do think a lot of women have responsive desire. Or maybe a different term meaning they need foreplay that starts during the day. They need something to get them in the mood and thinking about sex cause it's not just automatically there nor can it be turned on with just a sex request. 

If you start during the day she has a lot of time to build up towards getting in the mood


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

I am very familiar with responsive desire. It didn't work with my ex, and almost always works with my wife. On the other hand, much of the time I'm responding to her, as she also has spontaneous desire. Where we're both initiators and responders is my ideal scenario, so this is ideal for us. I'd probably get tired of always having to get her going - and after my experience with my LD ex, it would actually be a turn-off to always have to take the initiative, especially if the effort goes nowhere.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I do think a lot of women have responsive desire. Or maybe a different term meaning they need foreplay that starts during the day. They need something to get them in the mood and thinking about sex cause it's not just automatically there nor can it be turned on with just a sex request.
> 
> If you start during the day she has a lot of time to build up towards getting in the mood


The problem often is that they need to welcome (or at least accept) the foreplay.

It seems that what often happens is that they avoid or deflect the foreplay (verbal or otherwise) since they know that it might lead to sex which, at the time (before responsive desire has a chance to work), they don't want.

It would take an active effort on the part of the woman (in this case) to give responsive desire a chance to work.

What might prompt that effort? Hopefully the knowledge that her husband is unhappy and it's hurting the marriage (if she doesn't care about those two things, then responsive desire isn't the problem).


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

I'm both and I think MrH is too. Similar to the description given by Mr and Mrs MBH


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Just like visual porn can give men unrealistic expectations of what sex is like in a real world marriage.

Romance novels can do the same for women.

Responsive sexual desire who doesn't have it. If your wife came on to you and started kissing and rubbing on you would you not desire to have sex?

Just an excuse to not have to put themselve out there fear of rejection .
Much eaiser to wait until you come on to them.


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

I feel that "responsive desire" is a way of passing the buck. It removes responsibility from one party and places it on the other.

"I want to have sex with you, only if you show me you want to have sex with me," is a bull**** line, making someone else responsible for your actions.

My wife said one time that she wants me to chase her. However, she constantly puts out signs that she is not interested, doesn't want to be chased, and is not in the mood for sex. So, it is also my responsibility to fight through all of her obstacles, ignore her words, actions, facial expressions, and just force myself on her. Then, then after that, she might be into it enough to move a little while I do all of the work.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> Just like visual porn can give men unrealistic expectations of what sex is like in a real world marriage.
> 
> Romance novels can do the same for women.
> 
> ...


*So what about men, and even women for that matter, who absolutely will not "come onto" their mate, primarily out of their sheer fear of being summarily rejected because of any previous episodes of their mates abject rejection of them?*


----------



## TJW (Mar 20, 2012)

My W has now been given the "perfect" excuse. Armed with this information, she can avoid the truth.... that I'm just not her type, there were (and are) other men she wanted to have sex with, but she chose to marry me because of my "qualities", meaning that I had attributes they didn't, like the willingness to work and earn a living, the ability to make a good one, the reasonable devotion to family life.

In other words, her marriage was all a selfish, self-seeking endeavor. She wanted the 1-1-2 baths, the 2.4 children, and the white picket fence. I was the "ticket". Sex was "not important" compared to the OTHER aspects of marriage.

But now, thanks to the prevaricating salesmanship of a major magazine, she can now BLAME ME for her own selfishness, and assuage her guilt for not caring about my needs. It's, of course, still true that I'm a geek and that she isn't interested in sex with me, but now she has the PERFECT reason for it to be "duty" sex when I initiate. Now she can say "that's just the way I am".



tasorundo said:


> So, it is also my responsibility to fight through all of her obstacles, ignore her words, actions, facial expressions, and just force myself on her. Then, then after that, she might be into it enough to move a little while I do all of the work.


Exactly. Perfectly said.



arbitrator said:


> So what about men, and even women for that matter, who absolutely will not "come onto" their mate, primarily out of their sheer fear of being summarily rejected because of any previous episodes of their mates abject rejection of them?


They are like me. They can go to hell in a rowboat. Their spouse now has the "perfect" way to opt out of ever having sex again. She has "responsive desire", and I don't want to initiate because of the pain of rejection.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Thoughts?


In my marriage I have struggled with things, and read books on sexuality by those with a PHD. 

It is probably NOT a good idea to generalize that the majority of women have a responsive desire. It is however healthy to assume that everyone's model of sexuality works differently (regardless of gender). Too often we compare our own sexuality to the model presented to us by the porn industry. When our bodies or that of our spouse do not work the same way, we assume something is wrong or broken. The first response from that comparison is to send someone with a challenging libido to the doctor as if they are broken and need to be fixed. This in turn is a form of rejection instead of acceptance and it serves to be very harmful in relationships. 

So the truth is that regardless of gender, everyone's sexuality is a little different. Comparing to a model or expected standard will likely be harmful. The thing to ask is if you can accept your spouse just the way they are and make them feel loved. 

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

My theory is that women learn early on to deflect sexual advances and distrust the person who is making them --- basically because from the age of about 12 we have to spend half our lives (or more) doing this.

As a woman who does experience sexual hunger, my experience was that this was extremely dangerous, and got me into all sorts of trouble that most women would not want to be a part of. 

I am still "spontaneous" despite that. But I can certainly see why many women would decide that really, it's a feeling best quashed and deflected.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Tasorundo said:


> I feel that "responsive desire" is a way of passing the buck. It removes responsibility from one party and places it on the other.
> 
> "I want to have sex with you, only if you show me you want to have sex with me," is a bull**** line, making someone else responsible for your actions.
> 
> My wife said one time that she wants me to chase her. However, she constantly puts out signs that she is not interested, doesn't want to be chased, and is not in the mood for sex. So, it is also my responsibility to fight through all of her obstacles, ignore her words, actions, facial expressions, and just force myself on her. Then, then after that, she might be into it enough to move a little while I do all of the work.


Sure, it's effect is to "pass the buck". 

But, if it's true that this is normal for 75% of women (most men have spontaneous desire), then you can't just wish it away.

This doesn't mean that the woman get's a pass from having any responsibility for a good sex life. 

I imagine it's her responsibility to consciously decide to give responsive desire a chance to work.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

TJW said:


> My W has now been given the "perfect" excuse. Armed with this information, she can avoid the truth.... that I'm just not her type, there were (and are) other men she wanted to have sex with, but she chose to marry me because of my "qualities", meaning that I had attributes they didn't, like the willingness to work and earn a living, the ability to make a good one, the reasonable devotion to family life.
> 
> In other words, her marriage was all a selfish, self-seeking endeavor. She wanted the 1-1-2 baths, the 2.4 children, and the white picket fence. I was the "ticket". Sex was "not important" compared to the OTHER aspects of marriage.
> 
> But now, thanks to the prevaricating salesmanship of a major magazine, she can now BLAME ME for her own selfishness, and assuage her guilt for not caring about my needs. It's, of course, still true that I'm a geek and that she isn't interested in sex with me, but now she has the PERFECT reason for it to be "duty" sex when I initiate. Now she can say "that's just the way I am".


It's interesting in that most of what I read about responsive desire in women (generally in magazines aimed at women), the main point is to convince the woman that her situation is "normal" and that she's not "broken".

While I'm fine with that, I don't always see where it's recommended that a solution is for the woman, recognizing the condition, needs to make a conscious decision to be open to a sexual encounter even if she's not initially "in the mood".

Identifying responsive desire can be either an excuse or vital information used to improve the situation.

I think I'd be better off if my wife recognized that she had responsive desire than if she thought she had no desire at all!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> My theory is that women learn early on to deflect sexual advances and distrust the person who is making them --- basically because from the age of about 12 we have to spend half our lives (or more) doing this.
> 
> As a woman who does experience sexual hunger, my experience was that this was extremely dangerous, and got me into all sorts of trouble that most women would not want to be a part of.
> 
> I am still "spontaneous" despite that. But I can certainly see why many women would decide that really, it's a feeling best quashed and deflected.


Responsive desire isn't often a problem in the early stages of a relationship. NRE usually results in women having spontaneous desire.

Responsive desire usually only comes into play in LTRs.

It seems that Responsive Desire is an issue when the danger element is at a minimum.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

badsanta said:


> In my marriage I have struggled with things, and read books on sexuality by those with a PHD.
> 
> It is probably NOT a good idea to generalize that the majority of women have a responsive desire. It is however healthy to assume that everyone's model of sexuality works differently (regardless of gender). Too often we compare our own sexuality to the model presented to us by the porn industry. When our bodies or that of our spouse do not work the same way, we assume something is wrong or broken. The first response from that comparison is to send someone with a challenging libido to the doctor as if they are broken and need to be fixed. This in turn is a form of rejection instead of acceptance and it serves to be very harmful in relationships.
> 
> ...


If you're a car mechanic and someone brings in a car with a problem that you know is caused 75% of the time by a broken widget, you'd be an idiot not to take that information into account.

Now, if it's your car and you've been servicing it for years, maybe you focus more on the particular car and the general information about widgets and the problem you're having become less important.


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

Ok Buddy, then I am going to say it is the 75% of women's fault for not kindling their SO's spontaneous desire.

I would love to chase my wife, if she was actually looking to be chased.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Buddy400 said:


> The problem often is that they need to welcome (or at least accept) the foreplay.
> 
> It seems that what often happens is that they avoid or deflect the foreplay (verbal or otherwise) since they know that it might lead to sex which, at the time (before responsive desire has a chance to work), they don't want.
> 
> ...


Oh god, this x 1000.

It's like an extra layer of responsive desire to get through to the actual responsive desire. It's a freakin' circle sometimes.

"I have to be in the mood to be put in the mood". Sigh.

I've had this convo with my wife a few times. She didn't know what RD was until I explained it to her. Even showed her a TED talk on the subject. She was like "oh yeah, totally! I didn't know this was a thing, and now I do!" (not an actual quote). Did it change a thing? Good lord no!

I did eventually tell her, you know... in order to let your responsive desire actually work, you have to... allow it to work.

Instead, 8 or 9 x out of 10, she kyboshes it AS IT'S HAPPENING. And it's not like I'm trying to get with her twice a day, or even once a day.

And the thing is, she KNOWS what she's doing, lol! She knows that she'd get into it (most of the time) and everybody's happy, la la la. But it ends up being not even allowing me to try to get her to that point for god-knows-what-reason-I-don't-want-to-have-sex-now-or-in-4-hours-so-****-you.

 :|


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

If a woman I'm dating/married turns out to only have responsive desire, we won't be dating/married long. If she also puts up additional barriers, I'll develop spontaneous desire to be somewhere _else_. It would bring up so many traumatic memories and associations, that it would trigger my flight response.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

wild jade said:


> My theory is that women learn early on to deflect sexual advances and distrust the person who is making them --- basically because from the age of about 12 we have to spend half our lives (or more) doing this.
> 
> As a woman who does experience sexual hunger, my experience was that this was extremely dangerous, and got me into all sorts of trouble that most women would not want to be a part of.
> 
> I am still "spontaneous" despite that. But I can certainly see why many women would decide that really, it's a feeling best quashed and deflected.


I think this is a really interesting point.

I understand trust in your partner obviously plays a part in responsive desire. However, this post indicates that there may be a lack of trust in yourself as well. In other words, you've made enough mistakes with sexual vulnerability that a part of you doesn't trust yourself to continue doing it.

Am I misreading it?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I think the chase and day long foreplay is quite fun and luckily my bf agrees. He constantly talks about sex with me, keeping me in the mood, telling me how much he wants me, sending pics. When together he touches me always. Kisses me deep, pushing me up against the wall while I'm getting us coffee. Tells me how we're going to do it later. 

Because he's always working to amp me up, I'm always turned on. 

Some women have a very hard time going from 0 to turned on with just a request to have sex. They go from Mom and house cleaner to bed and get asked for sex. Well, they aren't in the mood. 

Is it really such a hard task to put in some effort to rev her up during the day? 

Some women do like a little push, commanding, etc. Should be something you can work with to both be happy without it seeming like a chore


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

The problem isn't putting in work. The problem is that it has been 22 years of putting in work, how much work should one do, when there is little to no reward for it?

Like I said before, I would love to chase my wife, if she responded to, or wanted to be chased. If she wants me to just dominate her, I think that could have come up in the 22 years as well.

To many men (I think it is mostly men here that have balked) it is just a constantly moving goal post. A carrot on a stick.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

A lot depends on how it's done, if you only touch her and flirt and show attention when you're trying to get sex. 

A booty grab while she's doing dishes can either me super hot or super annoying and a lot of things can change which one it is. 

I get that is frustrating but there are tons of fun things to do during the day and I think they should be done not just when you are hoping for sex but daily, regardless, because flirting and touching and kissing and texting during the day should be done always and not just when you want action. Keeps you close and keeps her knowing you don't just show attention when you want to get laid


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

Hey, the goal posts are over there now! I am on it!


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

After 20 years of us being nicely matched her drive tanked after menopause and her desire became responsive. I've finally come to accept that, mainly because I've finally come to realize she doesn't say no or make excuses. The one thing she asks is that I let her know in advance so she can get herself ready.

When the time comes she is usually good to go, but a couple of times a month she'll let me know she not into it yet. Usually we'll still have "naked time", basically foreplay, but without an expectation of sex. If she gets into it (50/50) great but if not I'm OK finishing myself off onto her boobs while she provides the eye candy.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Tasorundo said:


> Hey, the goal posts are over there now! I am on it!


But those are just goals of a healthy marriage. Touching and kissing and flirting not just when there's a sex expectation should be a given. If it's not already done then it's a lot harder to get to the point where you can both be sexual together.


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

To be honest, I am kind of at a point where I am done with it. I have no expectation of a satisfying sex life with my wife. I know that she loves me and I know that she would like to provide it, but she can/will not.

We have been through numerous things/books/counselors over the years. The only time our sex life improved was after I had a ONS and confessed the next time I saw her. About 3 months after it got better, it fell in a hole and has never come out.

I have played a part in all of this, and my ONS is completely on me. Our poor sex life is not all her fault, and my ONS is absolutely not her fault.

She knows that it slowly kills my spirit, but ultimately, nothing gets done about it.

She may just have responsive desire, it just doesn't respond to me.


----------



## *Deidre* (Feb 7, 2016)

People should stop talking and writing about it so much, and just do it. So many couples talking and talking and talking about their sex lives. Just do it!!! Stop over thinking sex so much, and what women want and don't want ...not all women are alike, nor men. I'm so over ''studies'' that present a few women in a controlled study, and act like we're all alike.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

*Deidre* said:


> People should stop talking and writing about it so much, and just do it. So many couples talking and talking and talking about their sex lives. Just do it!!! Stop over thinking sex so much, and what women want and don't want ...not all women are alike, nor men. I'm so over ''studies'' that present a few women in a controlled study, and act like we're all alike.


Typical woman response  J/K

Reading TAM I learned I'm really fortunate that we can openly and easily talk about sex, especially when just doing it is just not working (not just mismatched drives). Communication is important, and I'd say especially about sex.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I think the chase and day long foreplay is quite fun and luckily my bf agrees. He constantly talks about sex with me, keeping me in the mood, telling me how much he wants me, sending pics. When together he touches me always. Kisses me deep, pushing me up against the wall while I'm getting us coffee. Tells me how we're going to do it later.
> 
> Because he's always working to amp me up, I'm always turned on.
> 
> ...


Sure, women don't usually go from 0 to turned on (although my wife does, oddly enough, I don't).

But the problem is that you know that and let your bf start turning up the dial slowly.

For the women we're talking about here, they shut it down as soon as the husband gets to 1. So I don't think the problem in these cases is the guy not trying to take it slow as much as it is the woman not letting him turn the dial at all.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> Sure, women don't usually go from 0 to turned on (although my wife does, oddly enough, I don't).
> 
> But the problem is that you know that and let your bf start turning up the dial slowly.
> 
> For the women we're talking about here, they shut it down as soon as the husband gets to 1. So I don't think the problem in these cases is the guy not trying to take it slow as much as it is the woman not letting him turn the dial at all.


It depends on so many things including the relationship in general. If they don't date, don't touch, don't have meaningful conversations and he just comes up to her when he wants sex then that's not going to go over very well. 

Women will low drive or sex adverse are different than reactive drive. I'm only talking about women who have reactive drive and DO want sex if they are properly put in the mood. 

A woman will low drive or a dislike a sex in general, nothing will get her in the mood. Or at least rarely. 

Hard to tell the difference between them sometimes I supposed but in a good, loving relationship a woman with responsive desire will need some boosts. A woman with low drive won't have the urge even with the boosts. But in a non-loving and failing marriage both women can be shut off to sex with her husband and not be open to boosting of any kind.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

*Deidre* said:


> People should stop talking and writing about it so much, and *just do it*. So many couples talking and talking and talking about their sex lives. Just do it!!! Stop over thinking sex so much, and what women want and don't want ...not all women are alike, nor men. I'm so over ''studies'' that present a few women in a controlled study, and act like we're all alike.


What would "just doing it" consist of for the men here who aren't having the sex life they would prefer? A well done scientific study could give them a new insight or a new approach to take. It's not like they haven't already tried everything else. Sure, this probably isn't going to work either but I don't see how it would hurt.

I understand that studies depersonalize people and turn them into numbers. That's their nature.

And things that are generally true about most are no reason to think that they are true for every individual.

But just ignoring valid generalities doesn't seem feasible either.

If you're in charge of putting together a professional basketball team, are you just going to ignore the stereotype that most good basketball players are tall?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> It depends on so many things including the relationship in general. If they don't date, don't touch, don't have meaningful conversations and he just comes up to her when he wants sex then that's not going to go over very well.
> 
> Women will low drive or sex adverse are different than reactive drive. I'm only talking about women who have reactive drive and DO want sex if they are properly put in the mood.
> 
> ...


The premise is that many women who think that they have low-drive (who think they are "broken") often really have responsive desire, which is entirely normal for women. 

They think that they have low-drive because they don't have spontaneous desire 

If they knew that they had responsive desire and acted on that knowledge, they'd probably be happier and their marriage would greatly improve.

I have responsive desire for going to the gym.

I never *want* to go, but I always feel great when I do.

If I just went when I felt like it, I'd be less happy (and more fat).

If sexual desire could work the same way, then what would motivate a person with responsive desire to have sex?

Pretty much only the same impulse that drives me back to the gym. It's the right thing to do and I'll be happier as a result.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> The premise is that many women who think that they have low-drive (who think they are "broken") often really have responsive desire, which is entirely normal for women.
> 
> They think that they have low-drive because they don't have spontaneous desire
> 
> ...


Ah, I see. Well not the gym part. I hate the gym 

I think it would help everyone if people understood not to compare a woman's drive and ability to orgasm and what she likes to a man or pornstar. Somehow that became the standard that they just aren't living up to instead of both being perfectly normal. I think when women don't O right away or need clitoral stimulation and lots and lots of foreplay they feel like something is wrong with them and that they should be enjoying things more, should be easier, should be able to O from PIV.

For a certain amount of the women anyway, I'm guessing there are all kinds of reasons. 

Also, making sex amazing every time will also help with reactive desire. If they take the time to get themselves in the mood and get turned on and it's 'meh' she'll be less likely to remember that she loves sex when she gets to it. I'm personally spoiled with can't move, can't speak, lay twitching in a puddle Os and I really doubt I'd take the time to go through all the work of sex for less than that, at least most of the time, ever again. Some sex is like... pffft I could have done that and been back out watching game of thrones 20 minutes ago.... So quality would matter for a lot of women. 
Again, not all.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Also, making sex amazing every time will also help with reactive desire.


Amazing or giving it his all, being attentive and generally unselfish? It doesn't have to be amazing every time, "just" good sex is good. Trying for amazing every time could be a recipe for crashing, burning and general disappointment. YMMV.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Also, making sex amazing every time will also help with reactive desire.


Don't both parties have to work at that? I mean, I'm willing to do whatever it takes--my partner? Not willing to lay any effort into it. She's "happy" with however good it is without any effort. She doesn't see whatever better level of sex may be achieved as worth the effort--even though I'm willing, able, and energetic enough to assume most of the effort.



SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> If they take the time to get themselves in the mood and get turned on and it's 'meh' she'll be less likely to remember that she loves sex when she gets to it.


Yep. Vicious...downward...spiral...
Or at best, basic stagnation, which will never be much of a turn on... to either of us. 



SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I'm personally spoiled with can't move, can't speak, lay twitching in a puddle Os and I really doubt I'd take the time to go through all the work of sex for less than that, at least most of the time, ever again.


Such a description! Something I think most of us men aspire to... but when the Mrs cares not or has no such goal, or _doesn't even believe such a level even exists let alone is attainable_, well, our aspirations will lay unfilled no matter what we do, or how much we understand cycles of desire.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

I'm not really convinced that responsive desire is a thing. If it is, I suspect that true responsive desire is extremely rare. Most of the time I hear men describing their wife as RD it appears that they're missing the "R" part. In most cases guys use the RD label as a way to maintain hope when their wives just aren't that into them. Here's a newsflash: If she's not responsive to your advances, she's not RD. It's right there in the name folks...responsive!


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Don't both parties have to work at that? I mean, I'm willing to do whatever it takes--my partner? Not willing to lay any effort into it. She's "happy" with however good it is without any effort. She doesn't see whatever better level of sex may be achieved as worth the effort--even though I'm willing, able, and energetic enough to assume most of the effort.
> 
> 
> Yep. Vicious...downward...spiral...
> ...


All true, yes. My bf has the advantage of me not being able to say no. Yet still he puts the effort in always to ramp me up and make sure I have the best experience ever. 

I'd wonder if a trial run would work well for an RD couple. Say for 1 month she's not "allowed" to say no outside of serious veto needs and in return he puts in a solid effort to please her completely and do day long chasing, flirting, foreplay. 
May be enough to switch the gears and shake things up a bit. 

I've only been able to get there with my bf because he "makes me" if it was up to me I'd have stopped or let my head get in the way. I'd be shy and anxious. Losing all control and not having a choice helped me a ton but I know it's just not an option or desire for many women and some men would take advantage of the situation and make things worse.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> But those are just goals of a healthy marriage. Touching and kissing and flirting not just when there's a sex expectation should be a given. If it's not already done then it's a lot harder to get to the point where you can both be sexual together.


First you want all the extras without any return, then you want them in the past as well. Sounds like the "goal posts" are pretty much imaginary. You continuously reaffirm to us that nothing we do will ever be enough, Then you have the audacity to get upset when we don't cheer your "advice".

Whatever, I'm going to the movie alone tonight, To a church thing alone in the morning, and to a family thing alone tomorrow night. I suppose that should be enough evidence for you that I am getting my just desserts.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Mr. Nail said:


> First you want all the extras without any return, then you want them in the past as well. Sounds like the "goal posts" are pretty much imaginary. You continuously reaffirm to us that nothing we do will ever be enough, Then you have the audacity to get upset when we don't cheer your "advice".
> 
> Whatever, I'm going to the movie alone tonight, To a church thing alone in the morning, and to a family thing alone tomorrow night. I suppose that should be enough evidence for you that I am getting my just desserts.


I'm not upset. 
I do think touching and kissing and flirting without the expectation of sex every time should be part of a healthy marriage. I don't see it as wanting extras without a return because I don't see those things as extras anymore than you see sex as an extra. 
They are things that should be just a normal part of a relationship. 

You can disagree, doesn't make me angry. 

And I fully understand some women are just no drive, low drive. Nothing will work. You can be the best husband ever and it won't matter. Or selfish women lovers who don't care to take the time to learn how to please. 

These are different issues and I'd just say leave. 

RD could be worked around to find a happy spot for both.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> All true, yes. My bf has the advantage of me not being able to say no. Yet still he puts the effort in always to ramp me up and make sure I have the best experience ever.
> 
> I'd wonder if a trial run would work well for an RD couple. Say for 1 month she's not "allowed" to say no outside of serious veto needs and in return he puts in a solid effort to please her completely and do day long chasing, flirting, foreplay.
> May be enough to switch the gears and shake things up a bit.
> ...


Yeah, losing control is not something my exceedingly self-conscious, risk averse wife, would ever be able to do. 

I have been able to help "ramp her up" during the day on a few occasions (so I do see some utility in this "responsive desire" theory), but those are few and far between. For the first decade of our marriage, she couldn't let go at all. She basically told me it took a good 12 years before she could be fully comfortable with me (but she was comfortable enough to marry me, WTF?). For most of the next decade, three evenly spaced kids precluded strong desire (zero desire during pregnancy and breastfeeding). Then health issues took out the next decade (turns out she had developed hypothyroidism which causes excessive fatigue, and she was low energy to begin with).

Now? 30 years over which I've proven myself safe, comfortable, supportive, loving, and romantic. Thyroid completely under control. Kids all grown or in college. Time to rock it, eh? Not so fast. We got everything resolved just in time for... menopause! It's not just the hormonal changes and the associated effects on desire, there also seems to be that vaginal discomfort, I'm guessing from the thinning of the vaginal walls that comes with the loss of estrogen. In any case, no matter how much she enjoys it at a particular time, there has to be significant downtime between events, so we can't get into a more active cycle. 

So sometimes it seems the end is near, which I could accept more easily if we hadn't squandered our younger years.


----------



## *Deidre* (Feb 7, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> What would "just doing it" consist of for the men here who aren't having the sex life they would prefer? A well done scientific study could give them a new insight or a new approach to take. It's not like they haven't already tried everything else. Sure, this probably isn't going to work either but I don't see how it would hurt.
> 
> I understand that studies depersonalize people and turn them into numbers. That's their nature.
> 
> ...


But you're not putting together a basketball team. You're having sex with someone you took vows with and should have chemistry with. lol It's not as complex as many make it out to be. Most people in the threads I've read here where sex has gone down after married, they had awesome sex lives when dating. Likely, because they just let it happen and enjoyed it, without too much over analysis. I understand after years of marriage, for many, things can change, but that's not inevitable. Some people here make it sound like after you've married, a bad sex life is inevitable. All I'm saying is that if there's chemistry, the rest should fall into place. Unless there was infidelity, or there's a medical condition, there really shouldn't be a reason for so many sexless marriages, imo.


----------



## *Deidre* (Feb 7, 2016)

CharlieParker said:


> Typical woman response  J/K
> 
> Reading TAM I learned I'm really fortunate that we can openly and easily talk about sex, especially when just doing it is just not working (not just mismatched drives). Communication is important, and I'd say especially about sex.


It is, but if after a while that's ALL you're doing...it's time to either accept that your marriage will be a roommate type of arrangement or leave. To stay in a sexless marriage, miserable and unhappy, despite sharing one's feelings about it, seems senseless to me.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> *I think it would help everyone if people understood not to compare a woman's drive and ability to orgasm and what she likes to a man* or pornstar. Somehow that became the standard that they just aren't living up to instead of both being perfectly normal. I think when women don't O right away or need clitoral stimulation and lots and lots of foreplay they feel like something is wrong with them and that they should be enjoying things more, should be easier, should be able to O from PIV.


Exactly my point if men (and women) judge a typical woman's sexual response by that of a man or a pornstar, they're unlikely to understand how a typical woman's sexual desire works.

Perversely, I think this has, to some extent, been driven by sex-positive feminism. There's nothing wrong with sex-positive feminism and it's intent is clearly good. Women *were* short-changed on sex and didn't get the attention to their sexual satisfaction that they needed and deserved. 

But, this has led both men and women to expecting women to have the exact same drive as men. When it turns out they don't, both are disappointed. A woman may think that there's something wrong with her or her man; that, since she doesn't have spontaneous desire, she shouldn't push herself to have sex. Men are expecting women to initiate and be as enthusiastic about sex as they are and, when they aren't, they conclude that there's something wrong with them or their wife. 

If we consider the possibility that men's and women's sex drives are NOT the same, then we'll all be in a better place to deal with the differences in a way that makes everyone better off.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Yes I agree with you. 

"We like sex too!" is a great message but "We like sex too but sometimes have different sexual needs than you do and that's ok" would be a lot more clarifying. 

I know I thought I was broken for a while when it took me a long time to finish and sometimes couldn't at all. Certainly can make a woman and her husband both feel like she doesn't have desire. She does, it just has to be done in a different way. 

Even if you look up can't O from sex there are thousands of posts and questions from women thinking their is something wrong with them.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

WorkingOnMe said:


> I'm not really convinced that responsive desire is a thing. If it is, I suspect that true responsive desire is extremely rare. Most of the time I hear men describing their wife as RD it appears that they're missing the "R" part. In most cases guys use the RD label as a way to maintain hope when their wives just aren't that into them. Here's a newsflash: If she's not responsive to your advances, she's not RD. It's right there in the name folks...responsive!


I think that you're being way too dismissive of the possibility that responsive desire is a thing. This isn't something made up by a couple of female social scientists to get women "off the hook". 

There's a lot of research behind it (not that that proves they're right, but it increases the likely-hood that there's something to it).

RD doesn't mean that she'll always respond to your advances (if she did, I think only the most jaded men would complain). 

The problem is that women with RD assume that they are LD because they don't have much spontaneous desire. Therefore, they resist any effort by their husband to arouse them because the think that he's trying to get them to do something they don't want to do. 

Of course, as @alexm pointed out above, a woman knowing that she has RD and knowing how it works isn't enough. She has to take make a conscious effort to allow herself to be aroused even though she may not "feel in the mood" at the time.

And people rarely make conscious efforts to do something they don't initially feel motivated to do (think going to the gym). Action usually requires a conviction that there is a *very *serous problem to resolve.

So identifying and understanding RD is hardly a cure-all.

Just so that you don't think I'm one of those trying to fool myself, this doesn't apply to me. My wife will do whatever I want, whenever I want it and goes from zero to orgasm in five minutes flat.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

alexm said:


> Oh god, this x 1000.
> 
> It's like an extra layer of responsive desire to get through to the actual responsive desire. It's a freakin' circle sometimes.
> 
> ...


And her response (or lack thereof) makes you think that she must be missing something.

If only you communicated it better...........

 indeed!

I once had a issue with my wife where I was convinced she knew what I wanted and how important it was to me. Her failure to act upon it led me to believe that she simply didn't care about my happiness as much as I did hers.

In the end, it turned out she just hadn't gotten the message clearly. 

I would have thought that to be impossible, but she insists it's true (and I believe her).


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> But those are just goals of a healthy marriage. Touching and kissing and flirting not just when there's a sex expectation should be a given. If it's not already done then it's a lot harder to get to the point where you can both be sexual together.


1. Subject to available time... 

2. Subject to reciprocity...


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

farsidejunky said:


> I think this is a really interesting point.
> 
> I understand trust in your partner obviously plays a part in responsive desire. However, this post indicates that there may be a lack of trust in yourself as well. In other words, you've made enough mistakes with sexual vulnerability that a part of you doesn't trust yourself to continue doing it.
> 
> Am I misreading it?


Exactly. Social rules are set up in such a way that women bear the responsibility for managing sexual desire. Not just her own but a constant barrage of it. Sexual vulnerability comes at a very high price. Or at least it might if she is not super smart and cautious about it. Even then.

It's much easier/safer to just quash all spontaneity and just not put yourself out there. 

Just like a guy who has faced rejection would be less likely to set himself up to be hurt again, a woman who has taken risks and lost would also be gun shy about more risks.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> Responsive desire isn't often a problem in the early stages of a relationship. NRE usually results in women having spontaneous desire.
> 
> Responsive desire usually only comes into play in LTRs.
> 
> It seems that Responsive Desire is an issue when the danger element is at a minimum.


If it's a problem in LTR, then there's lots of possibilities. Boredom. Unsatisfying sex. General mistrust of husband's motives or concern for her. Lack of intimacy. Genuine low desire from hormonal changes. 

I dunno. To me "spontaneous" just means horny and looking for some kind of release, somewhere, somehow. And "responsive" means that you are aroused in response to someone's interest or efforts to turn you on. 

Aren't both men and women both, depending on context?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

john117 said:


> 1. Subject to available time...
> 
> 2. Subject to reciprocity...


There's always time. Unless you're a single parent working two jobs to support three kids and ageing invalid live-in parents, you can find the time. It's just a matter of prioritization. 

#2? Now there's a real potential sticking point. That is also within control, buy only your investment in reciprocity; your partner's? That's another story.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

wild jade said:


> I dunno. To me "spontaneous" just means horny and looking for some kind of release, somewhere, somehow. And "responsive" means that you are aroused in response to someone's interest or efforts to turn you on.


My wife went from the former to latter after the hormones left the building. For a while I took that as she used to be into me vs now she just tolerates me. I resented that, and that certainly didn't help things. It's not that she's not into me or sex. It's sex is not in front of her mind, so it's up to me to make it happen. Initially I found that work and rather tiresome (that too didn't help things), but because she does "respond" I've become OK with it.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> It's just a matter of prioritization.


Ugh, I fell into the trap of "blaming" her because I didn't prioritize it, even when I knew it wasn't a priority of hers. Understood, finally.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

john117 said:


> 1. Subject to available time...
> 
> 2. Subject to reciprocity...


You make time for what is important. 

As for 2, 

I've notice a theme with some where they expect to be doing basic relationship things to get sex. 

I'd help more around the house if I got sex out of the deal
I'd do date nights more but we don't have sex after so what's the point
I'd touch and kiss and flirt only if I get sex out of it. 


That shouldn't be the point. Sex is not a reward for good behaviour and if she thinks you're only doing these things to get sex it ruins the purpose. These are just basic relationship things everyone should be doing. These things aren't "for her" so you can get sex "for you". These things are for both of you. 

It'd be the same as her expecting a present every time she has sex with you. Wouldn't feel very good.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> There's always time. Unless you're a single parent working two jobs to support three kids and ageing invalid live-in parents, you can find the time. It's just a matter of prioritization.
> 
> #2? Now there's a real potential sticking point. That is also within control, buy only your investment in reciprocity; your partner's? That's another story.


There's always time... Not necessarily. Time with the proper clarity of mind vs time wondering where your next paycheck will come from... 

Reciprocity is the key, and subject to clarity of mind. I can send a nice text asserting my love () but if she's in the middle of a project review and getting her ears buzzed up about this or that...

It's doable, don't get me wrong but not as easy as one may think.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> These are just basic relationship things everyone should be doing.


True, but add sex to that list and you've got it covered. Sex is a basic relationship thing everyone should be doing. Sex shouldn't be a reward for date nights, and date nights shouldn't be a reward for sex, for example. They are usually linked in people's minds, though, to some degree, because when you were dating, it often led to sex (for most people). Anyway, each does not always have to lead to the other, but if they _never_ do, then there is something deeper wrong, IMO.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Yes I agree sex is something that both should be naturally doing. For each other and themselves. Sex shouldn't be a "his thing" cause she got a date night "for her" 
It's not a reward. 

For women (or men) who never want sex and are just selfish or naturally LD or don't enjoy sex, I don't think there is a fix. Not one that'll give real fulfillment to their partner. 

But women who are responsive or needs a strong relationship base to feel sexual, I think there is a lot that can be done to get a mutual sex life. But doing things just to get sex isn't the answer. 

Go on a date night because you enjoy alone time with your wife and meaningful conversations and recreation time with her. Not because you'll get laid later. That's not what we want and we can tell the difference.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> You make time for what is important.
> 
> As for 2,
> 
> ...


Both sides of the argument make this type of assertion. 

"If only he did more housework..."

"If only she initiated more..."

All of it reeks of entitlement. This is coming from someone who believes that it is an absolute requirement to have a regular sex life with his spouse (entitlement).

Deejo once said to me something akin to this:

"My love is indeed a well, and if you don't regularly replenish it, don't be surprised if you eventually haul up an empty bucket. And if you can't be concerned with that eventuality, don't get angry when I watch you go thirsty."


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

CharlieParker said:


> My wife went from the former to latter after the hormones left the building. For a while I took that as she used to be into me vs now she just tolerates me. I resented that, and that certainly didn't help things. It's not that she's not into me or sex. It's sex is not in front of her mind, so it's up to me to make it happen. Initially I found that work and rather tiresome (that too didn't help things), but because she does "respond" I've become OK with it.


Same thing happened to me with my husband -- but in reverse. As he got older, with a series health issues, his interest in sex dropped away. I too took that as him not being interested in me anymore and resented him for it. He also no longer "responds" very well, which for me adds to it. 

But it's not very helpful to resent someone for just being a normal human with normal human weaknesses.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

farsidejunky said:


> Both sides of the argument make this type of assertion.
> 
> "If only he did more housework..."
> 
> ...


Of course you realize that it absolutely works both ways .....??


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Of course you realize that it absolutely works both ways .....??


Absolutely.

For one who consistently gives more than they receive, there is zero threat in this.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Flowers,date night,compliments,

If they expect it then is it not the same as someone expecting sex?

Sex should be mutual desire. A wife should want to bang her husband! At least sometimes.

But you have a spouce that never initiates then there is no mutual desire and then just give them a convient lable/condition such as responsive desire disorder and they have the perfect excuse not to ever priortise something that is equally important as flowers,date night,compliments etc.

I love someone who loves to have sex with me who shows desire if i never feel desired then I'd rather spank it !

And the bus goes round and round.

Should a wife desire her man just because shes attracted to him and his work ethic and morals and vise versa?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

I'm super attracted to my husband, but I hate to initiate sex. I'll do it more readily for the week or so of my cycle when I'm horny all the time due to hormones, but for the rest of the time, if I initiate sex, it sort of kills my desire to have sex. I don't know, I guess it's a turn off, in a way. I'm a huge sexual submissive/bottom, so that might have something to do with it. 

There have been times I'm lying beside him in bed SUPER horny, just wising so hard that he'd start something . . . but he doesn't so I just go to sleep frustrated, because that's better than initiating and then losing my "hard on," so to speak, because I initiated. 

I don't know if I have responsive desire or not, but I know that I'm much, much more into sex since I've been able to talk to him about how my desire works, specifically, and he's used that info to his advantage. 

I've never been a fake it 'til you make it type of person, so that kind of "hurry up and finish" duty sex wasn't something I ever really offered. I was someone who, if I didn't feel "in the mood", would refuse his advances. 

We took my ability to refuse out of the equation and yep, that pretty much solved the problem. For me, having a say in the matter just complicates things way too much. 

My not initiating has nothing to do with how much I desire him or am attracted to him--and I'm eternally glad he believes me.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> I dunno. To me "spontaneous" just means horny and looking for some kind of release, somewhere, somehow. And "responsive" means that you are aroused in response to someone's interest or efforts to turn you on.


The authors of the studies describe spontaneous desire as having desire *before* arousal and responsive desire as having desire *after* arousal.

What often happens when one has responsive desire is that you do not allow your partner to try to arouse you, since you have no desire (you're "not in the mood"). If your partner was permitted to try and arouse you, you would generally desire sex.



wild jade said:


> Aren't both men and women both, depending on context?


The authors of the studies don't think so. Roughly 75% or women are thought to have responsive desire in an LTR and less than 25% of men.

That seems plausible to me since men have more testosterone coursing through their system than women.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Same thing happened to me with my husband -- but in reverse. As he got older, with a series health issues, his interest in sex dropped away. I too took that as him not being interested in me anymore and resented him for it. He also no longer "responds" very well, which for me adds to it.
> 
> But it's not very helpful to resent someone for just being a normal human with normal human weaknesses.


As men age, testosterone levels drop and spontaneous desire decreases. With men it's a pretty predictable pattern (for each man, each man starts at different levels). 

Since women don't have the testosterone boost, their drive is more variable (between women and for the same woman at different times). Also, women have more hormonal fluctuation (periods, motherhood, breast-feeding and menopause), which makes their desire level less stable.

It would be foolish to resent someone for not providing something that they can't possibly supply.

However, if they are a man whose drive is reduced by porn usage, poor physical condition that they make no effort to improve or a treatable medical condition that they refuse to seek medical help for; I think a little resentment might be called for.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

GettingIt_2 said:


> I'm super attracted to my husband, but I hate to initiate sex. I'll do it more readily for the week or so of my cycle when I'm horny all the time due to hormones, but for the rest of the time, if I initiate sex, it sort of kills my desire to have sex. I don't know, I guess it's a turn off, in a way. I'm a huge sexual submissive/bottom, so that might have something to do with it.
> 
> There have been times I'm lying beside him in bed SUPER horny, just wising so hard that he'd start something . . . but he doesn't so I just go to sleep frustrated, because that's better than initiating and then losing my "hard on," so to speak, because I initiated.
> 
> ...


I don't believe not initiating counts as responsive desire. You had spontaneous desire but just didn't act on it.

The bolded is a possible solution for dealing with responsive desire. Of course, it would require advance consent. But, "having a say in the matter" is pretty much derigueur these days. I believe that even most of the women for whom this would work would have a problem admitting or allowing it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

In this day and age "taking the ability to refuse out of the picture" is unlikely for many different reasons.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

chillymorn69 said:


> But you have a spouce that never initiates then there is no mutual desire and then just give them a convient lable/condition such as responsive desire disorder and they have the perfect excuse not to ever priortise something that is equally important as flowers,date night,compliments etc.


Having responsive desire is not an excuse to do nothing.



chillymorn69 said:


> I love someone who loves to have sex with me who shows desire if i never feel desired then I'd rather spank it !


Well, if you require a woman who has spontaneous desire and 75% of women have responsive desire, then you might have to share with a couple of other guys.

Either that or switch teams.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I don't believe not initiating counts as responsive desire. You had spontaneous desire but just didn't act on it.
> 
> The bolded is a possible solution for dealing with responsive desire. Of course, it would require advance consent. But, "having a say in the matter" is pretty much derigueur these days. I believe that even most of the women for whom this would work would have a problem admitting or allowing it.


Even when I have spontaneous desire, I find sex more "hot" if he's initiated. There is something about initiating that cools even a very fierce desire. When I'm not in that window when my drive is spontaneous, then I can actually make myself horny by thinking about whether or not he's going to take me, and how that might go down. But I'm not likely to initiate. 

I do think that taking away the ability for the woman to say "no" could be a solution for some (many?) couples, but transitioning to it requires a very high level of vulnerability and trust--two things that are often very damaged by a poor sex life. (And of course "consensual non consent" must always be negotiated--I'd never advocate that this be done without full agreement from both parties.)

I know my desire and attraction works in a way that is very different from my husband's. I attribute that to differences between the sexes, and don't find that to be hard to admit or talk about with my husband. If he needed my sex drive to work like his in order for him to feel desired and happy with our sex life, then he'd be SOL because I'm not a dude. If he wasn't taking it when he wanted it, and then moping about it, then yeah neither of us would be getting it, and we'd be miserable because we both love sex. 

I guess it's one of the differences we accept because we both believe that men and women are just different when it comes to what drives us sexually. I want and need him to take the lead. He's got unique sexual needs, too--and as long as he gets things rolling, I'll do whatever he wants, and love every minute of it. Seems like a fair trade off to me.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> Having responsive desire is not an excuse to do nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quote my whole post instead of taking one line here and there. You must be a liberal twist thing to suit your argument by ommitting the whole statement

Where are you getting 75%, from 1 study. Hmm

Switch teams mybe you should switch team. Wtf type of statement is that!

Sexual responce desire one shoe fits all.

And by the way women have testostrone and estgeron as they age their estgeron goes down but their testostrone stay the samr thats why many women see a spike in their sex drive in their mid forties.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think having him initiate can work well as long as you usually accept his initiations. Where people have trouble i think is when the wife has both responsive and low desire. Its no fun initiating when you are turned down most or almost all of the time.

Consensual non-consent can be fun but I think a lot of people aren't into that. It works if a woman has RD but also high desire. Lots of failure modes if sometimes she really doesn't want sex even if he initiates.



GettingIt_2 said:


> Even when I have spontaneous desire, I find sex more "hot" if he's initiated. There is something about initiating that cools even a very fierce desire. When I'm not in that window when my drive is spontaneous, then I can actually make myself horny by thinking about whether or not he's going to take me, and how that might go down. But I'm not likely to initiate.
> 
> I do think that taking away the ability for the woman to say "no" could be a solution for some (many?) couples, but transitioning to it requires a very high level of vulnerability and trust--two things that are often very damaged by a poor sex life. (And of course "consensual non consent" must always be negotiated--I'd never advocate that this be done without full agreement from both parties.)
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

uhtred said:


> I think having him initiate can work well as long as you usually accept his initiations. Where people have trouble i think is when the wife has both responsive and low desire. Its no fun initiating when you are turned down most or almost all of the time.
> 
> Consensual non-consent can be fun but I think a lot of people aren't into that. It works if a woman has RD but also high desire. Lots of failure modes if sometimes she really doesn't want sex even if he initiates.


Yes, the trade off for him always initiating is me always responding positively. That is not to say I have aways been screamingly enthusiastic. Sometimes I'm sleepy or busy or whatever, but I'm not going to complain and make it a chore for him to finish what he started, either. He's also willing to keep going on the rare occasions when I'm showing some reluctance or even outright resistance. That's not something that many husband would be willing to do.

I'm really turned on by the thought of him getting what he wants sexually, and that is connected to him taking it when he wants it . . . so it's just a nice feedback loop. 

I have never, ever, felt that he's abused the fact that I've given up the ability to say no. He treats our agreement with gravity and respect. 

Consensual non consent is *the reason* my sex drive is as high as it is. Without it, I just don't get as turned on. We had a very broken sex life for a long time before we implemented it.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> The authors of the studies describe spontaneous desire as having desire *before* arousal and responsive desire as having desire *after* arousal.
> 
> What often happens when one has responsive desire is that you do not allow your partner to try to arouse you, since you have no desire (you're "not in the mood"). If your partner was permitted to try and arouse you, you would generally desire sex.
> 
> ...


I agree with the poster that called this a made up statistic. All the guys I know will respond to arousal with desire, even when there was none there before.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Consensual non-consent is probably a great solution for some. But my guess would be that the appeal would be very limited.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

wild jade said:


> Consensual non-consent is probably a great solution for some. But my guess would be that the appeal would be very limited.


I agree. And even when the appeal is there, implementing it takes work and commitment. It's certainly not a common solution. It works because it removes, for me, the idea that I need to somehow "be the mood" or "react a certain way" to his advances. I find that being able to just accept that his desire is always there and that he can and will act on it as he chooses very . . . freeing and arousing. I was the gatekeeper of our sex life for too long, and frankly it was exhausting and stressful and our marriage suffered woefully. He's taken over being in charge and I must say he's doing a far better job than I. Our marriage on all fronts is a million times better and I'm a million times happier. 

I also think that, for the years I was gatekeeping, I didn't understand how my own sexuality works, and how it's changed since those fist few years when I was with my husband, before we had kids, a house, demanding careers, etc. I figured that was "just the way it is." I spent quite a lot of time figuring it out about years ago, and low and behold, my ability to feel and act on my attraction to him is still there, still very strong . . . but very different. 

I think it's the willingness to "figure it out" that is important, and not the eventual method. Could be CNC for some, but that's certainly not everyone's cup of tea.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

wild jade said:


> Consensual non-consent is probably a great solution for some. But my guess would be that the appeal would be very limited.


When we are "mismatched" we do what I call "I say when, she says what". She won't say no, but I don't expected intercourse. No pressure on her and no phoned in duty sex, she gives 100% of whatever she capable of at the time. At the very least I get a physical release and we both get an emotional connection.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

GettingIt_2 said:


> I agree. And even when the appeal is there, implementing it takes work and commitment. It's certainly not a common solution. It works because it removes, for me, the idea that I need to somehow "be the mood" or "react a certain way" to his advances. I find that being able to just accept that his desire is always there and that he can and will act on it as he chooses very . . . freeing and arousing. I was the gatekeeper of our sex life for too long, and frankly it was exhausting and stressful and our marriage suffered woefully. He's taken over being in charge and I must say he's doing a far better job than I. Our marriage on all fronts is a million times better and I'm a million times happier.
> 
> I also think that, for the years I was gatekeeping, I didn't understand how my own sexuality works, and how it's changed since those fist few years when I was with my husband, before we had kids, a house, demanding careers, etc. I figured that was "just the way it is." I spent quite a lot of time figuring it out about years ago, and low and behold, my ability to feel and act on my attraction to him is still there, still very strong . . . but very different.
> 
> I think it's the willingness to "figure it out" that is important, and not the eventual method. Could be CNC for some, but that's certainly not everyone's cup of tea.


I have to say, I would find going to bed frustrated because I can't/won't initiate anything but freeing and arousing. It would drive me crazy with resentment!

It's good you're both happy, though. That's the main thing.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

wild jade said:


> Consensual non-consent is probably a great solution for some. But my guess would be that the appeal would be very limited.


I agree. It works amazingly well for me and I love it but it wouldn't work for many and many men would take advantage of it. 

I'd still recommend a 30 day trail lol 

30 days, she "can't" say no but he makes darn sure to get her in the mood, make it pleasurable and does things like daylong flirting and texts, kissing and touching, dates. 

Taking away her ability to say no is not a free pass for selfish sex. It would only work if he used it to let her open herself up to his advances and make sex mutually pleasing. 

Ex- my bf will tell me he's gonna make me O for as long as he wanted and I was not allowed to stop him. 

I was having a hard time allowing him to go down on me. My ex hated it and I felt self conscious. I also (tmi) squirt often and was embarrassed to ever do that while he was down there so I'd stop before it got to that point. 

He took my ability to stop away so I could just lay back and enjoy and mentally knowing I couldn't stop him let me open up and take all the responsibility of what happened off me. 

After I'd get praise and reassurance. 

He used his power for good and not evil lol. It opened my mind and now I have no selfconsious issues and no problem with him seeing me at my 'having a excersism' stage of orgasm. Previously never shown to any man.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think that as long as you respond positively most of the time, its great. The cases where its trouble is when positive responses are more like 10% of the time. 

While I enjoy non-consent *games*, I personally would never be willing to do something where there was no safe-word equivalent. Not so much a matter of trust as just that communication isn't perfect and mistakes can be made even with the best intentions.




GettingIt_2 said:


> Yes, the trade off for him always initiating is me always responding positively. That is not to say I have aways been screamingly enthusiastic. Sometimes I'm sleepy or busy or whatever, but I'm not going to complain and make it a chore for him to finish what he started, either. He's also willing to keep going on the rare occasions when I'm showing some reluctance or even outright resistance. That's not something that many husband would be willing to do.
> 
> I'm really turned on by the thought of him getting what he wants sexually, and that is connected to him taking it when he wants it . . . so it's just a nice feedback loop.
> 
> ...


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

If you can't say no, your only option is to respond positively. 

If I brat, I get a "punishment". If I'm good, I get rewarded (in one way or another) 

Your mind gets programmed to respond and enjoy sexual advances. 
For me it's really about taking away the mental blocks and learning to enjoy being a fully sexual person. He's training me basically. 

You just have to trust the person you are with. I can not say no and he has pushed my previous limits, things I would have said no had I had the choice but ended up enjoying. If I had the ability to say no I would have never gotten to experience them.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

uhtred said:


> I think that as long as you respond positively most of the time, its great. The cases where its trouble is when positive responses are more like 10% of the time.
> 
> While I enjoy non-consent *games*, I personally would never be willing to do something where there was no safe-word equivalent. Not so much a matter of trust as just that communication isn't perfect and mistakes can be made even with the best intentions.


I don't think I'd have agreed to it if I thought I'd be miserable and that I wouldn't be able to hold up my side of the bargain. I wanted a solution as much as he did. I wanted a happy marriage and that means we had to have a sex life that was satisfying to us both. We had failed to achieve that while I had choice or a say in the matter. I'm inconstant, emotional, and too many factors affect my sexuality. 

As far as mistakes being made--yep, we're not perfect either. But I don't expect perfection, and neither does he. When things go sideways, we just move on. We don't blame one another.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> I agree with the poster that called this a made up statistic. All the guys I know will respond to arousal with desire, even when there was none there before.


Using the term "Made up" carries the implication that it was just manufactured out of thin air with no basis what ever in fact, generally with the intent to mislead.

I'm pretty sure it's not "made up".

It might very well be wrong. 

There are many subjects about which equally intelligent and educated people look at the same evidence and disagree on what it means. 

My goal wasn't to convince everyone that responsive desire is more predominant in woman.

My goal was to point out that* if *it's true, then there may well be a set of solutions that we hadn't considered and that some of those things that are tried may actually be counter productive.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

GettingIt_2 said:


> I think it's the willingness to "figure it out" that is important, and not the eventual method. .


Absolutely.

I don't think I've ever seen a thread about a couple with a sexual problem where both partners are trying hard to find solutions, yet the situation isn't improving.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Buddy,

Some do as you describe below. But - in many cases the HD partner moves too fast when it comes to setting the pace of foreplay. 

And they radiate desire itself too intensely.




Buddy400 said:


> The problem often is that they need to welcome (or at least accept) the foreplay.
> 
> It seems that what often happens is that they avoid or deflect the foreplay (verbal or otherwise) since they know that it might lead to sex which, at the time (before responsive desire has a chance to work), they don't want.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Or, the supposed responsive desire partner is busy playing defense against any advances, desired or not, for fear of falling for it and increasing expectations down the road...


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

MEM2020 said:


> Buddy,
> 
> Some do as you describe below. But - in many cases the HD partner moves too fast when it comes to setting the pace of foreplay.
> 
> And they radiate desire itself too intensely.


Yes. The #1 complaint from women is not enough foreplay. 

I've known many men who think foreplay is going directly to rubbing the vagina or right to oral. 

Kiss, boob grab, vagina. I am 5'4. There is a lot of me to play with, find some of it. 

Plus they miss the whole outside the bedroom foreplay. The gradual build up so that by the time you get to the bedroom she is already turned on. 

It's like as soon as they get the green light they are ready to go. Slowly, patience.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

john117 said:


> Or, the supposed responsive desire partner is busy playing defense against any advances, desired or not, for fear of falling for it and increasing expectations down the road...


This is what tells me, loud and clear, that this whole "responsive desire" thing is a myth.

Much more likely to be something simpler, such as boredom, unfulfilling sex, lack of intimacy, unhappiness with the partner, plain ol' lack of interest in sex, hormonal or health issues ....


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> Using the term "Made up" carries the implication that it was just manufactured out of thin air with no basis what ever in fact, generally with the intent to mislead.
> 
> I'm pretty sure it's not "made up".
> 
> ...


I'm sure people do respond to arousal with desire, and from there, yes, a bunch of possible solutions for getting sex arise. But why turn that into a "thing" that you're now saying that most women are?

All that does it set people up for another set of false starts and frustrations. 

(Hint: if someone isn't responding, odds are pretty good that "responsive desire" isn't the solution.)


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Ex- my bf will tell me he's gonna make me O for as long as he wanted and I was not allowed to stop him.
> 
> I was having a hard time allowing him to go down on me. My ex hated it and I felt self conscious. I also (tmi) squirt often and was embarrassed to ever do that while he was down there so I'd stop before it got to that point.
> 
> ...


What a great story! Sounds like you've got something really good going!

If you ask me, the sort of self-consciousness you describe here is a huge barrier, and finding ways to get rid of it is definitely a ticket to better sex. 

One thing that used to hold me back was fear of hurting my husband. After he was able to reassure me that he could look after himself, I spent less time worrying about him, and more time just having fun.

Enjoy!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Pretty stark difference between someone who thinks sex is something they do TO you, as opposed to WITH you.

And that is just a half ratchet from thinking sex is something your partner LETS you do TO them. 

So sure - some of this requires understanding the difference between being dominant (good) and rushing someone (really bad) along faster than their body is reacting. 

But that isn't the hard part. Not from my experience here. Nope. The hardest part is that there is more ego protective activity than partner focused behavior. 





SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Yes. The #1 complaint from women is not enough foreplay.
> 
> I've known many men who think foreplay is going directly to rubbing the vagina or right to oral.
> 
> ...


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

MEM2020 said:


> The hardest part is that there is more ego protective activity than partner focused behavior.


In hindsight (yes, I'll admit BTDT), letting ego into the bedroom devalues the entire experience greatly.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

It's a very rare man who doesn't Charlie. 

But some overall successful guys never come out the other side. 




CharlieParker said:


> In hindsight (yes, I'll admit BTDT), letting ego into the bedroom devalues the entire experience greatly.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Jade,

This idea - responsive desire - which could as easily be called: pacing - is the basis for my marital sexual relationship.

And had I ignored M2's requests to pace our encounters - to her taste - game over. 

She was just making it a mutually good experience, that's all. 




wild jade said:


> This is what tells me, loud and clear, that this whole "responsive desire" thing is a myth.
> 
> Much more likely to be something simpler, such as boredom, unfulfilling sex, lack of intimacy, unhappiness with the partner, plain ol' lack of interest in sex, hormonal or health issues ....


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

wild jade said:


> This is what tells me, loud and clear, that this whole "responsive desire" thing is a myth.
> 
> Much more likely to be something simpler, such as boredom, unfulfilling sex, lack of intimacy, unhappiness with the partner, plain ol' lack of interest in sex, hormonal or health issues ....


From a psychology point of view I can understand RD (think of it as conditioning based response) but there's a whole "who came first, chicken or egg" component to it it seems.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Part of "responsive desire" could in part be the environment. Good example, my W and I go away on vacation and she is ready to go without hesitation, often initiates, etc... For the other 360+ days during the year (unfortunately did not win the Power Ball so still need to actually work and raise family lol) not so much.

IMO, it really comes down to both people making an effort since I would think most couples have a mismatch (could be minimal, could be miles apart). I am perfectly fine with my W being more of the RD type which means I need to do more of the heavy lifting to get things started. However, when it gets so one sided that it becomes almost solely my responsibility, I rather not bother with. Combine with getting older where my drive isn't as strong as it was in the past, and as of now I pretty much have zero interest in (and am actually fine with now, but did frustrate me more in the past).


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> It's a very rare man who doesn't Charlie.
> 
> But some overall successful guys never come out the other side.


My guess is that it's a rare woman who doesn't either. There's self consciousness, like @SlowlyGoingCrazy's example. Body image issues. Fear of vulnerability issues. Trust issues (of self and other) like I mentioned earlier. 

I personally have dragged all of these into the bedroom at one point or another,--- and I consider myself to be fairly sex positive and not overly neurotic.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> If you're a car mechanic and someone brings in a car with a problem that you know is caused 75% of the time by a broken widget, you'd be an idiot not to take that information into account.
> 
> Now, if it's your car and you've been servicing it for years, maybe you focus more on the particular car and the general information about widgets and the problem you're having become less important.


OK, with almost any car you can plug in an ODB Scanner and clear out all the stupid codes causing the check engine light to come on and 75% just make the problem go away by doing that because the sensors themselves sometimes fail before the parts that they monitor. And yes, only an idiot would take the car to the dealership and allow them to determine that a broken widget means that the whole car should be replaced with next year's model along with outstanding financing and an extra cash bonus for your trade in value. 

But I really worry about the man that feels as though he can easily compare nurturing his marriage to that of maintaining a car. However some men do really care for their cars and sincerely love them as if a family member. There is an internet meme where someone took an image like this...










...and photoshopped the word "engine" to say "wife" and I thought it was funny. 

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Jade,

There is a large difference between being inherently - a little insecure and being reflexively and insistently ego protective. 

Woman says to her H: Could you do that a littler (slower or softer or ....)
His reply: I know what I'm doing (in an irritated voice)

That was often his response to her feedback. So she kind of gave up - on giving feedback and also to a large degree on sex. 






wild jade said:


> My guess is that it's a rare woman who doesn't either. There's self consciousness, like @SlowlyGoingCrazy's example. Body image issues. Fear of vulnerability issues. Trust issues (of self and other) like I mentioned earlier.
> 
> I personally have dragged all of these into the bedroom at one point or another,--- and I consider myself to be fairly sex positive and not overly neurotic.


----------



## Where there's a will (Feb 10, 2014)

If women only have responsive desire (75%) one could imply that a large proportion of women don't desire men at all in their daily life. Is this the case? Surely there is better spontaneous element. Also a second issue arises in as much as in order to gain sex a man must push through rejection to turn on the responsive desire. This is a dangerous line to persue. It is implying that a women who may say 'no' can be led to a place where they say 'yes' this scenario reinforces the stereotype that women are prone to changing their minds and that no doesnt really mean no.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Where there's a will said:


> If women only have responsive desire (75%) one could imply that a large proportion of women don't desire men at all in their daily life. Is this the case? Surely there is better spontaneous element. Also a second issue arises in as much as in order to gain sex a man must push through rejection to turn on the responsive desire. This is a dangerous line to persue. It is implying that a women who may say 'no' can be led to a place where they say 'yes' this scenario reinforces the stereotype that women are prone to changing their minds and that no doesnt really mean no.


My desire certainly works different now, 28 years in to my relationship with my husband, than it did in the first few years were together--before we lived together, had children, shard the responsibilities of "adulthood," etc. 

Although I can't ever remember a time when my thoughts were consistently "led" by my desire, I think sex was more in the forefront of my mind when I was younger. 

So in my "daily life" no, the physical desire for sex isn't on my mind, save for a few days a month when I'm ovulating. On those days, I'm *very* aware of the physical desire. For years this was a problem because I didn't know how to incorporate sex into my life for the rest of the month when that physical desire wasn't at the forefront, and it caused quite a downturn in the intimacy in my marriage. 

I'm much more in tune with how my desire works now, and can access physical desire pretty much any time I want to. I tend to make it a daily practice to keep it at or just under the surface of my awareness (something I'm guessing men don't have to "learn" to do or work at). I'm really much happier. I missed being a sexual person for those years when I felt like I had "lost" my libido. I didn't understand why I didn't just want it like I did early in my relationship with my husband. Turns out I do want it just as much, but that desire just doesn't live at the top of my mental "list" on a day to day basis. I don't worry that it doesn't, and neither does my husband, since our sex life is back up to speed and he fully understands and accepts how I "tick" differently as a woman as far as sexual desire goes.


----------



## David51 (Sep 12, 2017)

Where there's a will said:


> If women only have responsive desire (75%) one could imply that a large proportion of women don't desire men at all in their daily life. Is this the case? Surely there is better spontaneous element. Also a second issue arises in as much as in order to gain sex a man must push through rejection to turn on the responsive desire. This is a dangerous line to persue. It is implying that a women who may say 'no' can be led to a place where they say 'yes' this scenario reinforces the stereotype that women are prone to changing their minds and that no doesnt really mean no.




No always means no....it also means. I'm gonna go find another gal



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

john117 said:


> Or, the supposed responsive desire partner is busy playing defense against any advances, desired or not, for fear of falling for it and increasing expectations down the road...





wild jade said:


> This is what tells me, loud and clear, that this whole "responsive desire" thing is a myth.
> 
> Much more likely to be something simpler, such as boredom, unfulfilling sex, lack of intimacy, unhappiness with the partner, plain ol' lack of interest in sex, hormonal or health issues ....


I don't believe it's a myth at all. RD is, quite literally, when one's desire kicks in AFTER sex starts - the exact reverse of what is, quote/unquote 'supposed to happen'.

We all know this, so it's not worth devoting a paragraph to, but RD folks generally just don't become aroused by outside stimulation of any sort. Sexual thoughts and arousal typically begin to occur during, not before.

This is how my wife describes it, anyway, and I've heard similar from other posters here. For her, it's almost best described as a "point of no return". It's once we have/she has _committed_ to having sex, typically when the clothes are coming off and we're kissing deeply. For her, this is generally bedroom only. I could kiss her deeply and passionately and run my hands over her body in the kitchen, living room, backyard - and nothing. I mean, she'll enjoy it, but it doesn't "work". She becomes aroused when there's a commitment, a point of no return.

And when that happens, she lets loose like nobody's business, and you'd never know she doesn't have natural desire or arousal. It took me years to wrap my head around it and truly believe that it has nothing to do with ME.

And that's the thing - she can't explain it herself, never mind understand it. She knows that sex is amazing and orgasms are great, and every other benefit, personal and shared, are all positives, for her, for me and for us as a couple. Yet...

Personally, living with an RD spouse is difficult, in that the typical interactions don't 'work'. I would love to be able to turn my wife on simply by kissing her passionately or other 'normal' initiation methods. I would love for her to be aroused and come to me. Etc etc etc. Being with an RD person completely removes the natural flow of sexuality and more importantly, the spontaneity. It's not so much that it becomes a planned event, or even a scheduled one - I know that we could be having sex virtually daily, but it's not the same as spontaneous sexual arousal, where my wife is in the mood and initiates with me as a result. When she does initiate, it's not "for me", it's just that she's open to having sex and becoming aroused as it's happening, as opposed to a desire or a need.

So what's missing in these cases (from my side of things) is not having a partner who actually desires sex, per se, and desires you, in particular. It doesn't mean the sex is bad, or a duty or chore. I'm having the best sex of my life, currently. But the reality is, if you had experience beforehand, with a more normal desire partner, there's typically a big empty hole there. The only thing, literally, I miss about my ex wife, for example, is that she actually had a desire for sex and would act accordingly.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

I don't think it's a myth per se. But I do think true responsive desire is extremely rare. Maybe 1%. And I think essentially all of the men on tam who (optimistically) think it describes their wife actually have an attraction problem. Put her with the right guy and she'll be spontaneous desire all day. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

WorkingOnMe said:


> I don't think it's a myth per se. But I do think true responsive desire is extremely rare. Maybe 1%. And I think essentially all of the men on tam who (optimistically) think it describes their wife actually have an attraction problem. Put her with the right guy and she'll be spontaneous desire all day.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


But that's just because it would be a new relationship. If a person is truly LD it will come back to the same point after the relationship isn't new anymore.

I do agree that we mostly see attraction issues on TAM. But I also know some of these wives would not be any different in a long term relationship with another man. Same is true for LD men. If someone just isn't that sexual, this will come to the surface and be made obvious. It's hard to gauge at the beginning but there are almost always clues that the HD partner ignores or doesn't want to acknowledge. Being in love makes them think everything will get better over time because somehow they think love will magically change someone.


----------



## Lukedog (Nov 18, 2015)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I think the chase and day long foreplay is quite fun and luckily my bf agrees. He constantly talks about sex with me, keeping me in the mood, telling me how much he wants me, sending pics. When together he touches me always. Kisses me deep, pushing me up against the wall while I'm getting us coffee. Tells me how we're going to do it later.
> 
> Because he's always working to amp me up, I'm always turned on.
> 
> ...


THIS!!! X 1000

As women age, it takes longer for the "responsive" part to kick in. They just can't come home from work and jump into bed with their man and expect to be "responsive" to sex. So I believe both parties have to take part and make a little more effort with the foreplay. It may take all day long, but just think of the "response" you may get when the act may be anticipated all day long. >


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

As a psych expert of sorts, I got to wonder about RD as it's really compatible and also not compatible with the basic tenet of "stimulus response compatibility". 

Compatible in the sense that a stimulus produces the expected result (eventually ). 

Not compatible in the sense that a reward seeking behavior does not respond to the stimulus as expected.

Granted, stimulus response theory is for intended for basic low level activities, not highly complex ones like sex. But at some point it should be, ie if the conditioning is there and the stimulus is there, it ought to happen for many women. I understand side issues, but 75%?

The stimulus response theory basically says that a response to a signal will be expected to be the most common or natural one. I mean, think two buttons, left and right, and you press either based on a signal. There's good natural signals and not so good unnatural signals. But that's basic behaviors, not complex ones. Yet I would expect that if it's not the case for 75% of women someone would have figured out why. 

We understand S-R and design for it in very complex or tasks like flying a helicopter or jet fighter. But that's because we understand the mental processing between the stimulus and the response.

We can have positive excitation or negative as a result of the stimulus. And we define the excitation as coming from our own tendencies, our own behavioral rules, or frames. In other words, look for these three to find out the sources of the 75%. Modern psychology considers frames control selection of rules, rules control the selection of response tendencies, and tendencies control the actual responses. So, the argument that 75% of women operate on RD suggests some commonality - not at the tendencies or rules level but at the frame level. Frames are our own basic behaviors. But are they innate or learned?

TBH I don't believe they're innate.


----------

