# Responsive Desire = No Attraction (?)



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

It's been brought up in MEM's pyramid thread that Responsive Desire exists simply as a means of describing lack of sexual attraction.

I'm of a split mind on this. From my own perspective of someone with spontaneous desire this makes sense, however I'd like to hear from some folks that consider themselves RD as to why or why not they believe this is true.

Opinions?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

I don't believe that responsive desire exists solely as a means of describing a lack of sexual attraction. look at Lesbian Bed Death as a prime example of responsive desire.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

Spontaneous and responsive desire are both great. The only problem would be no desire. And I don't get when someone complains about their partner not being the initiator if the partner always responds to initation. It seems like anything less than a partner wanting to rip your clothes off and take you is looked at as pity sex. Talk about a no win situation. That's it.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Interesting read:

do you know when you want it? | the dirty normal


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

I'm not sure this will make sense..

I believe I have responsive desire, but I'm only responsive to somebody I'm attracted to and who I connect with. I find certain people to be aesthetically pleasing, whether it's Brad Pitt or my husband. That alone doesn't get my motor running. Brad Pitt could be a complete dork, I would never respond to that. The things that my husband does to me, that gets my motor running. I respond when he touches the back of my neck or gives me a special look. I just don't spontaneously think about sex or have that urge unless I consciously try to think about it, or my husband initiates. 

I have no idea if that answered the question or not😮


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

I don't know that it's possible to explain this away without comparing and contrasting the desires of a woman at different times of life or with different men. If it's all responsive desire, there is a lot to be said about attraction. A few words, a gentle touch, and bing bang boom. It explains alot about decision, and why some wives do not allow their husbands to talk with them or touch them. They find it less easy to withstand their desire for sex no matter who the man is, if they find him soothing their minds.

Well, it's a start.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Well, it seems it's certainly not anything like a man's desire. It is based on societal notions, ability to make money and so forth. Then, if those are present, and the guy piques her mental dreams of what love or desire should look like, then there might be a green light.

Here's a link: Sex Drive: How Do Men and Women Compare?

It doesn't explain ONSs though, and I think that's where I am confused. I suppose there is no desire for sex until these mental boxes are checked and then some physical touch, but how does that explain a quick decision like a ONS? There are too many pieces missing for me to understand.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> Interesting read:
> 
> do you know when you want it? | the dirty normal


This indicates it's NOT a lack of attraction, does it not? If RD were truly just a lack of attraction, wouldn't that automatically end with duty sex? This article indicates people with RD do get into the sex, they just basically forget that they like it. Or something. I'm not going to pretend to understand it myself.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> This indicates it's NOT a lack of attraction, does it not? If RD were truly just a lack of attraction, wouldn't that automatically end with duty sex? This article indicates people with RD do get into the sex, they just basically forget that they like it. Or something. I'm not going to pretend to understand it myself.


I disagree. I think it is an innate desire to feel wanted and protected and less about attraction. Sexual attraction seems to be defined more on the lines of how men think about sex. I can look at a woman and want sex. Women, as far as what I understand, don't think of sex until their minds are thinking along those lines via initiation. Hence, the dead bed syndrome? If I remembered the name of that correctly. Neither may realize they are horny until there is mental and then invited or wanted physical stimulation.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

And, Fozzy, if you think about this, there is no such thing as a high drive woman. It's all responsive. The amount of protection and understanding they feel with any man is directly proportional to their sex drive. So, the better a man is at providing these things, the more often they will be interested. There is no real desire because it takes initiation to start it. It's all in what a woman believes is enough that makes her horny. If she has lower expectations and a man who provides these mental stimuli more fully, she will be ultra responsive or the misnomer, HD. 

It then, is based on the desire(drive) and abilities of her husband.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

badsanta said:


> I think there are a lot of guys out there that are very attracted to their wives, but just do not get anything out of "duty" sex. They get way more excited by experiencing their wives have multiple orgasms. In that sense, you have BOTH attraction desire AND responsive desire.
> 
> I am sure it is a mix of both for women as well...
> 
> My wife is attracted to me, but she mostly gets excited to see me excited to the point I start going a little crazy.


If a man is getting duty sex, it's because he is not doing enough. Many women have said this, and I just didn't understand. I think it means she has a set of boxes that have to be ticked off(in her head and she doesn't keep a count it just is there) in order for her to feel sexy and horny. The more of those mental boxes you tic, the hornier she will be. I'm suggesting something along the lines of compatibility. If you notice the guys who work very hard to get some where even near what they want, you will see how hard they have to work at it and they gain little ground. It's not his fault or hers. It is what it is. 

That last sentence is responsive attraction.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I don't know where I'd fit on that, somewhere in the middle I'd guess. I can want sex for no reason but my brain will win out and say no if I'm not feeling loved or have my needs met. Other times I might not care one way or the other but something can spark it and make me want it. I really don't think it has to do with attraction. Maybe emotional connection though. 
H sounds like he'd be more RD so I don't think it's always a woman thing.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Reads pretty responsive to me SGC. No, I don't think all women are the same, but it seems that there is some correlation with response.

What I'd like to know is, what makes a woman say no, once she has had those mental boxes all ticked? I mean, once you feel desire, attraction or whatever word you want to use, what would then change your mind and make you say, I'm not going to do that. I am guessing it's removing yourself from any physical stimulus because that seems like it's the last box to check. I know it can stop even during if necessary. So, I guess enough of those mental box ticks have been removed, ie; you feel afraid or unappreciated or you think he's thinking about someone else, or a number of other things? Is it possible to even stop before it gets that far, if you have been neglected for a long time? I'm thinking it isn't, but that seems very disrespectful and unfair and I apologize for hurting anyone's feelings.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Seriously, I don't think it's possible to bring up that insatiable desire in any woman because of the different needs of individual women. So, if you give it your best and she isn't as responsive as you'd like, you are better off finding someone who is. I don't think that can be changed, only slightly improved.

Edit: And with responsive desire, you won't know that until you've tried. It isn't possible to tick off all those boxes, or meet all those needs, until you attempt it. Her response is tell tale and then all you have is physical compatibility and technique.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This is utter nonsense.

When in the presence of a guy who turns them on - women feel raw lust just like men do. And for the man that turns them on - he doesn't need to do anything to earn sex. 

That's just biology and its powerful. 





2ntnuf said:


> And, Fozzy, if you think about this, there is no such thing as a high drive woman. It's all responsive. The amount of protection and understanding they feel with any man is directly proportional to their sex drive. So, the better a man is at providing these things, the more often they will be interested. There is no real desire because it takes initiation to start it. It's all in what a woman believes is enough that makes her horny. If she has lower expectations and a man who provides these mental stimuli more fully, she will be ultra responsive or the misnomer, HD.
> 
> It then, is based on the desire(drive) and abilities of her husband.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> This is utter nonsense.
> 
> When in the presence of a guy who turns them on - women feel raw lust just like men do. And for the man that turns them on - he doesn't need to do anything to earn sex.
> 
> That's just biology and its powerful.


So, what is responsive desire? It must be bull as well? And so, there would be no dead bed syndrome? That's false too?

Edit: According to those articles I read, what you are speaking of "a guy who turns them on", is responsive desire.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Reads pretty responsive to me SGC. No, I don't think all women are the same, but it seems that there is some correlation with response.
> 
> What I'd like to know is, what makes a woman say no, once she has had those mental boxes all ticked? I mean, once you feel desire, attraction or whatever word you want to use, what would then change your mind and make you say, I'm not going to do that.


For myself it's past resentments and disappointments. I can feel, and often do, like OMG I want to just jump him right now and desperately want sex but then I remember he doesn't much care about my needs so I just don't do anything about it.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Do you attempt to meet your wife's needs? Aren't you essentially earning sex? She must see and feel protected/ion, have a sense that she will be taken care of gently and with confidence.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> For myself it's past resentments and disappointments. I can feel, and often do, like OMG I want to just jump him right now and desperately want sex but then I remember he doesn't much care about my needs so I just don't do anything about it.


This is still responsive because a man will many times not give a crap about things that would seem most important to respect and safety, but will just have sex anyway. He just wants to get off, now. Better with a woman he loves, but "any port in a storm" will do, sometimes. Not very responsive.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

If you believe it, back it up.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> This is still responsive because a man will many times not give a crap about things that would seem most important to respect and safety, but will just have sex anyway. He just wants to get off, now. Better with a woman he loves, but "any port in a storm" will do, sometimes. Not very responsive.


Not all men, there are many who need to have their other needs met or have someone initiate for them to have sex too. 

Women might be more RD because a lot of us need more warm up time. Is needing foreplay to get ready for sex the same as being RD?


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Not all men, there are many who need to have their other needs met or have someone initiate for them to have sex too.
> 
> Women might be more RD because a lot of us need more warm up time. Is needing foreplay to get ready for sex the same as being RD?


I think men in long-term relationships might need to feel respected, if and when their testosterone level lowers. I think, just like any other person, if they feel abused, their desire goes down, but no, it's not the same as not having any thoughts about sex until and only if, a man meets needs specific to each woman. I do think the first sentence in that last paragraph is true. 

I don't mind you or anyone else telling me I'm wrong, but I just want to see the proof if it's a very different opinion, or it just won't wash with me. 

And, I don't know if I'm correct, but it is there in the articles. 

Now, with perimenopause, I think there may be some huge shift in many of these, similar to having a few drinks. It lowers inhibitions and automatically ignores needs, as similarly with men with high levels of testosterone. That's an imbalance of hormones.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> , it's not the same as not having any thoughts about sex until and only if, a man meets needs specific to each woman.


I guess that's the question. Is RD just sitting at 0 until someone meets your needs or turns you on or is it that you _do _want sex you also need to be stimulated emotionally or physically as well? 

Tons of women have thoughts of sex, sometimes just randomly throughout the day. We talk about it, want it, fantasize, masturbate. Some women have more thoughts about it than some men.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I guess that's the question. Is RD just sitting at 0 until someone meets your needs or turns you on or is it that you _do _want sex you also need to be stimulated emotionally or physically as well?
> 
> Tons of women have thoughts of sex, sometimes just randomly throughout the day. We talk about it, want it, fantasize, masturbate. Some women have more thoughts about it than some men.


Truth. There are some seriously horny chicks out there.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I guess that's the question. Is RD just sitting at 0 until someone meets your needs or turns you on or is it that you _do _want sex you also need to be stimulated emotionally or physically as well?
> 
> Tons of women have thoughts of sex, sometimes just randomly throughout the day. We talk about it, want it, fantasize, masturbate. Some women have more thoughts about it than some men.


If the article is correct about "dead bed" when there are two women in a relationship, then, that desire must be sitting at zero.

If tons of women have thoughts of sex, then that article is hogwash and then, so are the opinions of women who say they have needs to be met for there to be sex. Plus, they would be initiating rather than waiting for a man to initiate. Money, status, etc., would have little bearing on desire, there would only be or mainly be only physical attraction that would have to occur for them to have sex. I don't remember anyone posting that or anything like it. 

Also, I wonder if the majority of the women you speak of are in peri or if the age and biology has little to do with it. From what I gather, changes in biology have lots to do with it.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Before menopause - M2 would feel spontaneous desire mid-cycle.

Other than that our entire sex life was based on responsive desire. And it worked great. 

As for the articles you reference below, how is that different than a guy getting turned when he meets a hot woman? 




2ntnuf said:


> So, what is responsive desire? It must be bull as well? And so, there would be no dead bed syndrome? That's false too?
> 
> Edit: According to those articles I read, what you are speaking of "a guy who turns them on", is responsive desire.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> If the article is correct about "dead bed" when there are two women in a relationship, then, that desire must be sitting at zero.
> 
> If tons of women have thoughts of sex, then that article is hogwash and then, so are the opinions of women who say they have needs to be met for there to be sex. Plus, they would be initiating rather than waiting for a man to initiate. Money, status, etc., would have little bearing on desire, there would only be or mainly be only physical attraction that would have to occur for them to have sex. I don't remember anyone posting that or anything like it.
> 
> Also, I wonder if the majority of the women you speak of are in peri or if the age and biology has little to do with it. From what I gather, changes in biology have lots to do with it.


It's not hogwash, it's just not true for everyone.
Not all lesbian couples experience bed death. Just because many women do have thoughts of sex doesn't mean they all do. Just like not all men are SD. A lot of women do initiate. I used to quite often. Money and status has nothing to do with my (and many other women's) desire and physical attraction can turn me on as much as it can a man. I just need a deeper connection to act on my want of sex, for my own emotional protection. 

The girl friends I talk(ed) about sex with were all roughly my age so different women, different ages from teens-30s so far.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Before menopause - M2 would feel spontaneous desire mid-cycle.
> 
> Other than that our entire sex life was based on responsive desire. And it worked great.
> 
> As for the articles you reference below, how is that different than a guy getting turned when he meets a hot woman?


It's different in that he doesn't need her to do anything for him to feel desire for sex. The article states that women do need someone to initiate. I didn't write it. I just went with what was suggested and did a search. There were no articles I could find that actually talked about women having anything other than responsive desire. Drive, then is responsive. Peri it seems, would cause a woman's need for relief through sex to go up, but it also causes her need for a stronger more aggressively initiative man.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Responsive desire sure does seem like a convenient way to put a pleasant spin on a lack of attraction to me. But I can't really say I've experienced it. For a time my wife was no desire. Before that, and for the last couple years, she's spontaneous desire. Just this morning I woke up with her sitting on me naked lol. She said after she just couldn't help herself. She woke up horny at 5 but let me sleep until 6 before she pounced.

If I have a choice between the two, I'll take the horny wife every time.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> It's not hogwash, it's just not true for everyone.
> Not all lesbian couples experience bed death. Just because many women do have thoughts of sex doesn't mean they all do. Just like not all men are SD. A lot of women do initiate. I used to quite often. Money and status has nothing to do with my (and many other women's) desire and physical attraction can turn me on as much as it can a man. I just need a deeper connection to act on my want of sex, for my own emotional protection.
> 
> The girl friends I talk(ed) about sex with were all roughly my age so different women, different ages from teens-30s so far.


Well, nothing is true for everyone and I don't suggest that, as I tried to differentiate those specific needs. However, I doubt a woman would write that if it wasn't true for a majority of a diverse group of women. 

So you know sex is good for you. You desire it. You have some needs to be met before you have sex. And, you would rather he initiate, but you did when you had to. Would that be correct?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Well, nothing is true for everyone and I don't suggest that, as I tried to differentiate those specific needs. However, I doubt a woman would write that if it wasn't true for a majority of a diverse group of women.
> 
> So you know sex is good for you. You desire it. You have some needs to be met before you have sex. And, you would rather he initiate, but you did when you had to. Would that be correct?


I think it's a good article to explain RD. I do wish she would have talked more about men being RD and women being SD too- and I still think you can be a mix of both or one for a while and then the other.

For right now, yes I'd need my needs to be met and his loving initiation to have sex. Before the hurt built up I didn't. FTR- my marriage is sexless but my _want _for it can sit anywhere from 0-99.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I think it's a good article to explain RD. I do wish she would have talked more about men being RD and women being SD too- and I still think you can be a mix of both or one for a while and then the other.
> 
> For right now, yes I'd need my needs to be met and his loving initiation to have sex. Before the hurt built up I didn't. FTR- my marriage is sexless but my _want _for it can sit anywhere from 0-99.


I tried to find something about men and women in the same article, on similar topics. What I found was basically nothing. Men have a different drive than women. I'd gladly read something someone feels relevant. 

My guess is, he was meeting those needs of yours on a regular basis, which allowed you to initiate, although I think it is quite similar to what I have been concluding. At least I think so, at this point. He doesn't meet those needs now, and you don't feel very attractive or desirous of him, but still want sex. I feel bad for you. I really do. Something is wrong there, with him. What that is and why, could be related to a number of things. 

I imagine you two were a pretty good match, or you would not have lasted this long in the marriage. I commend your fidelity and your persistence to rectify the problems.


----------



## batsociety (Jan 23, 2015)

I'm probably more RD than SD (not strictly either) but it is definitely not due to a lack of sexual attraction. At all. Ever. 

I think it's just because my husband has the same crazy sex drive he had when we were teenagers where I've always been a little more mellow. I'm not even thinking about sex most of the time before he initiates, but it only takes me about half a second before I'm in the same state of mind as him.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Before menopause - M2 would feel spontaneous desire mid-cycle.
> 
> Other than that our entire sex life was based on responsive desire. And it worked great.


This was very similar to me - the difference being that my inner feeling of excitement was random and not at a consistent, particular time of the month.

As an aside, I always used to wonder when I read that people marry someone similar to a parent, because I never, ever saw my ex-husband being anything like my mom or dad.

Both my parents are narcissists, who feel absolutely no need to initiate with me. The burden of 99.8% of the relational effort is my responsibility. (Basically, I grew up feeling invisible and worthless.)

And I only recently realized that that's how my ex was too.

He refused to initiate and didn't seem to think he should have to ask for sex. Or for anything.

So, since I'm responsive, and he didn't initiate, we had no sex.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

There's some serious, odd stretching of the term "responsive" going on in this thread.

Waiting to sleep with someone you're actually sexually attracted to is not "responsive". This idea that all men will sleep with all women is just as much a load of nonsense as the idea that all women only think of sex if a man initiates.

Those of us who fall outside the stereotypes, which are plenty, know better. No all women aren't responsive alone; I wouldn't have ever married a woman whose view on sex was "you always start, and I'll come along for the ride if I'm up to it". I need, require and desire a woman who needs, requires and desires me. No part of me is interested in being a woman who doesn't initiate for her OWN sake.

Of course both sexes have elements of responsive drive. There are times when you're just horny and think of sex spontaneously, and there are times when you're not and your partner initiating by touching your body, or suggesting sex, takes you from 0 to 180 in response to their initiation.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

I don't have as much testosterone as a guy. That means that I'm not as driven to seek out sex as your average guy. I do, however, have a sex drive. I do desire sex. I'm just not driven to seek it out in the same way a man would be. For the most part, I don't walk around all day thinking about sex, although sometimes I do think about it. But, if a man I'm attracted to and feel safe with, initiates, it's like a switch flips for me. Suddenly, "Hmm, I think I'll make brownies tonight" can turn into "Hey, sex!" and proceed to actually having sex. I often need a little kickstart to switch from not thinking about sex to thinking about it. 

Now, the bit I mentioned about "a man I'm attracted to _and feel safe with_" is important. A guy I'm not attracted to won't be able to flip that switch for me. I need attraction in order for "Hmmm, brownies" to turn into "Hey, sex!!!!" But even if I'm attracted to him, my brain can override the switch if he's someone I don't feel emotionally or physically safe with. I can be turned on, but still not feel uninhibited enough to actually have sex. One night stands hold zero appeal to me for that reason.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

jaquen, I don't know whether or not you're referring to my post, but if I gave the impression that I was just sitting around waiting and would respond if I felt like it, then that wasn't my intention.

When married, I consistently initiated, and was consistently shot down in one form or another.

I initiated scheduling (lasted one week), I asked about his fantasies, I initiated conversations about the lack of sex. And the last time I initiated sex itself, and I was turned down, I was done.

During our separation, I was the one initiating conversations about making our marriage better. I initiated going to counseling (which he attended once), and I initiated going through a couples book together.

So, it's not that I'm unwilling to do my part. But, the truth is, the more I had to prompt/convince my ex-husband to have sex (which was never successful), the less appealing having sex with him became.

By the end of my marriage, I didn't even see him as person capable of having sex. He became more of a eunuch. 





jaquen said:


> There's some serious, odd stretching of the term "responsive" going on in this thread.
> 
> Waiting to sleep with someone you're actually sexually attracted to is not "responsive". This idea that all men will sleep with all women is just as much a load of nonsense as the idea that all women only think of sex if a man initiates.
> 
> ...


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I tried to find something about men and women in the same article, on similar topics. What I found was basically nothing. Men have a different drive than women. I'd gladly read something someone feels relevant.


There have been threads here by women who have to do all the initiating. That if they didn't they would never or rarely get sex. I do think H fits more with RD but there's a lack of research in general about men who's drive doesn't fit the norm. Making it a "woman" thing won't help making those men feel normal. I think understanding RD can go a long way in making a sexual relationship with an RD spouse work, I just have a problem with it being so rigidly defined. That you're either one or the other based on gender.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

minimalME said:


> jaquen, I don't know whether or not you're referring to my post,


I haven't read the post in question.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

So does RD automatically mean you don't/won't initiate?


----------



## Tasorundo (Apr 1, 2012)

As a spouse of someone who says they have 'RD', I feel it is a way of blame shifting to a large extent. She passes the buck to me and I now I am responsible for her desire levels.

This despite that fact that she does not respond.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

jaquen said:


> I haven't read the post in question.


Hence the preface, _I don't know whether or not you're referring to my post..._



Fozzy said:


> So does RD automatically mean you don't/won't initiate?


Not to me, but like most things, it's probably highly individual.



Tasorundo said:


> As a spouse of someone who says they have 'RD', I feel it is a way of blame shifting to a large extent. She passes the buck to me and I now I am responsible for her desire levels.


I can understand that. As the former spouse of someone who didn't provide any sort of leadership (sex, finances, parenting, etc.), I felt like my ex-husband's passivity was a convenient way to get out of taking responsibility and making decisions.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

Do we have a working definition of RD yet? For me, it means that I am not in the mood, but my husband is, he initiates, and I respond by thinking sexy thoughts, conjuring fantasies, and actively enjoying his touch.

It takes me longer to orgasm when I am starting out cold like this, but I am always glad that I made the effort to become aroused by him.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Currently for me, it has a lot to do with his behavior. 

He doesn't ask, we don't discuss. He just takes.

That's the biggest turn on for me. If the attitude is right, I get immediately turned on more than I ever would if I initiated.


----------



## Propel (Aug 1, 2014)

> I tried to find something about men and women in the same article, on similar topics. What I found was basically nothing. Men have a different drive than women. I'd gladly read something someone feels relevant.


Please if you are going to point to a source, please be sure check out related articles at said source. 
I drew this graph about sexual desire… and I think it might change your life. | the dirty normal


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

My wife rarely outright rejects anymore, however I have to initiate 100% of the time. She hasn't initiated sex on her own in years now. I'm sure if I gave her the definition and asked her, she'd probably say she was RD, but who knows. I know some guys have no problem being the initiator 100% of the time, but after a while I start to get almost a rapey feel to it, as though I'm just using her body. Like if she can't be bothered to ever initiate---EVER (and she used to), it feels like basically it's all for my benefit. Which sucks.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

minimalME said:


> Currently for me, it has a lot to do with his behavior.
> 
> *He doesn't ask, we don't discuss. He just takes.*
> That's the biggest turn on for me. If the attitude is right, I get immediately turned on more than I ever would if I initiated.


See, and this would probably be ok with me, if she would ever communicate that this was a turn-on. But my wife would never admit to being turned on by this, or anything else. This leaves me with the assumption that she's just going along with it out of...what?....pity? kindness?


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> My wife rarely outright rejects anymore, however I have to initiate 100% of the time. She hasn't initiated sex on her own in years now. I'm sure if I gave her the definition and asked her, she'd probably say she was RD, but who knows. I know some guys have no problem being the initiator 100% of the time, but after a while I start to get almost a rapey feel to it, as though I'm just using her body. Like if she can't be bothered to ever initiate---EVER (and she used to), it feels like basically it's all for my benefit. Which sucks.


I'm afraid I don't know your history. Does she know how important this is to you?

I initiate sometimes, but when I feel desired and wanted (he initiates) it's more exciting and fun to me.

The last time my boyfriend and I were together, we were in the middle of a movie (at home), and I asked him to pause it. He asked why, and I said I wanted to take advantage of him.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

That would bother my husband too, Fozzy. He wants my passion, my lust for him. When I initiate, he feels desired and masculine.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> If the article is correct about "dead bed" when there are two women in a relationship, then, that desire must be sitting at zero.
> 
> If tons of women have thoughts of sex, then that article is hogwash and then, so are the opinions of women who say they have needs to be met for there to be sex. Plus, they would be initiating rather than waiting for a man to initiate. Money, status, etc., would have little bearing on desire, there would only be or mainly be only physical attraction that would have to occur for them to have sex. I don't remember anyone posting that or anything like it.
> 
> Also, I wonder if the majority of the women you speak of are in peri or if the age and biology has little to do with it. From what I gather, changes in biology have lots to do with it.



Let me explain lesbian bed death a little better.

Two women relate well to each other. Two women who know how to be emotionally connected, nurturing, supportive, loving, encouraging who have been together for a long time so the romance of loving one another has slowly petered out. That sudden urge of "wow we connect so well I just want to be in your arms and kiss you," has ebbed away and is replaced with the quiet contentment of "we get each other." There is no tension, no eroticism, no chase, no hunt...just contentment. 

Responsive sexual desire means that they are promoted to think about sex when the emotions go from contentment to erotic tension. Overtly sexual behavior is absent in a relationship that has settled into quiet contentment. Without overtly sexual behavior to charge the erotic atmosphere, there is nothing to respond to. Since both women are immersed in this quiet contentment it will take a significant awakening from both of them to turn on the sexually charged behavior because they must learn to manufacture that drive without any stimulus to prompt it.

Make sense?


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> So does RD automatically mean you don't/won't initiate?


I don't mind initiating, I just don't automatically think to do it all that often. When I was married, I tried to make a mental note to initiate sex at least once or twice a week. My very HD husband turned me down probably 80% of the times I initiated. He seemed to resent "always" having to initiate, but also didn't seem to particularly care for me doing so.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

minimalME said:


> Hence the preface, _I don't know whether or not you're referring to my post..._


Did I state otherwise?

You said you didn't know whether or not I was referring to your post.

I clarified that I hadn't read your post.

End of story. No need for this "hence" business. You were perfectly understood the first time.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Did I state otherwise?
> 
> You said you didn't know whether or not I was referring to your post.
> 
> ...


End of story, and yet you felt the need to post this? Thanks for setting me straight, but I'll decide what I respond to.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

minimalME said:


> I'm afraid I don't know your history. Does she know how important this is to you?
> 
> I initiate sometimes, but when I feel desired and wanted (he initiates) it's more exciting and fun to me.
> 
> The last time my boyfriend and I were together, we were in the middle of a movie (at home), and I asked him to pause it. He asked why, and I said I wanted to take advantage of him.


I have told her this is important to me. Whether she understands it or not is subject to debate.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Tasorundo said:


> As a spouse of someone who says they have 'RD', I feel it is a way of blame shifting to a large extent. She passes the buck to me and I now I am responsible for her desire levels.
> 
> This despite that fact that she does not respond.


Read Rowan's post below. Maybe it will help you to understand.



Rowan said:


> I don't have as much testosterone as a guy. That means that I'm not as driven to seek out sex as your average guy. I do, however, have a sex drive. I do desire sex. I'm just not driven to seek it out in the same way a man would be. For the most part, I don't walk around all day thinking about sex, although sometimes I do think about it. But, if a man I'm attracted to and feel safe with, initiates, it's like a switch flips for me. Suddenly, "Hmm, I think I'll make brownies tonight" can turn into "Hey, sex!" and proceed to actually having sex. I often need a little kickstart to switch from not thinking about sex to thinking about it.
> 
> Now, the bit I mentioned about "a man I'm attracted to _and feel safe with_" is important. A guy I'm not attracted to won't be able to flip that switch for me. I need attraction in order for "Hmmm, brownies" to turn into "Hey, sex!!!!" But even if I'm attracted to him, my brain can override the switch if he's someone I don't feel emotionally or physically safe with. I can be turned on, but still not feel uninhibited enough to actually have sex. One night stands hold zero appeal to me for that reason.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> Do we have a working definition of RD yet? For me, it means that I am not in the mood, but my husband is, he initiates, and I respond by thinking sexy thoughts, conjuring fantasies, and actively enjoying his touch.
> 
> It takes me longer to orgasm when I am starting out cold like this, but I am always glad that I made the effort to become aroused by him.


Click on the link in the one post I made on the first? page. There are actually two links and what I am basing some of this on.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

minimalME said:


> Currently for me, it has a lot to do with his behavior.
> 
> He doesn't ask, we don't discuss. He just takes.
> 
> That's the biggest turn on for me. If the attitude is right, I get immediately turned on more than I ever would if I initiated.


And that's kinda been my point in general.

I know there are reasons to be different as posted, and some maybe weren't yet. It's just risky to type that.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> See, and this would probably be ok with me, if she would ever communicate that this was a turn-on. But my wife would never admit to being turned on by this, or anything else. This leaves me with the assumption that she's just going along with it out of...what?....pity? kindness?


She wants her husband so much, she initiates when he won't. Some won't. Some will find a man who initiates. There are many possibilities. 

Did you read...who's post was it? hang on, I'll edit this. Edit: See next post. What you will notice is all of these women want needs met. In other words, feel safe, secure, provided for(not always huge amounts of cash or ceo of Conglomerated Cogs), and I forget what else, then they can allow that switch to turn on and here we go.

Even at that, they want him to initiate after he provides those needs. And, I bet you can infer, as I have, depending on their work load, or peri(unbalanced hormones with higher test than normal) those needs still have to be met first and then initiation is still better than them initiating. They still want him to be the one to initiate, provide whatever for those needs to be met and so forth before.

The one post is the opposite of the others below. It just talks of not getting those things and thereby helps make the same assertion as I have.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> She wants her husband so much, she initiates when he won't. Some won't. Some will find a man who initiates. There are many possibilities.
> 
> Did you read...who's post was it? hang on, I'll edit this.





SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I think it's a good article to explain RD. I do wish she would have talked more about men being RD and women being SD too- and I still think you can be a mix of both or one for a while and then the other.
> 
> For right now, yes I'd need my needs to be met and his loving initiation to have sex. Before the hurt built up I didn't. FTR- my marriage is sexless but my _want _for it can sit anywhere from 0-99.





Rowan said:


> I don't have as much testosterone as a guy. That means that I'm not as driven to seek out sex as your average guy. I do, however, have a sex drive. I do desire sex. I'm just not driven to seek it out in the same way a man would be. For the most part, I don't walk around all day thinking about sex, although sometimes I do think about it. But, if a man I'm attracted to and feel safe with, initiates, it's like a switch flips for me. Suddenly, "Hmm, I think I'll make brownies tonight" can turn into "Hey, sex!" and proceed to actually having sex. I often need a little kickstart to switch from not thinking about sex to thinking about it.
> 
> Now, the bit I mentioned about "a man I'm attracted to _and feel safe with_" is important. A guy I'm not attracted to won't be able to flip that switch for me. I need attraction in order for "Hmmm, brownies" to turn into "Hey, sex!!!!" But even if I'm attracted to him, my brain can override the switch if he's someone I don't feel emotionally or physically safe with. I can be turned on, but still not feel uninhibited enough to actually have sex. One night stands hold zero appeal to me for that reason.





minimalME said:


> Hence the preface, _I don't know whether or not you're referring to my post..._
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> Let me explain lesbian bed death a little better.
> 
> Two women relate well to each other. Two women who know how to be emotionally connected, nurturing, supportive, loving, encouraging who have been together for a long time so the romance of loving one another has slowly petered out. That sudden urge of "wow we connect so well I just want to be in your arms and kiss you," has ebbed away and is replaced with the quiet contentment of "we get each other." There is no tension, no eroticism, no chase, no hunt...just contentment.
> 
> ...


That's how I understood it.

What they conclude is that both are women and are RD and that is why the bed becomes a death bed. Neither will initiate. I think Minimalme, sorry if it's not you, posted that she had to initiate, which proves out how it would have to work in a similar scenario with opposite sexes. The difference in MM's life is that she had a tough childhood which makes the difference.

It's likely, if MM had not had those experiences, she would have to learn to recognize the signs and initiate. She already did through childhood suffering and contemplation. Good work, by the way MM.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Rowan said:


> I don't mind initiating,* I just don't automatically think to do it all that often.* When I was married, I tried to make a mental note to initiate sex at least once or twice a week. My very HD husband turned me down probably 80% of the times I initiated. He seemed to resent "always" having to initiate, but also didn't seem to particularly care for me doing so.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> She wants her husband so much, she initiates when he won't. Some won't. Some will find a man who initiates. There are many possibilities.
> 
> Did you read...who's post was it? hang on, I'll edit this. Edit: See next post. What you will notice is all of these women want needs met. In other words, feel safe, secure, provided for(not always huge amounts of cash or ceo of Conglomerated Cogs), and I forget what else, then they can allow that switch to turn on and here we go.
> 
> ...


:iagree:

When I was younger, I didn't appreciate the differences in men and women. 

I think, because a few male relatives seemed so comfortable ignoring sexual boundaries, I was scared of 'manly' men. Although it wasn't a connection I made at the time, I associated assertiveness with abuse.

In my marriage, I was safe, secure and taken care of, but even with all the good qualities my ex-husband had, he wasn't a leader - an initiator. 

I had chosen someone who was the opposite of my male family members. Unfortunately, the consequences of that choice were that we related more like girlfriends than husband and wife.

So, I agree with what you wrote above - that for me, I need to feel safe and secure, but that has to be coming from a confident man who makes decisions and has a sense of purpose. 

Those qualities have a huge impact on my level of respect, which in turn, effects my sexual attraction.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

I think many women have some level of responsive desire. For me there are certain times of the month where I think about sex a lot and want to have it, but others where the hormones are down where I don't think much about it at all. Those are the times it becomes responsive.....I could be fine without it but hb knows what I like so he'll usually get me there, even if it takes a little longer then usual.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

minimalME said:


> Those qualities have a huge impact on my level of respect, which in turn, effects my sexual attraction.


In regards to respect and how it affects every other aspect of a releationship, I don't think most people get it. Time and time again I see comments on TAM jumping on the band wagon to fuss about the spouse or bf/gf but rarely is the OP fussed at for allowing themselves to be treated like crap even though that's the root of most problems. Of course the flip side to this is that we can't expect those around us to respect us unless we are respectable and also return the favor.

But it's annoying to see so many people confuse boundaries with ultimatums and policing respect with being controlling. Sorry, rant over.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

lifeistooshort said:


> I think many women have some level of responsive desire. For me there are certain times of the month where I think about sex a lot and want to have it, but others where the hormones are down where I don't think much about it at all. Those are the times it becomes responsive.....I could be fine without it but hb knows what I like so he'll usually get me there, even if it takes a little longer then usual.


I see it all as RD of differing levels. I don't know any men who have their desire for sex with a woman triggered or tied so much to her ability to provide or protect.


----------



## batsociety (Jan 23, 2015)

Maybe spontaneous desire means no sexual attraction? Maybe you don't need the attraction to feel sexual desire at all?

I don't know why we have to try and make a science out of people's sex habits, tbh.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SD is about just sitting there and you want to have sex. It just pops in your head. Used to happen all the time when I was younger and my health was normal, average or better.

That was the reason they used the contrast of two women in a relationship to prove RD. Of course, being humans, we are all a mixed up chemical soup that has life experience that changes little things for each of us, but for the most part...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

batsociety said:


> Maybe spontaneous desire means no sexual attraction? Maybe you don't need the attraction to feel sexual desire at all?
> 
> I don't know why we have to try and make a science out of people's sex habits, tbh.


Because when we don't understand each other, things break down.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Fozzy, 

Isn't it all based in science? Aren't there biological reasons for the attraction? I think the messed up parts come along with misunderstanding of each other, but also from a misunderstanding of the science. We think what we have is the best we can get. Clearly, all the happy divorces where spouses find someone they are much happier with are an indication that's false.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I see it all as RD of differing levels. I don't know any men who have their desire for sex with a woman triggered or tied so much to her ability to provide or protect.



This article was written based on the other one (and has fantastic gifs to go along with it  )

https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-drive-spontaneous-responsive/

and talks about how "From a purely evolutionary standpoint, it’s not in her best interest to become aroused and willing to be impregnated for no reason. Hence why her responsive sex drive might help her to determine if the sperm donor in question is capable of being a partner, too."


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Not that I approve of it, but it would be at least settling and give clear direction if there is something definitive that must be in place to have a long lasting marriage or relationship. As an example, if I had beaten x2, I would have clear definitive proof of something that is not going to wash with anyone. When it's a lack of desire in me, why? When it's a lack of desire in her, why? What makes us tick and what things do I need to correct? So far, without her input, the probabilities are:

I didn't make enough money. 
I wasn't meeting her needs for physical compatibility, although why would she marry me?
I must have messed up on making her feel safe and secure by not being there for her in some "hour of need". I can think of a time when that would make sense, but I did not lie about what was going to happen. I swallowed my pride and made my feelings and what I knew I could do very clear. 

So, she had to have had beliefs that were not realistic, red flags if you will that she ignored. She broached the subject of marriage with me. She may not have understood her true needs. 

Edit: I want to add to this by saying that with all I have read on this and perimenopause, it makes perfect sense that she didn't really know what she wanted. Her hormones were reasonably stable when we married, and then she entered full on perimenopause while we were married, with my life being in turmoil from domestic relations and my poor choices due to trust in x1 and the court system being neutral, and her troubles from her daughter. There's no way we could have made it. She was not the same person she was when we married. She could not deal with the extra pressure. She even started a business, probably due to the more aggressive nature in her caused by higher levels of testosterone and a lack of enough satisfying sex. I say due to her hormones, because it was her idea and I knew nothing about it. I don't know who she talked with about it. She did a lot of preliminary work before she even told me. She found a building to rent through others and I didn't even know she was looking for one. She was very very good at keeping things to herself, lying, and deception. I was nearly completely trusting and deeply believed she loved being with me, probably due to her abilities to lie and deceive. She was a manager at a place and had a good job. I was satisfied. She wasn't. I just supported her and then really found excitement in it and a desire to learn. Since then, she has returned to something more stable and has given up her business. So, guess what? I got screwed with a woman who was not ready to be married or able to commit to a long-term relationship. Now, as long as her desire for sex is lower, there is a chance she won't cheat, unless there are things in her past that have broken her. Makes sense and is a warning to all men, not to get married when a woman is in perimenopause. If there is a history, there may be a better chance to make it. end edit

I think this is critical in making a decision to stay in or leave a marriage. Why be miserable trying to meet every need and thinking you are doing something wrong, when you are not? It's that she lied to herself, because clearly you want to be there, if you are doing what you know to do. 

I didn't do all I could. Some things I could not do. I take responsibility for not knowing how to get her to make decisions that would have made our lives together better. I take responsibility for not having a better job, even though she knew what I did and the income I brought to the table. She knew my past. I left no stone unturned. Amounts of detail, I left up to her. I told her the big picture and told her I'd answer any question she had, but I would not offer details unless she asked, because for example, I know someone may have died in a horrible accident at work. I don't need to know what they were screaming or how the blood and tissue squirted out and so forth. Understand?

With this stuff, I think its good to know the science behind what goes on in a normal person, and then adapt to specific circumstances. Clearly, this understanding will allow many to reconcile their guilty conscience to reality rather than hopes and dreams which will never come true and only have the potential to harm them further.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> This article was written based on the other one (*and has fantastic gifs to go along with it  )*
> 
> https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-drive-spontaneous-responsive/
> 
> and talks about how "From a purely evolutionary standpoint, it’s not in her best interest to become aroused and willing to be impregnated for no reason. Hence why her responsive sex drive might help her to determine if the sperm donor in question is capable of being a partner, too."


Oh good lord. Normally, that's the reason I don't read those. 

Just kidding. Not sure what you were thinking, but I get that it was meant to be humorous. I'll check it out.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> This article was written based on the other one (and has fantastic gifs to go along with it  )
> 
> https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-drive-spontaneous-responsive/
> 
> and talks about how "From a purely evolutionary standpoint, it’s not in her best interest to become aroused and willing to be impregnated for no reason. Hence why her responsive sex drive might help her to determine if the sperm donor in question is capable of being a partner, too."


Pretty much confirms what I've been posting. What's normal for women is no desire. Ovulation is an abberation which is not the norm. Ovulation lasts from 12 to 24 hours. Hormone levels rise. After 24 hours, the egg starts dissolving. Hormone levels drop to normal range. So, what seems to be normal is approximately two days out of thirty where there is a libido similar to men, but not exactly the same. 



> If fertilization does not occur the egg dissolves after 24 hours. At this time your hormone levels will decrease http://americanpregnancy.org/getting-pregnant/understanding-ovulation/





> Consider this: a man might be in the grocery store trying to decide between spicy mustards when suddenly, he realizes he is developing a boner. Now, he’s not that interested in mustard, so he realizes that he’s just plain horny. He rushes home to his wife and accosts her for sex. He’s ready to go. He’s sexually charged, locked and loaded.
> 
> His wife, however, has not had the same random, mystical arousal. While she acknowledges his desire for sex and concedes, her desire may come much later in the process. She becomes aroused in response to increasingly sexual activities. Not the other way around! So, by the end of the session of this afternoon delight, she’s happy she participated, even if she wasn’t feeling it at the beginning.
> 
> Her husband, meanwhile, doesn’t understand why she so rarely seems to just want sex for no reason. The exception being, perhaps, when she is ovulating. https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-drive-spontaneous-responsive/


I stand by my claims of what is normal.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

And, you won't know how deeply she desires you as a long-term partner and mate, until you have sex with her. Due to biology. You could marry someone who is not the best match and cannot ever be, no matter how well you do outside the bedroom with meeting needs.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Makes perfect sense to me why there are so many cases of infidelity during peri-menopause. Hormone levels are skewed from normal. Women need a stronger man who has made his life already and is secure with himself, because they are far from secure during that period. They are questioning their sexuality that they thought they understood. They are confused, but afraid of being open about it and looking weak under the pressures of societal expectations. They can't be themselves with their husband and not look weak. If you are a man, and men do have lower testosterone naturally during this same time, you will have a tougher time upping your aggressiveness due to that And the fact that you have in most instances, attained the life goals you set, or are at least solidly on track. 

Pride and fear, which have nothing to do with your partner in most cases, are the cause of weaknesses in many of these marriages. 

What a sick trick mother nature plays on us all, huh?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Pretty much confirms what I've been posting. What's normal for women is no desire..


But I wouldn't call it NO desire. Just needing a little foreplay reminder to get them in the mood most of the time. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. It doesn't mean they are LD. 
Like it says as well

In reality, it’s not that these women (it’s not just women: men can also have a responsive sex drive) have lower libidos; it’s that they don’t have the frequency of “spontaneous” desires as their male counterparts. 

Also talks about stereotypes of "slVts" and "40 year old virgins" contributing to the gender divide which I agree with too.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Something has been bugging me about this quote.

Quote:
Consider this: a man might be in the grocery store trying to decide between spicy mustards when suddenly, he realizes he is developing a boner. Now, he’s not that interested in mustard, so he realizes that he’s just plain horny. He rushes home to his wife and accosts her for sex. He’s ready to go. He’s sexually charged, locked and loaded.

His wife, however, has not had the same random, mystical arousal. While she acknowledges his desire for sex and concedes, her desire may come much later in the process. She becomes aroused in response to increasingly sexual activities. Not the other way around! So, by the end of the session of this afternoon delight, she’s happy she participated, even if she wasn’t feeling it at the beginning. 

Her husband, meanwhile, doesn’t understand why she so rarely seems to just want sex for no reason. The exception being, perhaps, when she is ovulating. https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-dr...us-responsive/


If true desire in women is responsive, at what point do women know they do not want sex with a particular person, in the cases where other or enough of those needs have been met? Do you only know for sure, once there has been some physical contact?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> If true desire in women is responsive, at what point do women know they do not want sex with a particular person, in the cases where other or enough of those needs have been met? Do you only know for sure, once there has been some physical contact?


How responsive a woman is and to what depends on the woman. Some might just see a sexy guy from across the room to think "ooooh, I want to bang that guy!" others might need a lot more warm up time, romance throughout the day. Each woman's turns ons and what makes them want sex are different.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> If true desire in women is responsive, at what point do women know they do not want sex with a particular person, in the cases where other or enough of those needs have been met? Do you only know for sure, once there has been some physical contact?


When do women know that they don't want sex with a particular person? When they have a wall of resentment built against their husband. When they do not have a strong emotional connection with him. When they do not want to please him. When they have lost respect for him. When they do not understand that sex is not just a physical release, it has an emotional component.

We have responsive desire when we yield to the passion of our husbands. We actively strive to become aroused by him. We allow ourselves to respond to his advances. The brain is the most important sexual organ in the body.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> But I wouldn't call it NO desire. Just needing a little foreplay reminder to get them in the mood most of the time. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. It doesn't mean they are LD.
> Like it says as well
> 
> In reality, it’s not that these women (it’s not just women: men can also have a responsive sex drive) have lower libidos; it’s that they don’t have the frequency of “spontaneous” desires as their male counterparts.
> ...


It certainly can't be classified as high or low drive. It's either no or limited drive based on surroundings and perceptions. Anything else is caused by a change from what is normal levels of hormones. 

When men have a responsive drive, it is not normal. We can all have something different, but these are not normal.

****s and 40 year old virgins are aberrations from normal and are societal pressures which only prove out in abnormal relationships. What makes this obvious is the most women who are younger, seem to sleep around more. Do they want sex with all these men? I suppose it's not rape in that sense, but a larger number would not be the norm, whereas for men, it does seem to be the norm. Hence, societal disrespect of the genders. 

Acceptance that we are all different is important. Still, I don't have to marry or desire someone who I am not naturally attracted to. I am more respectable when I do not pursue women who I'm not interested in and accept that I do not hold those beliefs for whatever reason, without telling them what I think or treating them differently when they desire a service from me than I would someone whose beliefs are more closely aligned with mine. Does that make any sense?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> It certainly can't be classified as high or low drive. It's either no or limited drive based on surroundings and perceptions. Anything else is caused by a change from what is normal levels of hormones.
> 
> When men have a responsive drive, it is not normal. We can all have something different, but these are not normal.


I don't agree. I don't think you should look at it as SD= having a sex drive and RD= you don't. 

It's just different ways of having a sex drive. You can be RD and want sex daily and be the higher drive partner. You can be SD and be the lower drive partner, maybe you only spontaneously think about it once a week.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

You might then ask why I would marry a woman who was more familiar with sexual relations than I was? A few reasons come to mind. 

Societal pressures to be someone who I am not, rather than respecting others for who they are and moving on.

Unfamiliarity with why it's important to be compatible in those areas directly related to a lack of sexual experience, I think.

Lack of knowledge due to mistaken conclusions. Unwillingness to study the how to manuals, thinking a loving partner would have fun exploring and learning, since each woman is different in what she wants, which are also, socially pressured norms that complicate life. There is a rule of thumb at least.

Denial of my own real wants and needs because I "should not think there is a difference in women surrounding experience", which is social pressure.

Beliefs that experience really isn't that big a deal. It certainly is when there is great disparity.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I don't agree. I don't think you should look at it as SD= having a sex drive and RD= you don't.
> 
> It's just different ways of having a sex drive. You can be RD and want sex daily and be the higher drive partner. You can be SD and be the lower drive partner, maybe you only spontaneously think about it once a week.


The trouble I see with your definition is that no doesn't mean no. It means maybe, depending. Check back in a half hour. Life doesn't provide opportunities like that. They are more random and spontaneous. 

So, either you have a drive or you sorta don't, or it's limited based upon criteria whose definitions vary widely. That's pretty much no or severely limited.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

There is one other reason I would marry a woman so different in sexual experience and it is definitely one reason I agreed to marry her. She didn't tell the truth. She was ashamed of herself. She screwed the marriage before we even started. She didn't trust me. Remove one check mark and it's a biggy. 

If she was honest with herself and me, we could have completely avoided all of what we lived through. It would have been the very best option under the circumstances. Guess what? She harmed me and it was intentional and abusive. She tried to make me or rather control me to become something I was not, at a fundamental level.

Edit: If you do check back in a half hour and the conclusion is no, you might then be a stalker. Makes sense to me based upon all the above. If you are wanted, you're a great guy for putting in extra effort. All seems to based upon the availability of more suitable partners that were there all along, except unnoticed due to denial of understanding what is really true about one's self. Maybe also due to the pressures of what society thinks things should be like instead of how they really are, too?

I remember when I was working nights alone with a woman. I, at one point felt some natural attraction, which I denied to afford myself the oppotunity to think about logically. What I found was that she grew in attraction for me while I realised my own attraction to her was based in a longing for companionship and the physical need to connect. It would not have been good. I wan't ready for what that meant. I would only have hurt myself, and maybe her feelings more deeply when I realised it and rejected her after any contact. 

When she pursued me, due to her greater longing from peri, which she was honest about, I rejected her outright, which led to her becoming very vindictive and doing things that made my life at work just that much more difficult. No one likes rejection. When I looked at her in realistic terms, denying my need for physical contact with a woman, any woman, I realized she was not who I would want to share that experience with and she was not physically attractive. 

She was also honest about her sex life, which was long and storied. She did not tell me numbers and I didn't ask or want to know. She just regaled me with what she thought would cause me to lose any inhibitions about her indecisiveness or fears of intimate contact with men. It only made me conclude, thankfully, that she was not right for me. I did not respect her less, but more, for her honesty and careful explanation. What made me respect her less was her attitude that I should want her by the definition in her head. She was a catch that should be more attractive due to my lack of physical contact in my life. She believed men and women were equals, but we are not, in some things, are we?


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

Perhaps we should limit this discussion to a LTR. I think that responsive desire is very different with someone that you love and trust vs. a ONS or a new date. You have to want to respond. You allow yourself to respond. It's not that no doesn't mean no. You don't say no, you say I agree to become aroused by you.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

skype said:


> Perhaps we should limit this discussion to a LTR. I think that responsive desire is very different with someone that you love and trust vs. a ONS or a new date. You have to want to respond. You allow yourself to respond. It's not that no doesn't mean no. You don't say no, you say I agree to become aroused by you.


Yes that would give a context to the topic at least. Even with that context I in mind I still think we're overanalyzing normal behavior. Realistically most people flip flop between SD and RD so it's not as cut and dry as being labled as one or the other. Okay I get the corelation where men and women follow different norms in this regard which makes sense based on biology and reproductive cycles.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> The trouble I see with your definition is that no doesn't mean no. It means maybe, depending. Check back in a half hour.* Life doesn't provide opportunities like that. They are more random and spontaneous. *
> 
> So, either you have a drive or you sorta don't, or it's limited based upon criteria whose definitions vary widely. That's pretty much no or severely limited.


Sure it does. One person can spontaneously want sex so they go to their RD partner, get them in the mood and off they go. Doesn't mean one drive is higher than the other.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> Perhaps we should limit this discussion to a LTR. I think that responsive desire is very different with someone that you love and trust vs. a ONS or a new date. You have to want to respond. You allow yourself to respond. It's not that no doesn't mean no. You don't say no, you say I agree to become aroused by you.


The same dynamics are present in both, with the only difference being the ones who decide that their physical needs will override their desire for long-term compatibility. 

Ask a few of the men in SIM if they've heard the word no at all. It's all the same, except with more accumulated wealth to lose when married.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Thundarr said:


> Yes that would give a context to the topic at least. Even with that context I in mind I still think we're overanalyzing normal behavior. Realistically most people flip flop between SD and RD so it's not as cut and dry as being labled as one or the other. Okay I get the corelation where men and women follow different norms in this regard which makes sense based on biology and reproductive cycles.


In men who are healthy, it does not flip as much as you might think. In women, it flips and flops naturally from being more open to initiation or more closed off. It's all RD with intensity being based upon biology.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Sure it does. One person can spontaneously want sex so they go to their RD partner, get them in the mood and off they go. Doesn't mean one drive is higher than the other.


It's all limited by biology. The spontaneity you speak of is not the same as what I meant. If one is told no, it is supposed to mean no, and by the respect and love felt is left at no and not considered maybe, to be attempted again in a half hour.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> It's all limited by biology. The spontaneity you speak of is not the same as what I meant. If one is told no, it is supposed to mean no, and by the respect and love felt is left at no and not considered maybe, to be attempted again in a half hour.


But if you have responsive desire, you don't say no. You say, "I am willing to be aroused by you. I love that I excite you."


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> In men who are healthy, it does not flip as much as you might think. In women, it flips and flops naturally from being more open to initiation or more closed off. It's all RD with intensity being based upon biology.


This accumulated wealth including forgive me, children, is what gives the LD or limited drive spouse the power in the marriage. That and the erroneous beliefs that the HD can change them or do not have the power to live a happier life. They do, They just have to realize that person they married was not being honest. It may have been unrecognized, but it was not honest. 

The suggestions to man up are good within that person's limitations and with respect to a time limit for consistent change, ending in divorce. Divorce is easier, in the long run. Personal change, likely should continue throughout everyone's life and be a real non-issue in the decision of whether a spouse can respond in a satisfactory manner in response to initiation.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> But if you have responsive desire, you don't say no. You say, "I am willing to be aroused by you. I love that I excite you."


No skype. That's just sick. You are a human being. Please don't put yourself or other women down. That's not fair or sensible. It is a suggestion that women are not worth as much as men because of our differences and I say women are worth as much as men in spite of and because of our differences. One is disrespectful and mine is respectful of the value of individuality and the importance of each of us whether male or female.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

I think we are using very different definitions of RD. 2nt, you are calling RD Low Desire or No Desire for your partner. When I use the term Responsive Desire, I mean that you respond to initiation by your spouse. You don't say no, you don't tease, you don't ignore your partner's desire. You say "Yes, please! Your passion excites me!"


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> No skype. That's just sick. You are a human being. Please don't put yourself or other women down. That's not fair or sensible. It is a suggestion that women are not worth as much as men because of our differences and I say women are worth as much as men in spite of and because of our differences. One is disrespectful and mine is respectful of the value of individuality and the importance of each of us whether male or female.


What? I don't see this as sick at all. It is sexual tension. Think we'll have to agree to disagree here.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> I think we are using very different definitions of RD. 2nt, you are calling RD Low Desire or No Desire for your partner. When I use the term Responsive Desire, I mean that you respond to initiation by your spouse. You don't say no, you don't tease, you don't ignore your partner's desire. You say "Yes, please! Your passion excites me!"


Yes, it doesn't come to you when picking out mustard. It's low or no until sex is initiated. It doesn't mean women don't know they need sex ore want it. It means they don't think about it much under everyday conditions, unless there is some initiation from someone.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> What? I don't see this as sick at all. It is sexual tension. Think we'll have to agree to disagree here.


I read it to mean you thought women didn't have a choice to say no, as per previous posts. That women, if initiation was present and found themselves to be horny, would say yes. I guess I misinterpreted?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Yes, it doesn't come to you when picking out mustard. *It's low or no until sex is initiated.* It doesn't mean women don't know they need sex ore want it. It means they don't think about it much under everyday conditions, unless there is some initiation from someone.


Then a SD is also low or no until the thought randomly pops into their head picking out mustard. SD or RD doesn't tell you the frequency that they want sex. I think LD and HD is a whole different conversation than RD/SD.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> I read it to mean you thought women didn't have a choice to say no, as per previous posts. That women, if initiation was present and found themselves to be horny, would say yes. I guess I misinterpreted?


Except in cases of rape, women always have a choice to say no. 
That is why we have so many sex-starved, miserable men starting threads in SIM.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> It means they don't think about it much under everyday conditions, unless there is some initiation from someone.


Some women have a RD.

Some women have a SD.

Some women have both and it changes throughout their life. 

How did we get to the point where ALL women have a RD? 

Same goes for men...

I don't understand these articles and the way they paint women and men with a broad brush. Everyone is different and an "individual" Also, some people change constantly throughout their lives.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

T&T said:


> Some women have a RD.
> 
> Some women have a SD.
> 
> ...


I think it's because when we look at the foundation without cultural and societal pressures or some individual life experiences, but just from a scientific standpoint, individualism starts to blur. The more open you are to possibilities, the more you will see that.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

T&T said:


> Some women have a RD.
> 
> Some women have a SD.
> 
> ...


Thank you, this is a refreshing POV in this thread which seems to be littered with a lot of absolutes about women that are simply incorrect.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Holland said:


> Thank you, this is a refreshing POV in this thread which seems to be littered with a lot of absolutes about women that are simply incorrect.


From a scientific standpoint, they are spot on. From the level of an addition of life experience, cultural and societal influence, you are quite correct and I agree, as I do with others who have attempted to state the same.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

skype said:


> I think we are using very different definitions of RD. 2nt, you are calling RD Low Desire or No Desire for your partner. When I use the term Responsive Desire, I mean that you respond to initiation by your spouse. You don't say no, you don't tease, you don't ignore your partner's desire. You say "Yes, please! Your passion excites me!"


This is Mrs. Conan. She could be considered LD except when it comes to her interaction with me. Then she turns into a horn dog. She actually goes from zero to out of control pretty fast with me.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

skype said:


> Except in cases of rape, women always have a choice to say no.
> That is why we have so many sex-starved, miserable men starting threads in SIM.


I thought you meant because of the makeup of RD and how it affects women due to biology, they would not be able to say no, so they had no choice, but to say yes under those conditions. I don't like to think that way at all and I do not believe it to be the case. 

My assertion is they have chosen the wrong woman. That natural desire is at the root and cannot be changed. It can only be enhanced a little in those cases. Whose fault is that? I think I explained I believe it is both partners fault, but isn't discovered until they know what to look for and the man initiates and receives a response from the woman.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

Well, my wife just went upstairs to draw a bath. She had a long day at work. 

She will find her robe laid out, a new silk gown, some white carnations, massage oil and a blindfold and soft cuffs. Oh, and chocolate on the edge of the bath!

I wonder if her response will be SD or RD or ND? I'll let y'all know.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Then a SD is also low or no until the thought randomly pops into their head picking out mustard. SD or RD doesn't tell you the frequency that they want sex. I think LD and HD is a whole different conversation than RD/SD.


I really don't think so, based upon the fact that one needs initiation and the other does not. Drive would be a desire to have sex without stimulus. It's just a desire to have sex. If one has responsive desire, it's not a drive on it's own. It's dependent upon initiation. Drive needs no initiation. It just is. Therefore, HD or LD would be based upon the frequency with which a man wants sex without outside stimulus. Even the article states that two women with RD will end up in a dead bed.

Sorry I didn't answer this sooner. I was engaged with what skype was proposing.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

T&T said:


> Well, my wife just went upstairs to draw a bath. She had a long day at work.
> 
> She will find her robe laid out, a new silk gown, some white carnations, massage oil and a blindfold and soft cuffs. Oh, and chocolate on the edge of the bath!
> 
> I wonder if her response will be SD or RD or ND? I'll let y'all know.


You know it's RD. Her level of arousal will be directly proportional to how many needs you have met previous to the gifts on the bed and the natural attraction she has for you. I expect you've chosen well, but you can't know unless you compare her to others, which I doubt you will do tonight.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I really don't think so, based upon the fact that one needs initiation and the other does not. *Drive would be a desire to have sex without stimulus. It's just a desire to have sex.* If one has responsive desire, it's not a drive on it's own. It's dependent upon initiation. Drive needs no initiation. It just is. Therefore, HD or LD would be based upon the frequency with which a man wants sex without outside stimulus. Even the article states that two women with RD will end up in a dead bed.
> 
> Sorry I didn't answer this sooner. I was engaged with what skype was proposing.


I don't agree with that definition. I don't think the only way to have a sex drive is to be SD about it. I like what T&T said and I don't think most women are strictly RD where they are at 0, don't think about or want sex until someone initiates it. If that were the case the sex toy business would be out of luck. Plus, look all the women on TAM who want and think about sex. 

There is a difference between wanting sex and being tuned on. I can want sex but still need something to turn me on to do it. I still have a drive, I want it, but will be responsive to stimulus.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I don't agree with that definition. I don't think the only way to have a sex drive is to be SD about it. I like what T&T said and I don't think most women are strictly RD where they are at 0, don't think about or want sex until someone initiates it. If that were the case the sex toy business would be out of luck. Plus, look all the women on TAM who want and think about sex.
> 
> *There is a difference between wanting sex and being tuned on. I can want sex but still need something to turn me on to do it. I still have a drive, I want it, but will be responsive to stimulus.*


There are men who want it, but can't get turned on. That's why viagra sells. So drive has more to do with how often you think about it without stimulus. Women in perimenopause think about it much more often because hormonal levels are out of balance to what is natural. They are losing their last few eggs and biology must change. There is no need for sexual desire after that or little need. Before peri, desire is there during ovulation, which is only a period of about 12 to 24 hours. Otherwise, I don't see the connection.

Men either think about it or don't, depending on hormonal health. As men age, test levels drop and those thoughts may be less frequent.

Here is a thought I had. Turn a woman on and place her in a room where no one flirts with her, but is nice and talks about mundane things. Respect is there to be seen, but no initiation. She will consider all of those men as jerks and lose interest in sex. 

Healthy men will go from one woman to another still feeling like they want sex with someone.

Another scenario...Men sometimes have harsh jokes, but there seems to be some truth to them.

Sometimes men will want a woman to be quiet so he doesn't lose his erection. While I know of no women who do not require some conversation to establish at least a minute level of desire.

In the first case, he doesn't need connection, just an orgasm. How many women complain about men like that? I don't blame them. I just think it comes natural to men.

In the women I have known, they all have needed to talk a little, unless there was already communication established. Even a ONS takes some communication between the two, whereas a man doesn't have to have that. I think it's the difference and why men are profoundly superior in numbers of rapists, to women.

By the way, his description of what he has planned does not interest me. I don't like that kind of rape fantasy stuff. I don't like feeling like a rapist. I've found it to be a turn-off and will lose my erection. I like mutual heated natural participation the best. It makes me want to roll her around and take it. Of course, that means she is willing and has shown she is willing beforehand. It doesn't mean she just smiles and lies there while I do whatever. It may be a fantasy of many women, but it's not one of mine.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> No skype. That's just sick. You are a human being. Please don't put yourself or other women down. That's not fair or sensible. It is a suggestion that women are not worth as much as men because of our differences and I say women are worth as much as men in spite of and because of our differences. One is disrespectful and mine is respectful of the value of individuality and the importance of each of us whether male or female.



WTH are you talking about?? Do you even know?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> You know it's RD. Her level of arousal will be directly proportional to how many needs you have met previous to the gifts on the bed and the natural attraction she has for you. I expect you've chosen well, but you can't know unless you compare her to others, which I doubt you will do tonight.


You have no way of qualifying that unless you ask his wife directly. You have assumed that all women are only RD which is not true.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Holland said:


> You have no way of qualifying that unless you ask his wife directly. You have assumed that all women are only RD which is not true.


I am just believing what a woman author researched and wrote.

Why isn't it true, because they say so?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I am not RD except occasionally. I know most of my friends have very healthy attitudes, desire levels and initiate with their partners. So not all women are RD only, just is not true.

Perhaps you believe the author because it suits your own life?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I am just believing what a woman author researched and wrote.
> 
> Why isn't it true, because they say so?


It's true of _some _women and _some _men. It's more commonly associated with women but to never think about or want sex unless it was initiated would not be the norm for either gender. You'd also have to be LD for that IMO.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> It's true of _some _women and _some _men. It's more commonly associated with women but to never think about or want sex unless it was initiated would not be the norm for either gender. You'd also have to be LD for that IMO.


This thread wasn't even about men. Okay, you believe that I am saying all women are the same. I can accept that. I know I've stated several times there are differences.

How do you explain two women in a relationship that end up with dead bed syndrome? They are both low drive?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Anonpink had a good post about it, you can read some stuff here too

http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/truth-about-lesbian-bed-death-its-complicated-1210134

explaining that they may be trading quality for quantity. 

But again, all couples are different. Not all lesbian couples have lower frequency sex.

Roughly what % of women do you think have only RD- meaning they don't even think about sex unless it's initiated?


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Anonpink had a good post about it, you can read some stuff here too
> 
> http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/truth-about-lesbian-bed-death-its-complicated-1210134
> 
> ...


To paraphrase, it says that the frequency of sex declines in all long-term relationships. Funny that isn't the case with women who have been married for years and then find peri-menopause causes a desire for more frequent sex, even when they are satisfied during the encounter.

Also, does that then mean that the women who state they are HD are not having fulfilling sex?

While they said that it's longer and more intensively concentrated on the clitoral area with stimulation by mouth, well duh..sorry for that. I think most everyone will see the sarcastic humor in that. 

I don't think the secret is to become better at sex and make it last longer. I think it's different for women than it is men. Just my educated guess.

Here again, I am saying not every woman will want the same intensity, or style of sex. Everyone is different. Uniqueness is fun.

Edit: You can check that article I posted about percentages.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I don't see % on there but reading it again I did see 


The idea that functional sexual desire requires wanting sex out of the blue is bull**** – pervasive and intractable bull****, but bull**** nonetheless. Yet again we’re confronted with what is becoming the theme of the blog: when you use male standards to assess ALL sexuality, **** goes to hell. In this instance, when spontaneous, “Hey, I think I’d like to have sex!” desire is the normative standard, anyone whose style that isn’t suddenly becomes “abnormal.” Which is bull****, however pervasive and intractable.

Which answers you theory that "Drive would be a desire to have sex without stimulus. It's just a desire to have sex." 

You don't need a SD to have normal, functional sexual desire.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I don't see % on there but reading it again I did see
> 
> 
> The idea that functional sexual desire requires wanting sex out of the blue is bull**** – pervasive and intractable bull****, but bull**** nonetheless. Yet again we’re confronted with what is becoming the theme of the blog: when you use male standards to assess ALL sexuality, **** goes to hell. In this instance, when spontaneous, “Hey, I think I’d like to have sex!” desire is the normative standard, anyone whose style that isn’t suddenly becomes “abnormal.” Which is bull****, however pervasive and intractable.
> ...


That kinda makes her whole article bull ****. hahahaha You can't base desire on spontaneity, but on just desire. So, if you combine that with the other, HD women just aren't getting satisfied properly and they won't say anything until they realize it, which will be after they haven't seen initiation for a while? Then, suddenly they aren't getting it often enough or by the article you posted, it just wasn't good enough. 

I think functional sexual desire has nothing to do with HD or LD. I think it has to do with the capability to have sex through desire. That's off target of the original premise of RD. It neither proves or denies RD. It just states pretty much that RD is desire for sex, unlike men have. 

I stated that HD and LD are men's definitions and cannot be related to women somewhere in this thread. 

I've been posting something like that all through this thread. Who's reading my posts, anyone? Or is everyone on defense mode?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I'm think I'm confused about your stance which may be where we're getting our signals crossed  

But apart from all the RD/SD stuff:
I don't think the article about lesbian frequency means hetero women who say they are HD aren't being satisfied.

None of this is black and white. Drives and desires are fluid and not just based on gender or age.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I'm think I'm confused about your stance which may be where we're getting our signals crossed
> 
> But apart from all the RD/SD stuff:
> I don't think the article about lesbian frequency means hetero women who say they are HD aren't being satisfied.
> ...


I'm not angry with you at all. You aren't doing anything to anger me. I'm frustrated. I do not have a set stance. I only state what I understand based upon those two articles I posted and now, the one you posted. I take a hard stance because I do not want to be told, I want it to be proven to me, just as in those articles. What I am concluding is that women are RD, not HD or LD. Only men can be described that way. I think the title of the thread is deceptive, in that I may have made a mistake in the word attraction. I think that by what I am reading, attraction is responsive in women. I don't know how that can be less generalized, unless one states that what attracts one woman might not be the same as another. Still attraction is attraction. I think this stance lends credence to many threads which talk about why men demean women by looking at them or by having them in commercials scantily clad. Women aren't like men, as these articles have stated. 

I hadn't thought of any of that in the beginning, which is likely why this thread is so fluid. I keep concluding more from these articles and the ensuing posts which have gone thither and yon trying to prove me wrong without evidence like the article you posted. I'm getting tired, also, from having to consider everyone's thoughts without those offers of evidence, while deflecting insinuations. It's been fun to say the least. The trouble is, I haven't learned anything more than I've posted nor have I changed my mind about many people just wanting me to believe them for the sake of belief in their opinion. We all have them. Show me where I am wrong and I will agree. I am not, in reality, trying to convince you. I am hoping that my conclusions are mistaken and that I can be proven wrong with facts or science. 

That is also part of the reason for the fluid nature of this thread. I liked your use of that term and I'm tired, so I'm using it.  I'm using it like a rented pickup on a roof tear off. Some of you will understand that and laugh. 

I'm betting this post makes little sense, rambles, and has some repetition, since that's what happens when I'm tired. I'll have to return to this tomorrow. I need to rest a little, but it has really been interesting so far. I thank everyone. Really, even Holland.  Just teasing you Holland.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Let me give a counter to this insane notion that all women have RD.

Tonight, while settling in to finish watching _Gentlemen's Agreement_ before it expires on Netflix, my wife stands up, grabs my hand, and says "lets go have a some couple time". I say that I want to finish this before it expires and she says "It's not going to take that long. Come on". I play a little hard to get for a minute, but I knew from the get go I was going to join her.

Now my wife, who is normally a very upbeat person, has been very down in the dumps over the last few days. Her job of 10 years is ending, and while she's excited about exploring what's next, she's in a deep grieving period for the loss of an incredible job that's been the hallmark of her professional life so far. In short, she's dealing with some depression.

We lay in bed. She looks so down. I tell her that we really don't have to do anything, it's fine. She says "no, but it's been almost a week since we did, and I need us to connect". I teased a little that depression isn't hot. I said I understand if she doesn't want to, and flat out asked her if she was doing so just because she knew it had been the better part of a week and sex would be good for me. She said absolutely not (don't know why I asked, because that's not really her), she wants to do it because she needs it, we both do. She said "I refuse to let my depression stop us". 

Here is a woman who is dealing with a very downbeat mood right now. 

Here I am being an understanding husband who is telling her that sex can wait.

And yet this woman needs sex. She needs connection. She craves bonding. She's willing to step outside of her downbeat, depressed place in order for us to be together. 

Ultimately we have a great time, both parties climax together, and all is well. The sex helped make her better.

She pursued me. She initiated. Her longing, her craving, her choice. 

No, all women are not RD.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> You know it's RD. Her level of arousal will be directly proportional to how many needs you have met previous to the gifts on the bed and the natural attraction she has for you. I expect you've chosen well, but you can't know unless you compare her to others, which I doubt you will do tonight.


I did it as a kind gesture since she's been working so hard. I had zero expectations last night. I would have been just as happy if she got into here jamie's and cuddled. I've done similar things and turned down sex knowing she was offering it for me and not "us" Sex can wait if one of us isn't in the mood. It's not nearly gratifying for either of us if it's ho hum...

So, if she responded by coming downstairs and ravaging me would that be RD just because of a nice gesture or would that be SD by being triggered by a nice gesture? Keep in mind I've done things like this many times before and she knows I don't expect sex at any time because of these gestures. 

I don't understand what you mean by "chosen well" or comparing her to others. 

Read some of the responses in this thread by the ladies of TAM. Looks like SD too me...

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-marriage/246737-what-turns-your-wife-you.html


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

T&T said:


> So, if she responded by coming downstairs and ravaging me would that be RD just because of a nice gesture or would that be SD by being triggered by a nice gesture? Keep in mind I've done things like this many times before and she knows I don't expect sex at any time because of these gestures.


Only speaking for myself, kindness wouldn't lead to RD or SD. 

I'm in perimenopause, so SD isn't something I feel anymore, but I'm still very responsive.

Last night, my boyfriend cooked an amazing dinner. Right after, he was sitting on the couch by the fire, and I initiated.

But it wasn't because he had worked so hard and made a great meal. And it wasn't because I was turned on. It was just a decision to be playful - with the help of some red wine.

RD for me is completely in the moment, and I'm responding to, and excited by, his behavior. 

So, last night, even though I started it, he took over and started telling me what to do. Although I was thoroughly enjoying what I was doing to him, it wasn't until he spoke that my RD kicked in.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

minimalME said:


> I'm in perimenopause, so SD isn't something I feel anymore, but I'm still very responsive.


Thank you for the words. I want to clarify this point though. Are you saying you used to have a SD prior to perimenopause. 

My wife is going through perimenopause too and her drive has gone through the roof! 

Again, we're individuals and here's an example of two women with completely different reactions to perimenopause...


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

T&T said:


> Thank you for the words. I want to clarify this point though. Are you saying you used to have a SD prior to perimenopause.


Oh, yes - especially when I was pregnant.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> I'm not angry with you at all. You aren't doing anything to anger me. I'm frustrated. I do not have a set stance. I only state what I understand based upon those two articles I posted and now, the one you posted. I take a hard stance because I do not want to be told, I want it to be proven to me, just as in those articles. *What I am concluding is that women are RD, not HD or LD. Only men can be described that way.* I think the title of the thread is deceptive, in that I may have made a mistake in the word attraction. I think that by what I am reading, attraction is responsive in women. I don't know how that can be less generalized, unless one states that what attracts one woman might not be the same as another. Still attraction is attraction. I think this stance lends credence to many threads which talk about why men demean women by looking at them or by having them in commercials scantily clad. Women aren't like men, as these articles have stated.
> 
> I hadn't thought of any of that in the beginning, which is likely why this thread is so fluid. I keep concluding more from these articles and the ensuing posts which have gone thither and yon trying to prove me wrong without evidence like the article you posted. I'm getting tired, also, from having to consider everyone's thoughts without those offers of evidence, while deflecting insinuations. It's been fun to say the least. The trouble is, I haven't learned anything more than I've posted nor have I changed my mind about many people just wanting me to believe them for the sake of belief in their opinion. We all have them. Show me where I am wrong and I will agree. I am not, in reality, trying to convince you. I am hoping that my conclusions are mistaken and that I can be proven wrong with facts or science.
> 
> ...


I am HD, I have mainly SD but at times RD. The RD happens when I am so tired that I cannot move or if he is ****ty me so much I could stab him. I will respond to him even when I am pissed off or tired because I love him deeply and know that our physical bond is important to us and our relationship.
It is anecdotal yes, but even if one person is saying your assumptions are incorrect, then sorry buddy, your assumptions are incorrect, not all women are RD and yes women can be HD.

And right back at you, thank you, truly. I enjoy the discussions here, the banter and the disagreements


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

There are always aberrations. To try to make those aberrations sound like they are what is most often encountered is disingenuous. 

Political correctness destroys truth. 

RD has nothing to do with HD or LD.

Being RD does not make you less likely to have sex.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

2ntnuf, I also think you're trying to button hole women and it just won't work, unless you define responsive desire so broadly that all sexual urges are in response, and only in response, to some sexual stimuli.

I think about sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?
My husband talks about sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?
I visualize sex or see pictures of sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> 2ntnuf, I also think you're trying to button hole women and it just won't work, unless you define responsive desire so broadly that all sexual urges are in response, and only in response, to some sexual stimuli.
> 
> I think about sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?
> My husband talks about sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?
> I visualize sex or see pictures of sex, I get aroused. Responsive desire?


I am trying to button hole them or the author of the article is? Because, I didn't do the research or write the article. I just read it and tried to understand. I could be wrong, but popular opinion wants to paint me as the brains behind the science. I'm not. The true answers remain elusive. 

If what you say is normal for you during the greatest part of your life, which would be the period of time before and after ovulation, I would agree that for you, thinking about sex is random and unrelated to a thing. I would agree that you can think about sex while picking out mustard in the grocery store and become aroused and ready for sex. Can you say those things are true? Can you say that for you and most women, they will randomly think of sex much more often than they do not, and become aroused by those thoughts? Please do not count peri-menopause or any other period of immense hormonal imbalance. While they may be normal occurrences in a woman's biology, they cause abnormal amounts of hormones and imbalance which lead to the body shutting down the main purpose for interest in sex.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I am trying to button hole them or the author of the article is? Because, I didn't do the research or write the article. I just read it and tried to understand. I could be wrong, but popular opinion wants to paint me as the brains behind the science. I'm not. The true answers remain elusive.


I saw it more as an opinion blog rather than scientific facts. It is for people with RD or spouses of people who identify as RD. It's not meant to explain all drives and women.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Do you believe women need to eat to survive?
Do you believe women need to drink water to survive?
Do you believe women need to have sex to survive?











If you do, oh, you button holer you. 

Maslow is a liar?

You see, this is what I think this article is getting at. There are certain things which are inherent to women. If you don't believe this, then say so. Be brave and say this author is full of it. Don't blame me, though. You are just killing the messenger.

It was a woman who wrote that article, so maybe that's why you misdirect your anger?


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Do most women have periods through some part of their lives?
Do most women go through peri-menopause through some part of their lives?
Do most women experience menopause through some part of their lives?

Oh my. I should be ashamed for generalizing.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

This is what I said about the article earlier and I still feel the same way. Has nothing to do with her being a woman or me being angry. It explains RD, it was never meant to be a fact sheet on women. 



SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I think it's a good article to explain RD. I do wish she would have talked more about men being RD and women being SD too- and I still think you can be a mix of both or one for a while and then the other.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I saw it more as an opinion blog rather than scientific facts. It is for people with RD or spouses of people who identify as RD. It's not meant to explain all drives and women.


I didn't read the blog. I read the article that explains about the definition of RD and who has it. She even states that it has nothing to do with HD or LD and she says that it's pretty normal for women. 

I don't know why it's looked at as a bad thing to have. It's just different from men's drives. Can you explain to me what thoughts come up for you when you think of RD? Do you think it's an illness or a malady? Do you think it makes you less of an equal to men? Do you think it makes women out to be inferior to men? Do you think it makes women out to be uninterested in sex? I don't see it that way.

Why?? I don't understand that part. I see it as women having a greater or lesser willingness to have sex depending on the individual's life experiences and biological makeup, once sexual advances have been made by a (potential) partner.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> I didn't read the blog. I read the article that explains about the definition of RD and who has it. She even states that it has nothing to do with HD or LD and she says that it's pretty normal for women.
> 
> I don't know why it's looked at as a bad thing to have. It's just different from men's drives. Can you explain to me what thoughts come up for you when you think of RD? Do you think it's an illness or a malady? Do you think it makes you less of an equal to men? Do you think it makes women out to be inferior to men? Do you think it makes women out to be uninterested in sex? I don't see it that way.
> 
> Why?? I don't understand that part. I see it as women having a greater or lesser willingness to have sex depending on the individual's life experiences and biological makeup, once sexual advances have been made by a partner.


Her article is also a blog. I don't think there is anything wrong with RD and never said I did. It's a normal drive, it shouldn't be thought of as low desire which I did talk about. 

I just have a problem with you using her article as absolute facts that apply to one gender. Men can be RD, women can be SD. We can all be a mix of it all. It's all normal.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Her article is also a blog. I don't think there is anything wrong with RD and never said I did. It's a normal drive, it shouldn't be thought of as low desire which I did talk about.
> 
> *I just have a problem with you using her article as absolute facts that apply to one gender.* Men can be RD, women can be SD. We can all be a mix of it all. It's all normal.


No problem. Find something to prove your assertions, that helps to disprove her's, and post a link.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Everyone is different, everyone.

Maslow says everyone is the same...in some things, I agree.

I don't see that as crazy.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

So based on the quoted below, I just conducted a little interview with my wife:

*Me:* So baby, do you get horny every day?
*Wife:* No.
*Me:* Really? You go days without being horny?
*Wife:* Yeah.
*Me:* I didn't know that.
*Wife: *Yeah, the only time I feel horny every day is during the summer time. It's always been that way. My hormones just seem to be more crazy then.
*Me: *So how horny do you feel during the other times of the year.
*Wife:* About 3 to 4 days a week.
*Me:* And is it spontaneous? 
*Wife:* Yeah.
*Me:* You don't need to be thinking of anything sexual to feel horny?
*Wife:* Nope.






> Consider this: a man might be in the grocery store trying to decide between spicy mustards when suddenly, he realizes he is developing a boner. Now, he’s not that interested in mustard, so he realizes that he’s just plain horny. He rushes home to his wife and accosts her for sex. He’s ready to go. He’s sexually charged, locked and loaded.
> 
> His wife, however, has not had the same random, mystical arousal. While she acknowledges his desire for sex and concedes, her desire may come much later in the process. She becomes aroused in response to increasingly sexual activities. Not the other way around! So, by the end of the session of this afternoon delight, she’s happy she participated, even if she wasn’t feeling it at the beginning.
> 
> Her husband, meanwhile, doesn’t understand why she so rarely seems to just want sex for no reason. The exception being, perhaps, when she is ovulating. https://urbantimes.co/2014/04/sex-dr...us-responsive/


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

What's that saying about keeping quiet and letting people think you're stupid vs. opening your mouth and proving it?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> I didn't read the blog. I read the article that explains about the definition of RD and who has it. She even states that it has nothing to do with HD or LD and she says that it's pretty normal for women.
> 
> *I don't know why it's looked at as a bad thing to have. It's just different from men's drives. Can you explain to me what thoughts come up for you when you think of RD? Do you think it's an illness or a malady? Do you think it makes you less of an equal to men? Do you think it makes women out to be inferior to men? Do you think it makes women out to be uninterested in sex? I don't see it that way.*
> 
> Why?? I don't understand that part. I see it as women having a greater or lesser willingness to have sex depending on the individual's life experiences and biological makeup, once sexual advances have been made by a (potential) partner.


No one is saying that having RD is a bad thing at all.

What is bad is to think that ALL of a gender think and act the same.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

WorkingOnMe said:


> What's that saying about keeping quiet and letting people think you're stupid vs. opening your mouth and proving it?


Dude, that's uncalled for. It's a discussion and people come here to learn. 

What's going on WOM? Something bothering you? You seem to very jaded as of late...


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

I'm in the camp that sexual desire varies from person to person ......BUT if your wife or husband never shows any desire for you sexually then they just aren't into you.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

I don't think there is inherently anything wrong about a true responsive drive.

But it can be wrong for a relationship if you're with a partner who needs to feel wanted sexually, who doesn't want to be the sole initiator.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Holland said:


> No one is saying that having RD is a bad thing at all.
> 
> What is bad is to think that ALL of a gender think and act the same.


I have to assume you realize just exactly how insulting this is.

So, therefore, I have a choice. Do I insult you back or let it go? Do I point out to you that your choice of topics has nothing to do with the premise of the thread? Do I actually dismiss you for being more ignorant than someone who would think such a thing? Or do I just point out that you are wasting my time and yours and move on? 

Answer me as soon as you can.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> So based on the quoted below, I just conducted a little interview with my wife:
> 
> *Me:* So baby, do you get horny every day?
> *Wife:* No.
> ...


So based upon discussion with your wife, you believe she randomly gets aroused while doing basic chores as in the example, without stimulus? 

Do you then assume the majority of women are similar? Because, if what you and others say is true, actually is, this author of the book is completely incorrect. I'm not defending her per say. I'm looking for the truth. Does it take someone to interact with a woman for them to be aroused or do they just become aroused at random? I think that's the premise of the article and book.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> I don't think there is inherently anything wrong about a true responsive drive.
> 
> But it can be wrong for a relationship if you're with a partner who needs to feel wanted sexually, who doesn't want to be the sole initiator.


You are making an incorrect assumption similar to why I think there are angry women in this thread. It does not have to do with willingness to have sex. It has to do with arousal coming from stimulating contact with others or randomly. That's why this is taking so long to figure out. No one really understands the premise. 

I suspect that even those who actually do, are afraid that it means something derogatory.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> So based upon discussion with your wife, you believe she randomly gets aroused while doing basic chores as in the example, without stimulus?


I've known my wife since we were 14 and 15 years old. We were best friends years before we got together and had frank, open discussions about sex as far back as then. That was 20 years ago. She is the same now as she was then; she ALWAYS got horny spontaneously. Always. She never needed "stimulus" to get horny. The only surprise I got was that she's not horny every day. It's been awhile since we discussed it so I totally forgot that she's only spontaneously horny daily during the summer months. 

That's her natural drive. Like nearly all human beings, her drive is partially responsive. As in there are times when she can be made horny from stimulus. 



2ntnuf said:


> Do you then assume the majority of women are similar?


I don't assume the majority of women are similar, no. In my experience, however, the idea that the majority of women are dissimilar doesn't ring true. There are far more women who just get horny, just because, than you seem to think. I think the blog writer is perpetuating a popular stereotype.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> You are making an incorrect assumption similar to why I think there are angry women in this thread. It does not have to do with willingness to have sex. It has to do with arousal coming from stimulating contact with others or randomly. That's why this is taking so long to figure out. No one really understands the premise.
> 
> I suspect that even those who actually do, are afraid that it means something derogatory.


I didn't say anything about "willingness to have sex". So I'm not sure why you quoted me, or what this rebuttal has to do with my post.

Plenty of women who have RD are very willing to have sex. However those women are far less likely to be major initiators in their sexual relationship. Some may be willing to have sex if they're properly warmed up by their partner, which is all well and good if the other partner has no problem taking the near sole responsibility for initiation.

For me? That wouldn't work. I need to be pursued, I need a woman who is aroused for her own good, her own need, not just because she's been made willing due to my initiation. I would find being the sole initiator in a sexual relationship to be unacceptable. I don't even want a woman initiating sex with me just because she thinks I need, want or deserve it. There is nothing like having a woman wake you up with a BJ, drag you into the bedroom, or just pounce on you because she craves sex for her own good, not because she just got horny because you put the moves on.

Obviously other people's mileage varies.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> I've known my wife since we were 14 and 15 years old. We were best friends years before we got together and had frank, open discussions about sex as far back as then. That was 20 years ago. She is the same now as she was then; she ALWAYS got horny spontaneously. Always. She never needed "stimulus" to get horny. The only surprise I got was that she's not horny every day. It's been awhile since we discussed it so I totally forgot that she's only spontaneously horny daily during the summer months.
> 
> That's her natural drive. Like nearly all human beings, her drive is partially responsive. As in there are times when she can be made horny from stimulus.
> 
> ...


I guess we'll never know? None of us is correct. No one can tell anyone what to try to affect change or help another. It's best to just divorce, rather than attempt what no one can explain. I think that's the only conclusion I can come to from this back and forth wishy washy no stance post.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> I didn't say anything about "willingness to have sex". So I'm not sure why you quoted me, or what this rebuttal has to do with my post.
> 
> *Plenty of women who have RD* are very willing to have sex. However those women are far less likely to be major initiators in their sexual relationship. Some may be willing to have sex if they're properly warmed up by their partner, which is all well and good if the other partner has no problem taking the near sole responsibility for initiation.
> 
> ...


This post explains why on it's own. You have again made it read like it's a malady. 

Those women who initiate are out there jaquen. I haven't said they aren't. See, that's where you just don't get it. And, that's okay. Some won't understand, but to make it sound like it's wrong, when you can't prove it, is just wrong. You have a sample of one that you comment on. I say that's what makes everyone different. I say, that's not as common as you are trying to make it sound. Read plenty of women who are horny, but get so angry that their husband doesn't want them. He doesn't do anything. He doesn't initiate. It wouldn't bother them at all. They'd just initiate the majority of the time and all would be well. But, it isn't all well. Is it? They feel he doesn't want or need them. They feel he doesn't desire them or has no drive or low drive. Does he? Isn't that what's wrong with you? You are LD? Think about it. You prove your own post is off. 

As far as BJ's are concerned, I don't want to be awakened like that. I guess there was a time when I might have liked it...no, I don't think so. I remember it being done when I was younger and I'd have to get up and urinate before continuing. I can say with confidence I am among the minority on that, at least at TAM. That was highly unusual and happened once or twice in ten years of first marriage, then, once in my second, that I remember. It only happened when second wife was in peri. It happened in first marriage when wife wanted to get pregnant and I didn't. Odd that. I have to think about motive now. *Thanks for making me think.*

Edit: Because I have a headache. I have to go take my blood pressure meds. I'll be back later. Don't think I'm upset if I don't answer posts. I don't feel well. I don't mind reading. I appreciate the thoughts.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, but:




2ntnuf said:


> This post explains why on it's own. You have again made it read like it's a malady.


How many more ways can I explain this to you?
It's not inherently a malady. It, however, yet again, would be a malady in a _*relationship with me*_.



2ntnuf said:


> Those women who initiate are out there jaquen. I haven't said they aren't. See, that's where you just don't get it.


Yes, actually you did:



2ntnuf said:


> And, Fozzy, if you think about this, there is no such thing as a high drive woman. It's all responsive... There is no real desire because it takes initiation to start it.


 





2ntnuf said:


> I say, that's not as common as you are trying to make it sound. Read plenty of women who are horny, but get so angry that their husband doesn't want them. He doesn't do anything. He doesn't initiate. It wouldn't bother them at all. They'd just initiate the majority of the time and all would be well. But, it isn't all well. Is it? They feel he doesn't want or need them. They feel he doesn't desire them or has no drive or low drive. Does he?


I actually never said how "common" it was. What does any of this have to do with anything I said?



2ntnuf said:


> Isn't that what's wrong with you? You are LD? Think about it. You prove your own post is off.


What the hell are you talking about here? I'm so lost.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, but:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Apparently, I did say that, concluded from the article. So, the article and all it's findings are incorrect for the majority of women or you don't know? I think it's the latter, but you feel a need to defend because you are LD. Being a man, if you were HD, you'd initiate more often.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Fozzy said:


> Opinions?


Is an orchestra's need of a conductor responsive musical talent or a lack of musical talent? 

---Not the greatest analogy, but it's how I look at it.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Okay, thanks. I hope she initiates tonight. You need it after all this frustration. I know, I wouldn't mind someone I found attractive to initiate. I've only found that in women who are in perimenopause or ovulating. Truly. The rest of the time, all the women I know, only thought about it because they had this notion about men being horn dogs and getting it anywhere they could, so they'd get angry if their man didn't initiate.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> Is an orchestra's need of a conductor responsive musical talent or a lack of musical talent?
> 
> ---Not the greatest analogy, but it's how I look at it.


Depends on who's company you're in.  

I'd liken it to when a woman asks if she looks fat in these clothes. If you are careful with your words, you will be fine. 

I'm done here. You guys have fun. 

Just to reiterate, I think there are no women who are the same. You have all convinced me of the error of this woman's findings. Thank you for your participation.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Apparently, I did say that, concluded from the article. So, the article and all it's findings are incorrect for the majority of women or you don't know? I think it's the latter, but you feel a need to defend because you are LD. Being a man, if you were HD, you'd initiate more often.



:rofl:

So tell me, how often do I initiate? How often do I have sex with my wife? You seem to know so much about me, enough to say that I'm LD, so please enlighten me as to how you know this.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> :rofl:
> 
> So tell me, how often do I initiate? How often do I have sex with my wife? You seem to know so much about me, enough to say that I'm LD, so please enlighten me as to how you know this.


jaquen, you posted that stuff. Are you just inciting discord at TAM?

Do you really believe what you post?


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> jaquen, you posted that stuff. Are you just inciting discord at TAM?
> 
> Do you really believe what you post?



Please answer my question.

You said that I am LD because, if I were HD, I'd initiate more. 

So, again I ask, how often do I initiate? Since you seem to know how often I, and my wife, initiate sex, please reveal the number.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Please answer my question.
> 
> You said that I am LD because, if I were HD, I'd initiate more.
> 
> So, again I ask, how often do I initiate? Since you seem to know how often I, and my wife, initiate sex, please reveal the number.


This thread was not created for me to tell you how many times you initiate. Do you believe that RD is a real thing that has been researched and written about in the article I've posted? Do you believe that the author is correct? If not, provide evidence of your beliefs. Your opinion is appreciated, however, but I do not consider it reliable.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

I don't follow the back and forth arguments but the thread title is *Responsive Desire = No Attraction (?)*. So the question is; does RD mean no attraction. The answer is no. It does not mean that. For those who are unattracted that use the term to their advantage then shame on them. RD is a logical concept that statistically is more common in women and less common in men.

I would have posted pages back but I couldn't figure out what the h3ll the back and forth conversations were even about.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Thundarr said:


> I don't follow the back and forth arguments but the thread title is *Responsive Desire = No Attraction (?)*. So the question is; does RD mean no attraction. The answer is no. It does not mean that. For those who are unattracted that use the term to their advantage then shame on them. RD is a logical concept that statistically is more common in women and less common in men.
> 
> I would have posted pages back but I couldn't figure out what the h3ll the back and forth conversations were even about.


:smthumbup::iagree:

The arguments were about folks who got their feelings hurt and wanted to somehow try to fight back.

The thread title is an incorrect assumption I made and admitted to after a few posts. Can't remember how many. Fozzy started the thread after I made a request. I enjoyed the back and forth and played along. It actually felt good. My apologies to those who got frustrated and confused. My thanks to those who contributed. I'm sure everyone who read had a fun drama filled time. I know I did. Thank you Thundarr.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> This thread was not created for me to tell you how many times you initiate. Do you believe that RD is a real thing that has been researched and written about in the article I've posted? Do you believe that the author is correct? If not, provide evidence of your beliefs. Your opinion is appreciated, however, but I do not consider it reliable.


Just what I thought, nothing. 

If you didn't want a derailment, you shouldn't have turned this thread into some bizarre, petty ass attack on my sex drive. If you don't know what you're talking about it's best to keep your mouth shut and those fingers silent. It'll save you a lot of embarrassment.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Thundarr said:


> I would have posted pages back but I couldn't figure out what the h3ll the back and forth conversations were even about.


I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the back and forth conversation is about. I think there might be some drinking, or other foreign substances, clouding the last few pages. :rofl:


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Just what I thought, nothing.
> 
> If you didn't want a derailment, you shouldn't have turned this thread into some bizarre, petty ass attack on my sex drive. If you don't know what you're talking about it's best to keep your mouth shut and those fingers silent. It'll save you a lot of embarrassment.


Don't threaten me jaquen. You played along. No one forced you to jump in and post about your life. That's on you.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Back to the topic at hand.

For women who have true responsive drive, and aren't just using it as a cover to not have sex with a spouse they're no longer attracted to, what happens if they're with a partner who never initiates? That's what always baffles me. Is the libido just completely dead unless their spouse comes on to them, or they read a sexy passage from a book, or watch a scene? 

If a RD person had no access to media, and their spouse just stopped initiating sex, would they just almost never feel horny?

I've never been with a strictly RD woman, so I'm very curious about how this works from day to day.


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

I have never felt spontaneous desire for sex. I actively seek out my husband, or erotica, or porn etc to get started. If my husband isn't around I just don't actively seek out erotic material. 

I imagine if nothing were to change, if I didn't actively try to get aroused I would never feel the need to have sex. 

Sometimes I'm jealous of those with spontaneous desire, other times I feel bad for them. Either way I have accepted that this is my sexuality, it is within the realm of normal, and my husband and I are both ok with it.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Giro, what about being with your husband compels you to try to get your motor started? That almost makes it sound like it's for his benefit?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> Giro, what about being with your husband compels you to try to get your motor started? That almost makes it sound like it's for his benefit?


What is the big deal if Giro's initiation sequence is for his benefit? She needs something to get her motor started but once it's started I bet it purrs along nicely. I bet she enjoys it every bit as much as her H does. It's something that is more important to her H than it is to her, but because it is important she puts the effort in.

She is an awesome wife who loves her husband.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

This is an old chestnut... of course, as a man, you want to be needed and desired, so responsive desire is bad because it makes the relationship "mechanical" and suspicion of "duty sex" arises... on the other hand, in LTRs situations can change and often spontaneous desire turns into responsive. It's not a bad thing imo... as long as you learn to accept your spouse for what he/she is and the intentions are genuine...


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> I have to assume you realize just exactly how insulting this is.
> 
> So, therefore, I have a choice. Do I insult you back or let it go? Do I point out to you that your choice of topics has nothing to do with the premise of the thread? Do I actually dismiss you for being more ignorant than someone who would think such a thing? Or do I just point out that you are wasting my time and yours and move on?
> 
> Answer me as soon as you can.


I am struggling to see what was insulting about what I said, it certainly was not meant to be.


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> Giro, what about being with your husband compels you to try to get your motor started? That almost makes it sound like it's for his benefit?


Because sex is fun! I would think that is the obvious answer. Sex with my husband is fun, exciting, passionate, sweet, etc. it is for our benefit. If it was just a chore I had to do for my husband I would have divorced and lived celibate the rest of my life. 

The only thing missing is the spontaneous, not the desire. I guess I don't see where this would only benefit my husband. I can read something erotic to get my motor started and then initiate, or I can just ask my husband if he'd like to have some private time, or I can enjoy his advances. What difference does it make how it started?

I'm pretty sure when I'm writhing and whimpering in our bed with my husband he feels my desire. At least that is what he tells me. He finds it fascinating and empowering that he can take me from zero to begging for him in about ten minutes. Seems to work fine for us.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> Depends on who's company you're in.


LOL - Point taken. 

Any analogy falls apart if it's pushed too far and this wasn't the greatest one to begin with. 

AnonPink said something in another thread that made a lot of sense to me. (And the more I think about it, the more sense it makes..)

She said, (And I'm loosely paraphrasing..) that male sexual response tends to be specific. Men know exactly what turns them on and they actively seek that out. Female sexual response tends to be general. Women are turned on by the overall idea of sex and arousal therefore is less formulaic and harder to pin down.

I would say that this not only explains a lot of things. (i.e. Why women generally prefer pornographic literature whereas men generally prefer pornographic imagery.) but is a good working description of active vs. responsive desire in and of itself.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> This is an old chestnut... of course, as a man, you want to be needed and desired, *so responsive desire is bad because it makes the relationship "mechanical" and suspicion of "duty sex" arises...* on the other hand, in LTRs situations can change and often spontaneous desire turns into responsive. It's not a bad thing imo... as long as you learn to accept your spouse for what he/she is and the intentions are genuine...


Mechanical?

Yeah, that's what my ex-husband said after I tried scheduling sex - too mechanical. After one week. And we were newlyweds.

Of course, he offered no alternatives, and he still didn't initiate. So, we went back to no sex.

Sex was never fun or playful in our marriage. It was always a battle.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

minimalME said:


> Mechanical?
> 
> Yeah, that's what my ex-husband said after I tried scheduling sex - too mechanical. After one week. And we were newlyweds.
> 
> ...


Funnily enough, that's what my wife told me when _I_ tried scheduling sex... it had to be spontaneous...

Now, after many years, she is scheduling it... she never initiates. She tells me when she is ready and, yes, I find that a bit mechanical...  If I don't agree with this, then it's no sex...


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

2ntnuf said:


> This thread was not created for me to tell you how many times you initiate. Do you believe that RD is a real thing that has been researched and written about in the article I've posted? Do you believe that the author is correct? If not, provide evidence of your beliefs. Your opinion is appreciated, however, but I do not consider it reliable.


Of course responsive desire is a real thing. However, sex in a marriage is NOT all science. It's an art. All our canvases are different in one way or another. Applying direct science and only science to your canvas will result in an awkward landscape.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Giro flee said:


> I have never felt spontaneous desire for sex. I actively seek out my husband, or erotica, or porn etc to get started. If my husband isn't around I just don't actively seek out erotic material.
> 
> I imagine if nothing were to change, if I didn't actively try to get aroused I would never feel the need to have sex.
> 
> Sometimes I'm jealous of those with spontaneous desire, other times I feel bad for them. Either way I have accepted that this is my sexuality, it is within the realm of normal, and my husband and I are both ok with it.


My wife is pretty much the same way. The only problem I have with this is her ability to RECEIVE arousal from me. If she's had a sh$tty day, it may be nearly impossible to get her aroused. Unfortunately, the older you get, generally the more responsibilities you have. More responsibility generally mean more problems and more worries which impact the wifes ability to receive input from me or any other erotic source.
C'est la vie.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> LOL - Point taken.
> 
> Any analogy falls apart if it's pushed too far and this wasn't the greatest one to begin with.
> 
> ...


This pretty much explains how I understand it. Actually, I thought this topic would help to understand each other better and maybe, just maybe, get some spouses laid a little more often. I figured it would also help me to understand a little more. It has, but not in the way I had hoped. This last page is probably the best.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

One thing I do notice is that I (a male) have more ability to eliminate day to day turmoil to clear my mind for sex. Let's say the kids are acting up, an old parent is doing something scary that makes you think Altzeimers, the dog just got hurt and needs to go to the vet, your roof is leaking and the dish washer just broke. I can forget about all that and have sex. My wife cannot. She cannot "clear" her mind of the day to day grind. Therefore, she needs more input to get fired up. 

This may also explain one of the reasons why young sex is frequent and usually good. When I got married I had a small apartment, no kids, no nothing, just us. It was easy back then. Not so much now.


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

UMP said:


> One thing I do notice is that I (a male) have more ability to eliminate day to day turmoil to clear my mind for sex. Let's say the kids are acting up, an old parent is doing something scary that makes you think Altzeimers, the dog just got hurt and needs to go to the vet, your roof is leaking and the dish washer just broke. I can forget about all that and have sex. My wife cannot. She cannot "clear" her mind of the day to day grind. Therefore, she needs more input to get fired up.
> 
> This may also explain one of the reasons why young sex is frequent and usually good. When I got married I had a small apartment, no kids, no nothing, just us. It was easy back then. Not so much now.



This is true for me as well. It is hard for me to understand how my husband can have enjoyable sex when under lots of stress. I cannot shut off all outside stimuli, this can be problematic if your life is full of stressors. I work really hard at keeping my life on a peaceful path.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I could have sex anytime, anywhere, under any stress... a bit less now... stress just annihilates my sex drive, but I'm not stressed very often... unfortunately, my wife is...


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> LOL - Point taken.
> 
> Any analogy falls apart if it's pushed too far and this wasn't the greatest one to begin with.
> 
> ...


My SO keeps the home fires on simmer most of the time by flirting constantly and through physical affection. That keeps the general idea of sex on my mind, so its a shorter trip from simmer to full boil.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Giro flee said:


> This is true for me as well. It is hard for me to understand how my husband can have enjoyable sex when under lots of stress. I cannot shut off all outside stimuli, this can be problematic if your life is full of stressors. I work really hard at keeping my life on a peaceful path.


Stress is my biggest issue when it comes to sex. I need to focus and concentrate on sex, and can't when my head is full of stress. It's hard to quiet those thoughts running through my head to feel sensual pleasure. That's one of the reasons my favorite time for sex is weekend mornings - I'm not awake enough for the stress to derail my thoughts, and I'm fully relaxed already.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Holland said:


> I am struggling to see what was insulting about what I said, it certainly was not meant to be.


There was nothing inherently insulting about what you said.



norajane said:


> My SO keeps the home fires on simmer most of the time by flirting constantly and through physical affection. That keeps the general idea of sex on my mind, so its a shorter trip from simmer to full boil.


That's a very good point. My wife and I don't do a lot of flirting, but we're constantly in a state of affection when together, be it home or beyond. We're always touching, caressing, nuzzling, kissing, etc. It's not something I even took much note of until a couple people from church made some pretty sweet, and funny, comments about it. 

As a result, yes, we're almost always up for sex. Even if one of us turns the other down, it's not because we're not able to easily slip into the mood; our bodies are extremely responsive to each other's touch. It's because, for whatever reason, now isn't the time. But it's always a matter of "not now, but soon".


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Giro flee said:


> This is true for me as well. It is hard for me to understand how my husband can have enjoyable sex when under lots of stress. I cannot shut off all outside stimuli, this can be problematic if your life is full of stressors. I work really hard at keeping my life on a peaceful path.


I think it has to do with how a mans mind works. We can concentrate on ONE thing and ONLY one thing as circumstances dictate. If I am watching a tv show I CANNOT hear anything anyone is saying EXCEPT the tv show. My wife can have a conversation with three people AND watch the tv show at the same time.

Therefore, during or before sex I can concentrate solely on the task at hand, but unless things are good at home, the wife cannot. Also, she tends to hold on to things for days at a time. I'll think everything is fine and she is STILL thinking about what her dad said three days ago.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

norajane said:


> My SO keeps the home fires on simmer most of the time by flirting constantly and through physical affection. That keeps the general idea of sex on my mind, so its a shorter trip from simmer to full boil.


Good idea, however, is it not a turn off for you if your mind is worried about something at the moment your husband flirts?


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

UMP said:


> Good idea, however, is it not a turn off for you if your mind is worried about something at the moment your husband flirts?


He knows me well enough to know when to hold off on the flirting. My mom is in the hospital? He doesn't flirt. Job stress? Please flirt!

Our relationship is solid, so we're starting from a place of goodwill and chemistry. I never get turned off by physical affection or flirting, even when I'm not able to accept the flirting in that moment.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

norajane said:


> He knows me well enough to know when to hold off on the flirting. My mom is in the hospital? He doesn't flirt. Job stress? Please flirt!
> 
> Our relationship is solid, so we're starting from a place of goodwill and chemistry. I never get turned off by physical affection or flirting, even when I'm not able to accept the flirting in that moment.


Our main problem is our 21 year old mentally handicapped daughter. She will always have the mind of a 5 year old. We were awarded a scholarship so that she can go to school with an aid. That is only during the school year. My daughter can and does drive my wife crazy. She wants to eat ALL THE TIME and will ask the same question over and over and over and over and over and over again. The only really good thing is that she goes to bed at 7:00pm every night. 

My wife actually feels guilty because she sometimes cannot wait for our daughter to go to bed.

Hard to flirt when your wife has been dealing with this all day and will continue to do so until we both die.

It makes my job as initiator that much more difficult.

I'm going to start a thread on this. I need advice.


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

norajane said:


> He knows me well enough to know when to hold off on the flirting. My mom is in the hospital? He doesn't flirt. Job stress? Please flirt!
> 
> Our relationship is solid, so we're starting from a place of goodwill and chemistry. I never get turned off by physical affection or flirting, even when I'm not able to accept the flirting in that moment.




My husband knows me well enough that if I am genuinely worried about something I won't be able to enjoy myself. He also knows how to nudge me toward letting go of unimportant worries that can be put aside. That was some work for both of us through the years.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

norajane said:


> My SO keeps the home fires on simmer most of the time by flirting constantly and through physical affection. That keeps the general idea of sex on my mind, so its a shorter trip from simmer to full boil.


Smart man....


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Giro flee said:


> Because sex is fun! I would think that is the obvious answer. Sex with my husband is fun, exciting, passionate, sweet, etc. it is for our benefit. If it was just a chore I had to do for my husband I would have divorced and lived celibate the rest of my life.
> 
> The only thing missing is the spontaneous, not the desire. I guess I don't see where this would only benefit my husband. I can read something erotic to get my motor started and then initiate, or I can just ask my husband if he'd like to have some private time, or I can enjoy his advances. What difference does it make how it started?
> 
> I'm pretty sure when I'm writhing and whimpering in our bed with my husband he feels my desire. At least that is what he tells me. He finds it fascinating and empowering that he can take me from zero to begging for him in about ten minutes. Seems to work fine for us.


I don't think I'm asking the question right. I'm not questioning whether you enjoy it so much as trying to understand what motivates YOU to get yourself going. I get that RD needs some outside catalyst to get it going, but I'm trying to understand what motivates a woman to provide the catalyst herself, vs just waiting for her husband to provide it. What motivates you to warm yourself up to the point of initiation?

I ask for purely selfish reasons. My wife will often respond to my advances, but she's rather eat a bag of hell than initiate on her own.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> I don't think I'm asking the question right. I'm not questioning whether you enjoy it so much as trying to understand what motivates YOU to get yourself going. I get that RD needs some outside catalyst to get it going, but I'm trying to understand what motivates a woman to provide the catalyst herself, vs just waiting for her husband to provide it. What motivates you to warm yourself up to the point of initiation?
> 
> I ask for purely selfish reasons. My wife will often respond to my advances, but she's rather eat a bag of hell than initiate on her own.


This has to vary per case, or woman. I would just bet that there are some things that are common. Sort of like basic needs. MMSLP, I believe, uses those to formulate the things that in general, will prove attractive to the widest variety of women. I state this without the advantage of reading the book, but only some excerpts and opinions. I have read another book and it goes along the same lines, with some variations. None are exactly the same, neither are the target audience or woman they are intended to attract. 

Women don't really want men to know this stuff. It makes them feel like they can be controlled and abused, and it can by the wrong man. They don't want any man to know too much because they can't know who will become abusive and controlling with the knowledge and they don't want it to be their SO. I understand the dangers. I don't blame them.


----------



## Giro flee (Mar 12, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> I don't think I'm asking the question right. I'm not questioning whether you enjoy it so much as trying to understand what motivates YOU to get yourself going. I get that RD needs some outside catalyst to get it going, but I'm trying to understand what motivates a woman to provide the catalyst herself, vs just waiting for her husband to provide it. What motivates you to warm yourself up to the point of initiation?
> 
> I ask for purely selfish reasons. My wife will often respond to my advances, but she's rather eat a bag of hell than initiate on her own.


Hmmm, why do I try to initiate? It is fun to be already "warmed up" so to speak. I don't want to constantly feel like my husband is doing all of the "work" to get me warmed up. My husband says it isn't work, but there is always the voice in the back of my head saying I am not good enough nor do I deserve to have my husband kiss and fondle me until I am ready for sex. I used to compare myself to a crockpot, my husband doesn't agree. He says a crockpot never really gets out of control like I do once aroused. He says he loves having that kind of power to take me from zero to begging. 

Threads like these reinforce these beliefs. Men want women who are already dripping wet and ready to go. I've seen many posts saying men would never bother with a woman like me, never would put up with a woman like me. That I must not love my husband or find him attractive. Unfortunately those comments keep that little voice alive in my head.

So I guess I would say it's half for me, I want to feel like a "normal" person. Half for my husband, I want him to feel loved and cherished and worth all my effort. Does that make any sense?


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Giro flee said:


> Threads like these reinforce these beliefs. Men want women who are already dripping wet and ready to go. I've seen many posts saying men would never bother with a woman like me, never would put up with a woman like me. That I must not love my husband or find him attractive. Unfortunately those comments keep that little voice alive in my head.


Nobody here can speak universally for the 4 or so billion men on planet Earth.

Since there are plenty of women with responsive drive, there are plenty of men who are in relationships with women who have RD. And I don't think it's wise to even remotely suggest that all of those men are unsatisfied.

Truth be told many men I've met just assume a woman needs to be "warmed up". Hell look across this board, even in this very thread; there are men who think ALL women have a responsive drive. It is far, far from uncommon for a man to just assume that it's his job, as a man, to be the primary initiator (from a place of spontaneous desire) . A role that, yes, some men grudgingly accept, but plenty of men love. 

I'd chance to say that there are a lot of men who would count your husband very lucky.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I have recently discovered I have *preemptive* desire, setting the scene for the next mornings encounter just before falling asleep.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Giro flee said:


> Hmmm, why do I try to initiate? It is fun to be already "warmed up" so to speak. I don't want to constantly feel like my husband is doing all of the "work" to get me warmed up. My husband says it isn't work, but there is always the voice in the back of my head saying I am not good enough nor do I deserve to have my husband kiss and fondle me until I am ready for sex. I used to compare myself to a crockpot, my husband doesn't agree. He says a crockpot never really gets out of control like I do once aroused. He says he loves having that kind of power to take me from zero to begging.
> 
> Threads like these reinforce these beliefs. Men want women who are already dripping wet and ready to go. I've seen many posts saying men would never bother with a woman like me, never would put up with a woman like me. That I must not love my husband or find him attractive. Unfortunately those comments keep that little voice alive in my head.
> 
> So I guess I would say it's half for me, I want to feel like a "normal" person. Half for my husband, I want him to feel loved and cherished and worth all my effort. Does that make any sense?


This was a very honest response. I believe that a majority of women are this way most of their lives. I think perimenopause will make a woman more aggressive and assertive, but from what I have read, they still want the man to take them in many cases. It seems that during the encounter, she will take charge and take what she wants in some cases. That's all quite normal, if there is such a thing as normal. I do think there are things that happen more often than not in most heterosexual men and women, and with information from this article may well be inherent and not have a thing to do with preference in gender.

I think the reason men assume things that are false is due much more to a lack of understanding of sex, the bodies' responses, and their partner, especially when that partner is the opposite sex. I think threads like this, when folks answer honestly, can lower the incidences of frustration and increase satisfaction in couples. 

That's why I wanted to participate in it. I posted controversial things to get folks to open up. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I really don't care if I am well liked. I want to learn something, not find a partner at TAM. Many others have the opposite approach and have been banned for it. I don't believe it's stopped, only that it remains acceptable as long as it's hidden.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

For the first 15 years of our marriage I initiated almost every day. The only days I did not initiate were when M2 was sick, or clearly exhausted or upset. 

Then - slowly over time we evolved to where we have been for many years now. 

M2 initiates 95% of the time. Has done so for years. 

She does NOT initiate because she feels horny. She does so because:
- She wishes to feel close (70%)
- She considers it her responsibility as a good wife (30%)

And when I say she initiates I mean that in the truest sense of the word. I don't give her some subtle cue - she then responds to. 

When I initiate I'm not subtle. 

So - the reason we do this is simple. Since M2 is the lower desire person - I think it's best for her to pick the nights that she most wants to. It's that simple. 

She never forgets and doesn't give me pity sex. 

A true gem. 




jaquen said:


> Back to the topic at hand.
> 
> For women who have true responsive drive, and aren't just using it as a cover to not have sex with a spouse they're no longer attracted to, what happens if they're with a partner who never initiates? That's what always baffles me. Is the libido just completely dead unless their spouse comes on to them, or they read a sexy passage from a book, or watch a scene?
> 
> ...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

What makes a gem a true gem is it's rarity. You're a very lucky man to have a wife that believes she has some responsibility in that regard.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> What makes a gem a true gem is it's rarity. You're a very lucky man to have a wife that believes she has some responsibility in that regard.


He is a hard working man that is reaping high due. She didn't start that way and at one point, she was definitely no prize. He took hard steps to turn her around and, to her credit, she learned and changed.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Holland said:


> I have recently discovered I have *preemptive* desire, setting the scene for the next mornings encounter just before falling asleep.


My wife has that too... but the other way 'round...


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Maybe most women are responsive desire, but work against that natural tendency early in a relationship. We always read how sex was so great early on and then it falls off. Perhaps women know how much sex means to men and in order to "catch" a particular male, they go hard against their innate responsive desire.

Once the relationship is achieved, and marriage follows, the couples "true colors", show up. The male is left dumbfounded because he now has to deal with something he is unfamiliar with.

I know it's much more complicated than this, but I do feel that this is part of the equation. Without the knowledge of female responsive desire I could see a man floundering for years in resentment. I know I did.

To top it all off, as I age, I feel myself becoming a responsive desire male. However, I have taken it upon myself, since I am the supposed male leader, to initiate and fire up my wife even though I actually need the same work up as my wife. In order to combat my own RD I try to not masturbate, at all. Sometimes if I need a boost on a day I know I'm going to have sex, I'll infuse a bit of porn to get my motor running. 

The interesting part of understanding responsive desire in women is that it takes the resentment away when you realize it has nothing to do with her attraction for you. (all other things being equal) In other words, if you KNOW you are meeting her needs and are not a complete slob, maybe you should work on creating desire in your responsive desire wife. It seems to be working for me. I just lather up the testosterone cream, and get to work on a daily basis creating that desire in my wife.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)

I get the impression that this was not really about what percentage of women have RD vs SD or whether it's possible for a woman to have SD or if she's 100% RD.

From my interpretation of the OP, the real question is: "Can someone tell me if my wife is using RD as a cover for not feeling attracted to me at all?" Simple answer is I have no idea because I don't know the marital dynamic.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Not my intention for the thread at all. I created the thread mostly at 2ntnuf's request. My wife does not use RD as a cover for not being attracted to me. She uses complete non-communication for that.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

I think the bottom line is many people tend not to believe in that which they have never experienced.

You see that on TAM all the time. A default assumption that all men and all women are boxed in by a poster's experience, and no matter how many other posters counter their experience with a different one, they just can't, or won't, see it. 

So if a man has never experienced a woman with genuine spontaneous desire, if they've only been with women who need to be warmed up, or reminded of sex, it's tough to believe there are women who aren't like that. It's like the guys who think women rarely ever hit on men.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> Not my intention for the thread at all. I created the thread mostly at 2ntnuf's request. My wife does not use RD as a cover for not being attracted to me. She uses complete non-communication for that.


Sorry Fozzy. This thread went in the weeds pretty quickly, so wasn't sure what the primary intent was tbh.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

You see a whole lot of "herd mentality" and attempts to express overconfidence, which is mainly low self-esteem. I don't need to do that, since I readily admit to low self-esteem and express it in writing at times. 

Whether you believe in RD or not is up to you. I do, personal experience notwithstanding. You can't know what I've experienced, only what I have shared that is accurate. All is perspective.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

UMP said:


> Maybe most women are responsive desire, but work against that natural tendency early in a relationship. We always read how sex was so great early on and then it falls off. Perhaps women know how much sex means to men and in order to "catch" a particular male, they go hard against their innate responsive desire.
> 
> Once the relationship is achieved, and marriage follows, the couples "true colors", show up. The male is left dumbfounded because he now has to deal with something he is unfamiliar with.


I suspect it is more about the same actions not getting the same response. When dating, most people do not live together, at least at first, so there is a newness that exists. Being separated for a week while both are working means that finally getting together on the weekend provokes a responsive desire. But when you live with that person, the newness wears off and different actions are needed. 

I think in many cases, neither side really understands why things are not working.


----------



## Tubbalard (Feb 8, 2015)

Its a lot of horny women out here looking for sex. I think the guys that are asking this question, have never had the oppurtunity to experience these women or are inexperienced when it comes to women. Its some agressive women out here thats ready to give toppy on sight. No game needed, no drinks offered, no money thrown about. Just ready to pounce on it like a cheetah.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Toppies are into BDSM. I don't think it's what that article was about. I do think it's more natural for women to be RD. Simple to understand. Everything else is just fear of looking LD and that's not what it's about, in women.


----------



## Tubbalard (Feb 8, 2015)

Toppy = sloppy toppy = Oral sex. Thats what I meant by toppy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Toppies are into BDSM. I don't think it's what that article was about. *I do think it's more natural for women to be RD. Simple to understand. Everything else is just fear of looking LD and that's not what it's about, in women.*


In your experience. Not in mine, the women I know or the men I know that discuss things like this eg my brothers and friends.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

And honestly, that's where people get offended or stop talking.

Once you start discounting other people's lives and experiences or put labels on like "normal" or "natural," well, what is the point of discussing the other side or my experiences if they don't line up with what is natural and normal?

JMO.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> And honestly, that's where people get offended or stop talking.
> 
> Once you start discounting other people's lives and experiences or put labels on like "normal" or "natural," well, what is the point of discussing the other side or my experiences if they don't line up with what is natural and normal?
> 
> JMO.


You're so alpha.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

I've been working on my glamour muscles.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Lets be real, even a person (man or woman) with a spontaneous drive can become more responsive if they're with a person they're not really all that sexually attracted to.

Maybe some of the push back is coming from folks who've never been able to generate much raw sexual lust in their partners? One man's RD wife might be another man's SD dream. I think a lack of attraction can make even the most spontaneous, high drive person lean more to the responsive side.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Lets be real, even a person (man or woman) with a spontaneous drive can become more responsive if they're with a person they're not really all that sexually attracted to.
> 
> Maybe some of the push back is coming from folks who've never been able to generate much raw sexual lust in their partners? One man's RD wife might be another man's SD dream. I think a lack of attraction can make even the most spontaneous, high drive person lean more to the responsive side.


Man I'm not sure who you're aiming this comment at but it going to read hurtful to some readers. How exactly do you think men and women with truly RD partners will see your comment? Honestly I like most of your posts and as such, I choose to believe you didn't intend to make a hurtful comment.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

jaquen said:


> Lets be real, even a person (man or woman) with a spontaneous drive can become more responsive if they're with a person they're not really all that sexually attracted to.
> 
> Maybe some of the push back is coming from folks who've never been able to generate much raw sexual lust in their partners? One man's RD wife might be another man's SD dream. I think a lack of attraction can make even the most spontaneous, high drive person lean more to the responsive side.


We'll put Jaquen in the column of people who DO believe that Responsive Desire = No Attraction.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Holland said:


> In your experience. Not in mine, the women I know or the men I know that discuss things like this eg my brothers and friends.


I don't know why this is so tough for you to understand. I read the article. I believe the conclusions. It doesn't matter what my or anyone else's experiences are. It's not personal. I'm not trying to make this personal. I'm trying to support the conclusions of the article. I also suggested and continue to suggest that there are going to be variations on the curve, just like anything else. In other words, some will lean more in one direction than another. I think you and many others here are taking this whole thread personally, and it's not supposed to be personal. Those types of emotionally charged responses are tell tale signs of the truth of the article, instead of the opposite. Even this post wasn't meant to be inflammatory, but I doubt it will be taken as such.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Thundarr said:


> Man I'm not sure who you're aiming this comment at but it going to read hurtful to some readers. How exactly do you think men and women with truly RD partners will see your comment? Honestly I like most of your posts and as such, I choose to believe you didn't intend to make a hurtful comment.


I'm not trying to be hurtful, I'm trying to be real.

I've said it several times before on the whole LD vs HD front; I truly believe a lot of marriages are suffering from a fundamental lack of sexual attraction, often quite mutual. It's the elephant in the room that's very tough to talk about, but it's there. It's not uncommon for people to lose attraction to each other over time, and some people never had it to begin with. I think working to keep sexual attraction up is so much more important than a lot of people give credence to. So people either let themselves go, be it emotionally or physically, which can detrimentally mute even those with high drive and/or spontaneous desire, or they never made it important from the beginning and so, in time, things just fall off sexually.

Do I think that some people are purely RD? Absolutely. Do I believe that ALL people who appear so are actually truly RD? Nope. 

What good would it do to ignore this possibility? Because it's not "nice" and is inconvenient? What if there was something you (universal you) truly could do, or change, that would affect the drive of your partner to the degree that they actually thought of, and wanted, sex with you more often, wouldn't you want to know? Even if it initially was painful to hear?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

jaquen said:


> I'm not trying to be hurtful, I'm trying to be real.
> 
> I've said it several times before on the whole LD vs HD front; I truly believe a lot of marriages are suffering from a fundamental lack of sexual attraction, often quite mutual. It's the elephant in the room that's very tough to talk about, but it's there. It's not uncommon for people to lose attraction to each other over time, and some people never had it to begin with. I think working to keep sexual attraction up is so much more important than a lot of people give credence to. So people either let themselves go, be it emotionally or physically, which can detrimentally mute even those with high drive and/or spontaneous desire, or they never made it important from the beginning and so, in time, things just fall off sexually.
> 
> ...



I would agree that many marriages DO suffer from a lack of sexual attraction. I believe mine being one. I also believe RD is very real. What I don't know is how you always can distinguish those two. Some people are self-aware enough to know that they're legitimately RD, so if they say so you kind of have to take them at their word. But in a case where a person just can't figure out why they're not revved up by their spouse--especially without a prior sexual history to draw on--I think it would be a crap shoot at best to just label them RD. There's a good chance that there's just not a lot of juice there, for whatever reason.

ETA--not equating RD with LD. Just saying that if a person doesn't get turned on spontaneously--maybe they're LD, maybe they're RD, and maybe their spouse is gross. But if they can't figure it out themselves, how do you know?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> I don't know why this is so tough for you to understand. I read the article. I believe the conclusions. It doesn't matter what my or anyone else's experiences are. It's not personal. I'm not trying to make this personal. I'm trying to support the conclusions of the article. I also suggested and continue to suggest that there are going to be variations on the curve, just like anything else. In other words, some will lean more in one direction than another. I think you and many others here are taking this whole thread personally, and it's not supposed to be personal. Those types of emotionally charged responses are tell tale signs of the truth of the article, instead of the opposite. Even this post wasn't meant to be inflammatory, but I doubt it will be taken as such.


I don't take anything online personally. Just trying to point out that there are plenty of women that are SD, simple as that. No article is going to prove otherwise.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Holland said:


> I don't take anything online personally. Just trying to point out that there are plenty of women that are SD, simple as that. No article is going to prove otherwise.


Okay. I disagree, but that's what TAM is all about. She did a study on some women. We didn't.


----------

