# The Great Spouse Swap



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

I was just imagining all the people in HD/LD relationships here swapping partners to create HD/HD and LD/LD. Maybe try to pair up the really selfish people with each other as well.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

I thought about creating a web site for this purpose years ago, and while it seems very reasonable and appealing in many ways, there are - sadly - too many practical issues and secondary considerations for it to work. Darn.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> I was just imagining all the people in HD/LD relationships here swapping partners to create HD/HD and LD/LD. Maybe try to pair up the really selfish people with each other as well.


*Rich: I can see your rationale, but ...

Not "No," but "Hell No!"

No reasonable marriage or relationship can sustain it! It's nothing more than giving absolute carte blanche to an open sexual relationship!

Let's just say that I'd much rather divorce first and then go about finding someone who is more like-minded of my sexual compatibility!*


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Better to just leave and find a suitable person for your own libido.

One person finds someone to go at it like rabbits every night the other person finds someone to watch Matlock reruns with.


----------



## jorgegene (May 26, 2012)

Still funny to imagine though. All the HD/HD people happy as larks going at it all the time, all the LD/LD people happy never doing it, and all the selfish/selfish people being selfish to each other.


----------



## YupItsMe (Sep 29, 2011)

Looks good on paper 

We kind of have that already 

Adultfriendfinder, A$hley Madi$on, Tinder, Facebook For HD

Gamersunite.com. The knitting forum, Start trek fans unite for LD

The main issue I see is LDs would pretend to be HDs until they are married with kids, retirement accounts and a mortgage to destroy you with. You know, just like they do now

I kid you. Put the knife down


----------



## Hacker (Jul 14, 2014)

LD with a LD would be a terrible mess. Because even people with LD want to do it sometimes. But when that sometimes comes the other LD person will be nah.

And then they will both be pissed.


----------



## YupItsMe (Sep 29, 2011)

Hacker said:


> LD with a LD would be a terrible mess and then they will both be pissed.


Good


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Hacker said:


> LD with a LD would be a terrible mess. Because even people with LD want to do it sometimes. But when that sometimes comes the other LD person will be nah.
> 
> And then they will both be pissed.


Worst sex conversation ever"

"Hey baby, it's been awhile, how 'bout it tonite?"

"Um, cool your jets! We just did it last year!"


----------



## HiLibido (Dec 10, 2013)

I'm starting to think y'all are a bunch a prudes around here. 

I submit this for your edification:

Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? | Alternet



> ...what’s so gutsy about living a life full of self-denial and insecurity, where the person you love most is also the person you most need to limit?
> 
> ...
> 
> Jenny Block, author of Open: Love, Sex, and Life In An Open Marriage, doesn’t understand why an open relationship would seem more risky than a closed one when 50 percent of marriages already end in divorce. “Relationships are hard no matter what the set-up. Sometimes I think open ones have a better shot because they are (or at least the good ones are) steeped in honesty.”


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

You can't pair up selfish people with other selfish people either. A selfish person is unlikely to be happy with someone who is, in turn, also selfish. Being a taker really only works if you're partnered with a giver. 

Just in case anyone gets to working out the problems with all this, though, I have a selfish, narcissistic, alcohol-and-gambling addicted, ADHD, OCD, high-drive, serial cheater ex-husband y'all can have for beta testing.


----------



## Coffee Amore (Dec 15, 2011)

michzz said:


> Worst sex conversation ever"
> 
> "Hey baby, it's been awhile, how 'bout it tonite?"
> 
> "Um, cool your jets! We just did it last year!"


Reminds me of that scene from Woody Allen's film, Annie Hall.

The marriage counselor talks to the husband and wife separately. 

Counselor: " How often do you and your husband have sex?"
Wife: "Almost always. Three times a week."

Counselor: "How often do you and your wife have sex?"
Husband: "Almost never. Three times a week."


----------



## LuvIsTuff (Feb 20, 2015)

michzz said:


> Better to just leave and find a suitable person for your own libido.
> 
> One person finds someone to go at it like rabbits every night the other person finds someone to watch Matlock reruns with.


The way I read it, I assumed he meant a permanent swap.


----------



## LuvIsTuff (Feb 20, 2015)

Hacker said:


> LD with a LD would be a terrible mess. Because even people with LD want to do it sometimes. But when that sometimes comes the other LD person will be nah.
> 
> And then they will both be pissed.


Serves those bastards right!!!


----------



## YupItsMe (Sep 29, 2011)

Coffee Amore said:


> The marriage counselor talks to the husband and wife separately.
> 
> Counselor: " How often do you and your husband have sex?"
> Wife: "Almost always. Three times a week."
> ...


Exactly except despite my surprise it in some cases here is the reverse. Not in my case but its out there where the husband is the LD. Hard to believe but I've read plenty of the posts and other stuff out there in internet land with an LD hub.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano (Jan 30, 2015)

HiLibido said:


> I'm starting to think y'all are a bunch a prudes around here.
> 
> I submit this for your edification:
> 
> Why Not Have Sex With People Who Aren't Your Partner? | Alternet


I see several of your posts here and your situation. I understand you are poly. I absolutely respect that lifestyle. However, some of us are happy to be monogamist and not out of a sense of prudishness but because it matches our values more. Monogamists are not morally superior and polygamists are not more natural and open-minded. 

Monogamy for me is natural and matches my morals and polygamy for you is natural and matches your morals.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

Hacker said:


> *LD with a LD* would be a terrible mess. Because even people with LD want to do it sometimes. But when that sometimes comes the other LD person will be nah.
> 
> And then they will both be pissed.


*Low-Drive with a Lower-Drive, an absolute formula for marital/sexual failure!*


----------



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

JMO, but I think HD and LD are overused terms. You may find out in this hypothetical that pairing two LD's may result in a happy and sexually fulfilling relationship with multiple times/wk. On the flip side, 2 HD people may dwindle to 1/month or less due to medium to long term marital issues. I have no idea of knowing, but it's my belief that easily half of the problems on SIM are not due to mismatched drives but because of a deeper underlying cause or causes. 

While you can study math and major in it, the subject is normally not perceived to be an end unto itself but a means to pursuing other ends. Most people view mathematics as a language of science and engineering. Sex is the language of lovers. It's an expression of love.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> Sex is the language of lovers.


Some have a very limited vocabulary, and are people of few words.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano (Jan 30, 2015)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> JMO, but I think HD and LD are overused terms. You may find out in this hypothetical that pairing two LD's may result in a happy and sexually fulfilling relationship with multiple times/wk. On the flip side, 2 HD people may dwindle to 1/month or less due to medium to long term marital issues. I have no idea of knowing, but it's my belief that easily half of the problems on SIM are not due to mismatched drives but because of a deeper underlying cause or causes.
> 
> While you can study math and major in it, the subject is normally not perceived to be an end unto itself but a means to pursuing other ends. Most people view mathematics as a language of science and engineering. Sex is the language of lovers. It's an expression of love.


I agree with you. I think the terms are probably overused.

Though I have seen on this board enough to believe that it is truly a phenomenon and in that case regular methods of re-connection to improve love and thus sex will not work. 

However, it is probably overestimated as a cause and not as an explanation for deeper issues.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

This is definitely a case of "careful what you wish for".

I'm reminded of the Family Guy skit where the Muslim blows up a bomb vest and arrives at the Pearly Gates. Mohammed greets him and introduces him to his 72 virgins, which turn out to all be socially awkward male computer geeks. 

Your service would probably hook me up with some hypersexed dude.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

I've yet to meet a LD/LD couple. I bet they are very rare.


----------



## WonkyNinja (Feb 28, 2013)

Rowan said:


> Just in case anyone gets to working out the problems with all this, though, I have a selfish, narcissistic, alcohol-and-gambling addicted, ADHD, OCD, high-drive, serial cheater ex-husband y'all can have for beta testing.


selfish, narcissistic, ADHD and OCD? So he gets angry at someone else when he forgets to put something in the right order as he would never do that?


----------



## scatty (Mar 15, 2013)

Mr. Nail said:


> I've yet to meet a LD/LD couple. I bet they are very rare.


My hubby and I are both LD right now, but not by choice. A combination of meds, and disabilities have brought us to this point, but we are naturally both MD ("medium drive") 

We did try an open relationship several years ago, and each took a lover.  I prefer to call it that.  We both thought it was fun for a night, but we decided we both hated it as a lifestyle.

However, what if one of us LOVED it, fell in LOVE, or wanted to make it a way of life. It would have been a disaster. We messed with fire because we knew there was a chance of us being burned, but we never had to deal with the wounds, so it worked out o.k. with us, but I wouldn't recommend it.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening 
Maybe not. They may have happy lives together, their friends would never guess that they never have sex. How would you ever know?






Mr. Nail said:


> I've yet to meet a LD/LD couple. I bet they are very rare.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

I think most alleged spouses with LD are low in most all other aspects that one might want in a partner. The HD/HD folks would make out ok but the LD/LD folks wouldn't be getting much of anything.


----------



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

Married but Happy said:


> Some have a very limited vocabulary, and are people of few words.


Or suffer from dyslexia.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> JMO, but I think HD and LD are overused terms. You may find out in this hypothetical that pairing two LD's may result in a happy and sexually fulfilling relationship with multiple times/wk. *On the flip side, 2 HD people may dwindle to 1/month or less due to medium to long term marital issues. * I have no idea of knowing, but it's my belief that easily half of the problems on SIM are not due to mismatched drives but because of a deeper underlying cause or causes.


QFT. There's more to sex than drive.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

WonkyNinja said:


> selfish, narcissistic, ADHD and OCD? So he gets angry at someone else when he forgets to put something in the right order as he would never do that?


Hey, you've met him!


----------



## askari (Jun 21, 2012)

Maria Canosa Gargano said:


> I see several of your posts here and your situation. I understand you are poly. I absolutely respect that lifestyle. However, some of us are happy to be monogamist and not out of a sense of prudishness but because it matches our values more. Monogamists are not morally superior and polygamists are not more natural and open-minded.
> 
> Monogamy for me is natural and matches my morals and polygamy for you is natural and matches your morals.


:iagree:
This is one of the better TAM posts. 
For those of you who are in a happy and contented marriage where your emotional and sexual needs are met and you are totally 'together' with your partner, I am truly very happy for you indeed. And jealous.

We all know that extramarital affairs are 'wrong' according to OUR ethics and morals. One must remember that there are tribes, communities etc in the world for who polygamy is the accepted norm, and having multiple wives/sexual partners is perfectly normal. Who is right and who is wrong?

Those of you in 'happy' marriages often fail to understand what it is like being a sexual person in a sexless marriage. Frustrating.

Please try to understand that if someone in a sexless marriage gets sexual relief elsewhere, it can often make the marriage better because the issue of sex, which often causes resentment etc is no longer in the equation.

So as Maria says in her post, basically; I will respect what you do if you respect what I do.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Fun thought. Practicality has a negative value though.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

Mr. Nail said:


> I've yet to meet a LD/LD couple. I bet they are very rare.


They tend to die out as they are less likely to reproduce than HD people?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

intheory said:


> Hey, being a _Star Trek_ fan doesn't make you an LD.


Kirk was a bit HD no?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

intheory said:


> Hey, being a _Star Trek_ fan doesn't make you an LD.





ConanHub said:


> Kirk was a bit HD no?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Kirk got all the alien tail, some even with a tail.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Kirk was a bit HD no?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes, but nothing compared to Spock during Pon Farr.

RIP Mr. Nimoy.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Star trek fans are not low drive, they are low opportunity. <giggle>

Richard that is true, the only way to tell if a couple is low drive is when you invite them to an event on their anniversary and they say, O. K. We can give this year a skip.

MN


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
From what I have heard, that is not true at conventions....



Mr. Nail said:


> Star trek fans are not low drive, they are low opportunity. <giggle>
> 
> 
> 
> MN


----------



## Coldie (Jan 2, 2014)

LD / LD would be a relationship without intimacy. Without intimacy, it would just be a friendship. These relationships dissolve or never develop to begin with. This is why you have people that could be friends for 20 years, yet marry some other person or marry multiple other people during that span.

The LD finds someone who is HD, because the HD almost forces intimacy and turns a friendship into something more. 

A HD/HD is common, it's call the first year of marriage when both people are in love and can't get enough of each other. One turns LD as their interest sways or they are no longer in love the same way. Not getting intimacy is never good, which is why LD for me is the same as low intimacy. I could never be with someone who was low intimacy. Talk about horrible.

My 2.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Yes, but nothing compared to Spock during Pon Farr.
> 
> RIP Mr. Nimoy.


Watch out for horny vulcans!!! &#55357;&#56840;&#55357;&#56840;&#55357;&#56840;&#55357;&#56840;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> From what I have heard, that is not true at conventions....


Then I hope they wear Vulcanized rubbers.


----------



## doobie (Apr 15, 2014)

What a great title for the thread - I'm in


----------



## HiLibido (Dec 10, 2013)

> _Originally Posted by Maria Canosa Gargano_
> I see several of your posts here and your situation. I understand you are poly. I absolutely respect that lifestyle. However, some of us are happy to be monogamist and not out of a sense of prudishness but because it matches our values more. Monogamists are not morally superior and polygamists are not more natural and open-minded.
> 
> Monogamy for me is natural and matches my morals and polygamy for you is natural and matches your morals.





askari said:


> :iagree:
> This is one of the better TAM posts.
> For those of you who are in a happy and contented marriage where your emotional and sexual needs are met and you are totally 'together' with your partner, I am truly very happy for you indeed. And jealous.
> 
> ...


:iagree: 
Taken together, I think these two are among the best TAM quotes I've seen. Maria was responding to my statement "I'm starting to think y'all are a bunch a prudes around here," which was my tongue-in-cheek reaction to the negativity of even considering stepping outside marriage for sex--which I would recommend only with all concerned parties in the know. Except for her conflation of the terms polygamy and polyamory, I'd say Maria is mostly right--except that poly people, I think by definition, are indeed more open-minded. 

(_Quick aside: Why is that monoGAMY can refer to a relationship in or outside of marriage, while biGAMY and polyGAMY refer only to marriage relationships? I believe the only reason the term "polyamory" was coined was because we're NOT speaking specifically about marital relationships. Just another example of societal bias against those outside the norm_?)

And askari's conclusion is succinct and to the point -- except that many here do NOT respect one another. And that's a problem.

People come here for advice and support with marital problems. It's counter productive to jump on them because they have different points of view than yours, or to condemn them for some action they did or did not take, or are perhaps considering.

I don't claim the moral high ground because I happen to be poly, but I do get looked down on because of it. Many on here do claim it simply because they're monogamous, whether they're happily married or not. Frankly, I don't care how other people carry on their lives, but I do feel they should be honest about it. With themselves first, but also with their partner(s).

I'll respect you until you show you don't respect me. If we had more mutual respect, openness and honesty, this world would be a much better place.


----------



## doobie (Apr 15, 2014)

Coldie said:


> *A HD/HD is common, it's call the first year of marriage when both people are in love and can't get enough of each other. One turns LD as their interest sways or they are no longer in love the same way.*


I beg to differ here. In my previous relationship we were both HD and during the first 3 - 4 years had sex at least twice a night, very often more. The relationship lasted for 15 years with sex tailing off to about 5 times a week after those first few years. The sex was absolutely awesome, the best I've ever experienced. However there were other problems in the relationship, mainly caused by his refusal to get a job - luckily we didn't live together. We had planned on living together but I would not allow him to move in with me until he got a job, which never happened. For the last 18 months of the relationship we didn't have sex at all, because the constant issue of him refusing to work made me lose all respect for him and I lost interest in having sex with him. I wasn't LD as such, I just needed to be more emotionally invested in him and the relationship in order to have good sex. Within a year of me finishing the relationship he got a job which he still has now, five years later! He's always regretted losing me in this way, hasn't had another partner since and friends tell me that he is kicking himself now for not sorting out a job much sooner. Ironically, I'm now in a marriage with a man who has no interest in sex and I'm pretty much kicking myself too for leaving my previous partner. I know that it took me leaving to make him wake up and smell the coffee so to speak - but I now think, what a waste of what could have been the perfect relationship. Unfortunately we've both lost out here which just makes me very very sad. If it weren't for the fact that I'm married, I would go back to the other guy in a heartbeat.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

doobie said:


> I beg to differ here. In my previous relationship we were both HD and during the first 3 - 4 years had sex at least twice a night, very often more. The relationship lasted for 15 years with sex tailing off to about 5 times a week after those first few years. The sex was absolutely awesome, the best I've ever experienced. However there were other problems in the relationship, mainly caused by his refusal to get a job - luckily we didn't live together. We had planned on living together but I would not allow him to move in with me until he got a job, which never happened. For the last 18 months of the relationship we didn't have sex at all, because the constant issue of him refusing to work made me lose all respect for him and I lost interest in having sex with him. I wasn't LD as such, I just needed to be more emotionally invested in him and the relationship in order to have good sex. Within a year of me finishing the relationship he got a job which he still has now, five years later! He's always regretted losing me in this way, hasn't had another partner since and friends tell me that he is kicking himself now for not sorting out a job much sooner. Ironically, I'm now in a marriage with a man who has no interest in sex and I'm pretty much kicking myself too for leaving my previous partner. I know that it took me leaving to make him wake up and smell the coffee so to speak - but I now think, what a waste of what could have been the perfect relationship. Unfortunately we've both lost out here which just makes me very very sad. If it weren't for the fact that I'm married, I would go back to the other guy in a heartbeat.


I'll bet he's lose his job within a week if you did


----------



## 1marriedlady (Mar 27, 2015)

michzz said:


> Better to just leave and find a suitable person for your own libido.
> 
> One person finds someone to go at it like rabbits every night the other person finds someone to watch Matlock reruns with.


But if everything is great outside the bedroom - would you leave? You love your spouse, your kids, your life. Sex isn't what you thought it would be. 
that


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

1marriedlady said:


> But if everything is great outside the bedroom - would you leave? You love your spouse, your kids, your life. Sex isn't what you thought it would be.
> that


A perfect illustration of the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!"


----------



## maritalloneliness (Mar 18, 2015)

Sex should be what's required in marriage, otherwise it's just two friends playing house! Heck, I have enough friends, lol. Speaking from HD/LD marriage.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Two LDs getting together..imagine that. Both denying something neither wants. Neither of them have anyone blowing powder sugar up their backside in some vain effort to get a weak sign of affection from them. There's no control or fun in that. To be queen or king, they have to find someone with a healthy sexual appetite.


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

unbelievable said:


> Two LDs getting together..imagine that. Both denying something neither wants. Neither of them have anyone blowing powder sugar up their backside in some vain effort to get a weak sign of affection from them. There's no control or fun in that. To be queen or king, they have to find someone with a healthy sexual appetite.


I don't think that most LD's are control freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partner. They just have very little desire for sex, do not think about it very often, may not know how to orgasm, may feel dirty about the act of sex, and do not know how to stimulate sexual hunger within themselves. Women may also sublimate their sexual energy into motherhood.

It may also be a hormonal issue. Too little testosterone for both men and women.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

skype said:


> I don't think that most LD's are control freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partner. They just have very little desire for sex, do not think about it very often, may not know how to orgasm, may feel dirty about the act of sex, and do not know how to stimulate sexual hunger within themselves. Women may also sublimate their sexual energy into motherhood.
> 
> It may also be a hormonal issue. Too little testosterone for both men and women.


But it's so much easier to just bash them and call them selfish. 

I'm appalled by the responses I am reading. People calling LD spouses selfish and wishing them ill will. It seems sort of immature. It's like there is no realm of possibility where someone just couldn't be interested in sex. For true LD-ers it IS true. They don't go around thinking about sex. 

I'm HD by the way. I think about it all of the time! I feel bad for people who are Really LD sometimes.


----------



## doobie (Apr 15, 2014)

skype said:


> I don't think that most LD's are control freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partner. They just have very little desire for sex, do not think about it very often, may not know how to orgasm, may feel dirty about the act of sex, and do not know how to stimulate sexual hunger within themselves. Women may also sublimate their sexual energy into motherhood.
> 
> It may also be a hormonal issue. Too little testosterone for both men and women.


I agree that LDs are probably not freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partners. Whatever their reason for being LD/ND, not making any effort to address the lack of sex in a relationship does have a torturous effect on the HD partner. Most of us go into a relationship/marriage expecting to have a sex life, not expecting to be forced into a celibate lifestyle. 

If there's anything that you do that really upsets your partner and makes their life unbearable, you do all you can in order to address that situation in order not to hurt your partner. Not taking any responsibility to make an effort to change this is unfair. 

I think LDs would be quick enough to complain if the HD partner were to have an affair, but I think not trying to do anything to improve sexual relations is just as bad as having an affair. Okay, two wrongs don't make a right and those of us HD partners would probably think long and hard before doing the wrong of having an affair, but LDs just don't seem interested in even considering whether they are being wrong by not joining in and having sex.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening doobie
I think the problem is that in many cases the LD people honestly don't realize the misery they are causing. They hear the words, but they think the HD partner wants sex the way that they want a new car, or ice cream for dessert. Requests for sex seem like whining by the HD partner -childish and selfish.

They don't have an internal model for what if feels like to be rejected - it has essentially never happened to them.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Personal...a lot of people are just not sexually self aware enough to know what to do or how to handle the complicated sexless relationship, neither the HD or the LD in many cases. Especially if married very young.

Anyway that sums up my first marriage, lol!


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Personal said:


> How does one become sexually self aware without experience?


It does usually require experience, and maturity.

However, there are some who are simply already there naturally from a young age. My hubby, for instance. :smthumbup:

Part of his advantage was having never been shamed or stunted in his sexual growth. So by the time he was having real sex as a young adult, he had a huge head start over the young people who had been traumatized or stigmatized or whatever-ized. He also always had a healthy view of his own body and masturbation, so there was no having to hide or be sneaky or be ashamed about the natural tricks the body can do.

For most of us it takes more time and more experience, though. It took me until I met him to find my sexual self-awareness. I wrote a blog post about it: Let's Talk About Sex: Sexual Self-Awareness, part 1


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Yes I think he was for the most part, from what I understand of his previous relationships. 

However there were a lot of years of non-relationship status. Not sure how "mature" he was then.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Yes, good immature fun. We both had plenty of that.

I'm glad we found each other, too. We both feel lucky in this way. 

I'm glad for you and your wife, too, you seem so in love with her.

I love being in love, and I love hearing other people who are in love talk about it!


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening personal
I don't feel like threats should be part of a loving relationship. I could say "have sex with me every other day or I will get a divorce" - but is that really an acceptable thing to do? Would I want sex on those terms? I actually think cheating would be better - at least it would be with a willing partner.






Personal said:


> In the absence of dire consequences for withholding sex in a marriage how will they ever know withholding sex is a significant problem.
> 
> if one tolerates their marital partner withholding sex from them, they prove through their actions that the denying persons actions are acceptable.
> 
> One can express their dissatisfaction repeatedly, yet if they don't actually do anything about it the withholder will know their behaviour has proven to be acceptable.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

skype said:


> I don't think that most LD's are control freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partner. They just have very little desire for sex, do not think about it very often, may not know how to orgasm, may feel dirty about the act of sex, and do not know how to stimulate sexual hunger within themselves. Women may also sublimate their sexual energy into motherhood.
> 
> It may also be a hormonal issue. Too little testosterone for both men and women.


I suppose men who refuse to work and support their wives are equally blameless. Mothers and fathers who refuse to feed their kids even though they have the means to do so are also innocent.
This is really quite simple.
1. Did someone promise to be sexually faithful to you for the rest of their days?
2. Exchanging that promise with them implies that both parties will be reasonably sexually available to the other.
3. Are you physically able to be sexually intimate with the person you swore to be sexually intimate with? 
4. Are you actually being what you swore to be and what you still purport to be? If you aren't really a husband or a wife, what is your status?
5. If your spouse's sexual business isn't your responsibility, who would you like to delegate those duties to and why would you imagine the spouse that you deliberately deprive owes you anything?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening unbelievable
I honestly believe that many LD people do not believe their marriage vows included #2, and / or believe that "reasonably sexually available" means once every few weeks or so.





unbelievable said:


> snip
> 2. Exchanging that promise with them implies that both parties will be reasonably sexually available to the other.
> snip


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Coldie said:


> LD / LD would be a relationship without intimacy. Without intimacy, it would just be a friendship.


HD/HD partnership here. Even so there is SO MUCH more to intimacy than just sex. Sex does not allow us to understand each others thoughts, feelings, moods. Sex does not allow us to gain trust in each others forever love. If sex were all that there was to intimacy, I would be one sad and unhappily married woman.


----------



## jacko jack (Feb 19, 2015)

Having been married in a church

what about 1 Corinthians 7 3-4

"The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife"

Any comments please


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> I was just imagining all the people in HD/LD relationships here swapping partners to create HD/HD and LD/LD. Maybe try to pair up the really selfish people with each other as well.



SOLD:smthumbup:


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> HD/HD partnership here. Even so there is SO MUCH more to intimacy than just sex. Sex does not allow us to understand each others thoughts, feelings, moods. Sex does not allow us to gain trust in each others forever love. If sex were all that there was to intimacy, I would be one sad and unhappily married woman.


This is true, but I think for some people sex can act as a gateway to exploring those other facets of initimacy. When you lock the gate, so to speak, intimacy lies just on the other side out of reach.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> This is true, but I think for some people sex can act as a gateway to exploring those other facets of initimacy.


Can. But is not the only gate. So when I read someone say without sex you might as be roommates is missing a WHOLE lot. And if that person happens to be the sufferer in a sexless marriage, it makes me want to hit him or her with a clue-by-four.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Probably depends on whether sex is an emotional need for that person or not. Some people don't equate sex with emotion regardless of whether they're HD or LD. If you're in the sex/emotion crowd, and you find yourself cut off from it, it's going to be a lot harder to want to explore new and exciting forms of intimacy when you just had your primary one severed.

If it's just sex, then you probably weren't looking at it as intimacy in the first place. You might grouse about it, and go on to have your warm fuzzys satisfied some other way.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening unbelievable
> I honestly believe that many LD people do not believe their marriage vows included #2, and / or believe that "reasonably sexually available" means once every few weeks or so.


Those people would not be content if their marital needs and expectations were met once every few weeks or so. If my wife is cold, I provide her warmth. If she's hungry, she gets fed. If she's frightened, she gets comfort and protection...not once every few weeks or a couple times a year or if I happen to feel like it, but whenever she needs. I don't change my babies' diapers when I feel like it but when they need the service. They go to the doctor when they need it, not when I feel like going. If once every few weeks is mutually satisfactory, there is no problem. If one partner's needs aren't being seriously addressed, there is no marriage. There is a provider/dependent, a hostage taker/hostage, or a slave owner/slave relationship.


----------



## ChargingCharlie (Nov 14, 2012)

skype said:


> I don't think that most LD's are control freaks who enjoy torturing their HD partner. They just have very little desire for sex, do not think about it very often, may not know how to orgasm, may feel dirty about the act of sex, and do not know how to stimulate sexual hunger within themselves. Women may also sublimate their sexual energy into motherhood.
> 
> It may also be a hormonal issue. Too little testosterone for both men and women.


Agree with this - my wife has no control issues in that way. She just doesn't have any interest in sex and never thinks about it. Also being a mom means that she devotes all of her energies into the kids which means none left for sex. Also think it could be hormones, but she doesn't seem to care. 

I'd love to swap for my wife's close HD friend - a fairly attractive well-endowed nympho who thinks going two days without sex is a major drought.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> Probably depends on whether sex is an emotional need for that person or not. Some people don't equate sex with emotion regardless of whether they're HD or LD. If you're in the sex/emotion crowd, and you find yourself cut off from it, it's going to be a lot harder to want to explore new and exciting forms of intimacy when you just had your primary one severed.
> 
> If it's just sex, then you probably weren't looking at it as intimacy in the first place. You might grouse about it, and go on to have your warm fuzzys satisfied some other way.


Right. If you are a person for whom other gates to intimacy are required and you are married to the supposed "HD" who wants what s/he sees as "intimacy" then whatchagonna do?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I've known several LD/LD relationships. They are typically very happy together and very in love.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> I've known several LD/LD relationships. They are typically very happy together and very in love.


God bless them and I wish more LD types would find each other.


----------



## HiLibido (Dec 10, 2013)

jacko jack said:


> Having been married in a church
> 
> what about 1 Corinthians 7 3-4
> 
> ...


What do the incoherent ramblings in a bronze age book of bad poetry have to do with relationships in 2015? 

Nothing, that's what.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

HiLibido said:


> What do the incoherent ramblings in a bronze age book of bad poetry have to do with relationships in 2015?
> 
> Nothing, that's what.


Well, let's see... That bronze age book said the universe was instantly created and it took scientists over 2500 years to arrive at the same conclusion. That book spoke of the importance of fathers raising their kids and social scientists have only recently discovered the link between absentee fathers and juvenile delinquency, involved fathers and academic achievement, etc. That book described a healthy diet a few thousand years before scientists discovered the instructions were spot on. Ancient Jews lived together as man and wife. They raised kids. They knew what worked and what didn't. Good advise is good advise and dismissing advise because it comes from an old source is rather foolish because life experience is a great teacher. Not everyone who lived before you were born was a complete idiot. Those who believe in that bronze age book tend to have stronger marriages, fewer divorces, better performing and behaving kids, have fewer illnesses, tend to be more generous and compassionate, actually live longer, and report higher rates of life satisfaction. Do you have something with superior proven results to offer?


----------



## HiLibido (Dec 10, 2013)

Clearly I'm not going to change your beliefs, so I won't waste my time debunking your factual errors. But for your education, here's a graphic that illustrates the bible's value when it comes to marital relationships:

(Some men looking for strange might want to go back to those "god old days," eh?)


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Can we please not do this?

Honestly, take it somewhere else.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> Can we please not do this?
> 
> Honestly, take it somewhere else.


*Exactly! Why in the hell would I ever desire to be in want somebody elses problems?

And why in the hell would they ever want the misguided misfortune to ever want to experience mine?*


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

I was referring more to the religion trashing/atheist bashing. Have some respect for each others beliefs or take it to the politics/religion forum.


----------

